I had the occasion to enter a local retail establishment recently and was surprised to see many signs which indicated that sections were closed, i.e. items not available for purchase.
The government in all its wisdom has determined that the purchase of greeting cards to mark birthdays, anniversaries, illness, death, etc. cannot be purchased however the cards for Mother’s Day were not blocked off and I was able to purchase those. Can someone please explain this logic to me?
The next item on my list was a package of sponges/green scrubbies which were not available for purchase. However, I can go into the local grocery store and purchase these items for around $4.99 whereas the discount store sells them for around $1.
Given that a large number of people have lost their jobs or are working reduced hours, which impacts their earning power, did anyone ever consider the compounded financial burden imposed with these “random” restrictions?
Pay LTC staff a proper wage
Bridgitte Pellerin, in her column in Wednesday’s paper, is right in saying that humans should not be looked upon as expendable tools to keep the economy going .
Therefore, preventing staff from working in more than one long term care home is only half of the equation. Paying staff enough so they can afford to work in a single home is the other half.
The government seems to believe that this will happen on its own without their intervention.
Homes will soon not have sufficient staff as people leave to find jobs that pay well enough to make ends meet.
Once again, expendable tools.
Mask-wearing is everyone’s business
Regarding Katharine Gow’s letter of May 12, I certainly sympathize with her plight and under no circumstances should she be subject to being “. . . accosted . . . spoken very rudely to . . . yelled and cursed at . . . .”
There is one fatal flaw in her letter in that she implores people to “mind their own business.”
Mask-wearing is principally done to prevent the spread (not the acquisition) of COVID-19 so not wearing a mask is very much the “business” of those around you.
I’m surprised that this fundamental in the prevention of viral transmission is lost on her in an otherwise eloquent letter.
Time to take seniors’ needs seriously
Moving back to the city after decades to help an elderly mother, my first observation was that she, nor any of the seniors in the area, used the local park.
Seniors didn’t walk, meet, sit, talk or play cards in the park. I then looked at other parks and noticed that there were few benches, trees, picnic tables, shade or attractions to make parks functional for seniors.
The city won awards for its Brantford ‘Age Friendly’ plan. Public space is part of the plan. Plans are good. Actions are better. We are spending $13.2 million on parks in coming years yet are we ignoring a future population of 40,000 seniors?
Likewise, the impact on seniors seems ignored with the closing of Arrowdale Golf Club, and Dufferin lawn bowling and tennis clubs. The only senior’s centre is dated and located where seniors avoid: downtown.
Council is quick to talk about disposing of the Tourist Centre or the current city hall. Yet, either could be reinvented as a revenue-generating café, and a learning and cultural centre for seniors.
Likewise, the city report on COVID-19 communications revealed the city did not communicate with 75 per cent of seniors. In a state of emergency not a single post card, booklet, or guide was distributed to seniors to help people deal with safety, stress and do so while having some fun. The same applies to Let’s Talk Brantford, the online engagement tool for citizens. How many seniors are online? Are the voices of seniors ignored? They are also a market. Give them options to spend money.
Sadly, the lack of focus on seniors means that the most popular senior centres are now Tim Hortons and McCafe. With no many millions being spent on accommodating new residents, perhaps it is time to accommodate the growing cohort of seniors who have lived here for decades.