I sent an email to my rep (also NDP) with a concrete question about how the BC gov decided to do what it did. Hearthspirit, would you say this is a fair message? I sent it over a month ago:
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the purpose of a democratic government is to weigh all competing factors and interests against one another to develop balanced policy and laws. I understand that our government is trying its best to protect the people here in BC, but I wonder at what cost, and if the cost is justified. You are certainly obligated to take into account the guidance of the Public Health Office, but I think this should be weighed against the costs imposed by said guidance. As a hypothetical question, would the government, confronted with an ailing economy, seek only the opinion of economists and capitalist think tanks and pursue those measures even if it meant the further destruction of the environment and social cohesion? We must hear all sides of the debate and come to a measured response to ensure that the costs don't outweigh the benefits.
A concrete question for you: in the past two years, has the legislature formed a committee to take official and public account of what the Public Health Office recommends along with input from economic, social and psychological experts and so on to properly assess the risks and benefits of measures pursued by the government? To my understanding, this is a critical part of how our democracy is supposed to function, especially in cases where individual rights and freedoms are infringed upon. The infringement must be demonstrably justified, and we see today that the New Zealand supreme court has decided the vaccine mandates enforced by the government do not meet that requirement. We cannot throw aside our inalienable rights because of one sided policy with no input from or debate with dissenting voices. An unelected official, such as Dr. Bonny Henry, should not have as much power as she has to dictate public policy.
It is my educated belief that a decade or two from now we will look back at the response of all western democracies to the pandemic with shame and disgrace. Every day more and more information and data are coming out showing just what a boondoggle the vaccination program, lockdowns and masking have been. And this information is not sourced from social media platforms. Rather, numerous scientific, peer reviewed studies are supporting these conclusions. I am hoping that you, my elected official, might start asking some questions in the legislature and be the voice in the wilderness to lead us back to true democracy.
I appreciate the time you've taken to respond to my letters, and I look forward to your response.
Re: Effectively Vaccinated Rate
I sent an email to my rep (also NDP) with a concrete question about how the BC gov decided to do what it did. Hearthspirit, would you say this is a fair message? I sent it over a month ago:
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the purpose of a democratic government is to weigh all competing factors and interests against one another to develop balanced policy and laws. I understand that our government is trying its best to protect the people here in BC, but I wonder at what cost, and if the cost is justified. You are certainly obligated to take into account the guidance of the Public Health Office, but I think this should be weighed against the costs imposed by said guidance. As a hypothetical question, would the government, confronted with an ailing economy, seek only the opinion of economists and capitalist think tanks and pursue those measures even if it meant the further destruction of the environment and social cohesion? We must hear all sides of the debate and come to a measured response to ensure that the costs don't outweigh the benefits.
A concrete question for you: in the past two years, has the legislature formed a committee to take official and public account of what the Public Health Office recommends along with input from economic, social and psychological experts and so on to properly assess the risks and benefits of measures pursued by the government? To my understanding, this is a critical part of how our democracy is supposed to function, especially in cases where individual rights and freedoms are infringed upon. The infringement must be demonstrably justified, and we see today that the New Zealand supreme court has decided the vaccine mandates enforced by the government do not meet that requirement. We cannot throw aside our inalienable rights because of one sided policy with no input from or debate with dissenting voices. An unelected official, such as Dr. Bonny Henry, should not have as much power as she has to dictate public policy.
It is my educated belief that a decade or two from now we will look back at the response of all western democracies to the pandemic with shame and disgrace. Every day more and more information and data are coming out showing just what a boondoggle the vaccination program, lockdowns and masking have been. And this information is not sourced from social media platforms. Rather, numerous scientific, peer reviewed studies are supporting these conclusions. I am hoping that you, my elected official, might start asking some questions in the legislature and be the voice in the wilderness to lead us back to true democracy.
I appreciate the time you've taken to respond to my letters, and I look forward to your response.