- - - - - - - Langley Free Press Welcomes Your Comments - - - - - - - - - Name Email URL is optional
Many of us have taken shots at the Langley Times for their dismal performance when it comes to investigative reporting. I am one of the guilty ones in this regard. Let's just hope that when this article is wrapped, up we can say that the Times is becoming a real newspaper.
Relentless digging and asking tough uncomfortable questions no matter who or where is the key to survival of the print and establishment press journalism.
Otherwise they will be just sad footnotes in memory of the Edward R. Murrow standard who took a big risk and publicly challenged McCarthyism by taking on U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthy. How much different are the politics of B.C. and even Langley now a days.
The arrogance and the perception of conflict in both is simply overwhelming to me. The parallels including the sleazy slander and seemingly strategic personal attacks of late at all levels are just amazing IMO.
Edited By LFP EDITOR
The Times did a good job of asking the question but look at the response from the Land Commission.
“He told The Times he would get back to the newspaper with more information, or another person to contact, later that day or early the next morning.
Since then, The Times has tried to contact Underhill three times, but he has not responded to the messages nor has he been available.”
This clearly indicates that the Commission needs to get permission from their political masters perhaps such as Coleman/Falcon before they are allowed to talk. It is called managing the message. We would call this corruption if it happened in any country in Africa but here it seems to be tolerated. I am sure Coleman can get a hold of Tomlinson in 2 seconds if he wants an answer. We already know how that conversation is going to go. Meanwhile we get scolded if we are disrespectful
There is nothing more disrespectful than not giving an immediate answer to a simple question.
We need change we can believe in.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Wally, Let's hope the Times finishes what they started, and gets the truth from the ALC.
Strange is it not how Clr Bateman's blog has no mention at all of this Times article nor a peep of his BC Libs BC RAIL Kinsella/Campbell bombshell either. Yet despite his obvious extremely partisan BC Liberal connections he still jumps up and down saying his decision on the Falcon Overpass is non partisan. I have great swampland for sale in Florida too.
Edited By LFP EDITOR
ALC Commmision Executive Director says: "It will be up to individual commissioners to declare their conflicts, said Fry, who added he’s “very confident” they will do so because of a recent “refresher course” on the subject."
Based on the McHollister Langley Times report, obviously this refresher course was a dismal failure. Maybe they need an ongoing regular monthly refresher course!
Once again I must draw a parallel between how the citizens speaking against the Overpass and the citizens that spoke out over the last 2 years over the sweeping changes the school district made.
Wally Martin mention that if you speak out you get scolded- darn right you do! If you try and stand up for your community and your rights you are belittled and figuratively beaten into submission.
This is because the players are the same, it is the provincial Liberal government that up to now has been controlling Langley behind the scenes.
Thank goodness with the results of the last election we now have a Mayor that won't cowtow to them, and a majority on the school board that won't either.
I would like to hope that things have changed at the Langley Times and they are ready to do some actual reporting with facts instead of beliefs, but considering how the coverage of school issues has been dealt with over the last couple of years I won't hold my breath.
It's just like Coleman and Polak endorsing candidates for school trustees in the last election that they didn't even know!
Rich Coleman stated in the local papers the other day that he thinks Steve Burton paid for the ad, yet it was the PITS group that claimed it, coincidentally that group is led by a parent who pushed for the Middle School in Aldergrove and got her way, that group didn't get raked across the coals for standing up for their beliefs, in fact, Alison McVeigh even stated she admired their passion.
Once again, it depends who's side you are fighting for as to what picture the media paints of you.
Edited By LFP EDITOR
Sue brings up an interesting point. I find it very curious that a minister of the crown, Rich Coleman, would have allowed his name and picture to have been used in an advertisement to endorse school board individuals by someone or indeed MAYBE a group without being absolutely totally sure who the actual sponsor really was! He did say originally he thought it was School Trustee Burton did he not?
Something does not square properly on Coleman's comment on this item in my opinion at all. Not at all. He's much sharper than that! Thanks anyway Sue for your comments and thoughts.
P.S. Meanwhile our newest Minister, Mary Polak, must just be steaming today because her letter to the Editor in the Advance was hidden on just about the back corner of the paper's last page! Does the Editor there consider her opinions to be back page quality or is he just sending the message that it's election time and ante up the PAID political advertising next time?
BTW her letter in this Editor's opinion was to justify her Mufford decision and secondly blatantly asked for people to re-elect her essentially, all in my opinion of course! LOL
---LFP EDITOR---
Mary Polak's letter and her support for Falcon's overpass is in reality a kiss of death if she expects to get re-elected. It's one thing to support an absolutely rediculous overpass and road to nowhere, but quite another to brag about it.
By writing that letter and telling everyone she was for the overpass, Mary has lost a lot of votes. Not only that,in doing so she has admitted that she was not listening to ALL of her constituents. If your MLA doesn't listen to you, get rid of them.
Bye, bye, Mary.
Hi All
Langley advance has an interesting story on Friday April 3 2009 that “Overpass on the chamber agenda” and “The next chamber event is the monthly dinner meeting Tuesday, April 21. The subject up for discussion is "facts about" the Roberts Bank Rail Corridor.” That is very cute that now chamber members and others can hear the “facts”. It is too bad that they didn’t release the “facts” a year ago. Can anybody guess what the new “facts” will be?? Will Mayor and Council be able also to receive the “facts” ??
http://www2.canada.com/langleyad...5b-
fa0045072dcf http://www.langleychamber.com/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I see where Councillors Bateman and Fox are it seems to me be hinting at perhaps having inside knowledge that Brown's Pit may not be used to supply gravel to the Hwy 1 expansion. I suppose that we might expect them to take credit for this change of heart by their B.C. Liberal masters. The shame of it is that Brown's Pit should never have been considered as a source of gravel. Why is it only now seriously mentioned that the Hoppington Aquifier is doomed if the Pit were to be opened?
But wait a minute! There's an election in progress! Could it be that our local MLA is using his minions to announce the possibility that Brown's Pit is a no-go, hoping for a little boost at the polls? This issue will not really be over until Falcon says it is though, and we need to hear that from his lips. We can't wait until June for this statement, or we might never hear it.
I don't suppose that it's over yet, but thank goodness that Mayor Green raised hell about Brown's Pit reopening, or the Langley Township Liberal stranglehold on our civic affairs could be giving us another black eye to go with the road and overpass to nowhere. Unbelievable!
Soon comes the next provincial government experiment that will be at our expense - The TOL Water Management Plan. Yuck! It will be interesting to see how this bad idea gets stick handled by the Liberal Bloc of councilors that has been stifling the free and open flow of real facts in past years. Have your "Gong" hammers ready people.
Thanks LFP editor.
Mary Polak does not seem to know what her political role is in my opinion.
In the spring of 2007 she was featured in the local newspapers handing over 3.5 million dollars from the provincial government to the Langley school district to expand the Fundamental school. This expansion should never have been allowed as it ultimately caused the closure of a public secondary school.
When the parents of the south central area approached Mary Polak regarding the reconfiguration of HD Stafford, she told the parents that she could not get involved at a municipal level.
Not only that- but I understand that she forwarded emails sent to her by concerned parents to the School Superintendent and the Chair at the time.
Then at election time, she did an about face again, and involved herself at the municipal level by not only endorsing 4 incumbent trustees, but also a slate full of people she had never worked with before- even though the ad stated she had in my opinion. The ads were not fair in my opinion.
Now another about face concerning the citizens opposed to the overpass:
in an article in the Langley Advance ( Tuesday, March 24th)
she states "it's interesting that they would choose to protest provincially, because it has nothing to do with any provincial decision" is that so? We were told in no uncertain terms by Kevin Falcon that if the original overpass design was not passed in council- there would be no provincial money going towards the overpass.
Why? Why could the other plans with less impact on the environment be considered? And I certainly hope that we should never conclude that it is once again about money and land deals and pay offs.
The paragraph below about Mary Polak was taken from Wikipedia, I think it is an interesting read. In my opinion, she should never have been elected in Langley in the first place and I will do my part to make sure she does not get in again.
"Mary Polak was recruited to run as a member of the socially conservative Surrey Electors Team by school trustee Heather Stilwell. As chair of the Surrey School Board, she voted to ban sex education and condom machines in Surrey schools, even though Surrey has one of the highest rates of teen pregnancy in BC. She also voted, along with the majority of the school board, that books dealing with families where both parents were of the same sex not be included as optional learning resources. These books were requested by a kindergarten teacher to reflect the realities of today's families and to teach his pupils about diversity and tolerance.
A legal battle to overturn the decision to ban the three books went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, where the school board's decision was overturned. The judgment cited the need for families headed by same-sex couples to be respected. Chief Justice Beverly McLachlin dismissed the school board's argument that children would be confused or misled by classroom information about same-sex parents. The legal fees ended up costing Surrey taxpayers over $1,200,000."
Edited By LFP EDITOR
Commenting by HaloScan
