After the guy dumped dirt on the memorial, I feel like this is pretty poor optics even if it’s something the City needs to move forward on right now.

  • IdleCeremony
    2·
    1 year ago

    I don’t dispute any of this. However, the reality is that the province isn’t proposing to spend that money on anything. They just said “it’s too expensive, please go away” to people with a very legitimate complaint and a long history of being ignored or outright oppressed by that same government.

    If the government had approached them and said, “It would cost $200 million and be extremely dangerous to the searchers and the environment. What if we did X, Y, and Z with $200 million instead and named X a memorial to the missing victims?” then this would be a different conversation.

    I agree the money could be put to better use, but it’s not even being proposed. The money is just being used as an excuse to swat down people that have been swatted down their entire lives.

    I’m not a fan of going ahead with the search. The risks to the searchers and the environment (risk of toxic leaching, etc) is too great in my opinion.

    However, my opinion here can’t matter. This has to come down to the families and advocates. And the government has made NO overtures to them beyond, “gee, that must suck, sorry.” So failing a better offer, I don’t blame them for continuing to hammer the only point they have available to them.

    • TroyM
      3·
      1 year ago

      However, my opinion here can’t matter.

      I disagree. In the end, it’s your money the government would be spending, and democracy is still the rule.

      Nevertheless, you’re absolutely right in that it’s a very sticky situation.

    • abff08f4813c@kbin.social
      1·
      1 year ago

      I agree the money could be put to better use, but it’s not even being proposed. The money is just being used as an excuse to swat down people that have been swatted down their entire lives.

      That’s exactly it. At least keep talking to them and try to find a middle ground proposal.

      I’m not a fan of going ahead with the search. The risks to the searchers and the environment (risk of toxic leaching, etc) is too great in my opinion.

      So the article links to another which mentions a report that was made on the feasibility of conducting the search, and it seems that this is disputed somewhat. It’s claimed by the other side that there is a way to conduct the search in relative safety, and the report outlines what measures would need to be taken.

      Anyways, I find myself in complete agreement with what you wrote:

      Maybe it wouldn’t have become so dangerous and impractical if we had taken action on this much earlier. The delays have made it worse and each continued delay makes it even moreso I expect.

      To me, the above is an argument for starting the search now (instead of waiting longer and making it even riskier and more expensive later).