Friday, January 31, 1997
Truck drivers must drive safer
It was just four months ago that Yellowknifer ran an article bearing a headline "Northern trucks among safest on nation's highway."
Well, just try and preach that message to the Dogrib who travel Hwy. 3.
They would certainly dispute just how safe these truckers really are.
But they are not alone in their complaints about trucks speeding or coming around corners on the wrong side of the road.
As Treaty 11 members the Dogrib collectively carry clout, unlike the lone voice of an isolated motorist who encounters a behemoth on the winter road and is left with white knuckles clutching the steering wheel.
Thank goodness Grand Chief Joe Rabesca has had enough and has brought to light several brushes with disaster by members of his community on Hwy. 3.
Rabesca pursued the matter with transport minister Jim Antoine, asking for a strictly enforced speed limit of 60 km/h for any trucks over five tonnes.
The serious nature of this threat to the motoring public was highlighted by North Slave MLA James Rabesca who raised the issue in the legislature last week, calling for road reconstruction to start this summer between here and Rae, coupled with a reduction in speed.
Truck traffic is going to accelerate soon with a big rig leaving every few minutes from Hay River to gold and diamond mines north of here, so extra vigilance -- including spot checks for drinking truckers -- by the RCMP is needed to make the highway safer.
The trucking industry must crack down on its drivers, too.
Vigilance and caution should be enough without having to worry about unsafe roads and dangerous truck drivers. (1/31/97)
"Not in my back yard" is often bandied about when hypocrites decide they shouldn't pay the price for society's benefits.
It would be easy to dismiss the Forrest Drive folk who don't want Yellowknife Properties to build 50 multi-family units on 2.4 hectares in their peaceful corner of the city as NIMBY types. But that would be unfair.
It's not hypocritical to oppose changing the zoning -- the nature of their community -- just so someone with lots of money can make more of it. City council should reject the plan. (1/31/97)
So, Royal Oak Mines Inc. is feeling the pinch because gold prices aren't what they used to be, making it a little difficult for its Giant Mine to turn a profit.
We sympathize with the shareholders of one of the city's most important economic engines. But to suggest, as did Royal Oak last week, that their city taxes should therefore be reduced, is more than surprising.
If the city were to oblige, does that mean that when gold prices rise again, as they inevitably will, Royal Oak would gladly increase its tax burden accordingly? (1/31/97)