Dear Editor,
I would like to express my appreciation to various people for bringing this issue to the foreground of discussion, as it is indeed an important subject that affects all residents, particularly property owners in Ponoka. However, I am of the opinion that the “Letter to the Editor” forum could be utilized in a significantly more productive manner. Scathing sarcasm will ensure only that rational voices and realistic urgings are not heard. Conversely, diplomacy and tact, coupled with a positive and proactive approach will unite like-minded individuals toward positive action, thereby culminating in desirable outcomes for all.
It is paramount to note that the mandate issued by the Town of Ponoka citing that smart meters will be universally installed is not in keeping with existing common law and statute law that is derived from the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. When the Charter is circumvented, the result is an infringement on our basic human rights and freedoms, in this case pertaining to real property ownership. Property ownership is verified by a title of ownership. A title of ownership inherently provides us with a fundamental right to determine who enters our property and, if/when an integral part of our property is to be affected in any way, we have the right to decide for ourselves if we are inclined to allow or disallow such an occurrence. In our democratic society, masses of people cannot simply be forced to comply with a decision made behind proverbial closed doors that we had no information about and that we were never consulted on. Elected officials and public servants at all levels of government are accountable to taxpayers who pay their salaries. Democracy thrives when communication/debate is robust, balanced, and inclusive, even and especially in cases where divisiveness exists. The ultimate objective for all of us on this and all other issues is the wellbeing of all citizens.
I will pose one final question. If the meters are entirely safe and efficient, why is our neighbouring province halting all installation and indeed removing previous installations? Perhaps more research and more conversation, with all interested parties, is required prior to proceeding with this endeavour?
Sincerely,
Sarah Keays
Concerned Ponoka resident and taxpayer