The following text may have been generated by Optical Character Recognition, with varying degrees of accuracy. Reader beware!

WHITBY FREE PRESS, WEDNESDAY, JUNE 25. I986 PAGE 5 "I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostiftty against every form of tyranny over the min.d of man." - Thomas Jefferson Advise and Dissent THE CROW'S NEST by Michael Knell I know I promised only one column on Lynde House when I opined on the sub- ject a few months ago, but I can't help myself. By the time you read this, Coun- cil will hopefully have exercised some sense and adopted an operations com- mittee recommendation that the town assume ownership and responsibility for the Lynde House and move to Cullen Gardens and Miniature Village. To be perfectly frank, I'm surprised that council waited this long to act. If it hadn't been for the then coming November election, council might have yanked this situation out from under the Whitby Historical Society last September. in addition to being the right move, Council is also demonstrating its im- patience with the historical society and its displeasure with their failure to arrive at a senisble course of action despite having 13 years in which to come up with one. Privately, many councillors have expressed disappointment and even anger at the society's seeming inability to come to grips with the future of Lyn- de House. All they have seen is an organization that has done nothing but engage in wishful thinking, talk, and study but no action. They simply could not make up their mind as to what they wanted to do. And it's not that they didn't know what they needed to do. They knew that the house needed extensive renovations. They knew they had to make in more viable in terms of attendance and programming. They knew they had to promote its value to the community but its potential as a community resource as well. Why they did not act, I do not know. The society also knew what the province expected of them in the operation of the house as a museum. They knew that the government would not provide all the money they needed to do the things they knew had to be done. But, to the best of my knowledge, at no time during the last 13 years has the Whitby Historical Society publically proposed to undertake any plan or activity that would help them raise their share of the $200,000 (approximately) needed to restore Lynde House and bring it to acceptable museum standards. During the time I was the full-time editor of this newspaper I was never approached by any member of the historical society and asked if this newspaper would lend its support to such an activity. But every year they would go to council and ask for their grant which they would get after complaining in tired voices about the condition of the shutters, the roof and the foundation and how they wanted to see the place fixed up. They went through the motions for 13 years. They may even have indulged in a little wishful thinking. Far too often, I've heard some people proclaim that the owner of the site Lynde House sits on was a nice guy and would give them the land so they wouldn't have to move the house. Well, I have at least one letter in my file from the vice-president of Whit- tington Investments saying that there was no way the land would simply be given to them. I'm not surprised by council's action. I'm surprised they demonstrated this much patience. I suppose one of the reasons they waited so long was that they did not want to steal the society's thunder. They did not want to pre-empt the society. Council, I think, would have prefered to play a supporting, rather than a leading role in the issue. But they could not wait any longer to act. With Len - Cullen's offer and Whittington's patience scheduled to run out on June 30, Coun- cil had to ensure that the house was preserved and had a permanent home. Considering the circumstances, Council's action was more than appropriate. The first priority is to ensure that the house is preserved. Once that had been accomplished, the issues of the restoration and long term usage can be ad- dressed properly and thoughtfully. From my perspective, the historical society lost both ils sense of priority and its sense of direction. With the crunch coming, they decided to do that which they should have done 10 years ago. The feasibility study they commissioned a few weeks ago should have been undertaken in 1975 or earlier. The debate over the future of the Lynde House has become a political issue in its purest sense. It had the potential of becoming a 'hot' issue, especially in the older more established parts of town. Council has had enough of hot issues for one year. Council has also been resigned to the fact that they would have to get involved with the issue at some point in time. They knew that sometime soon, someone was going to demand money from them for Lynde House. Despite its desire to do otherwise, Council's decision to become a leader in this issue rather than a reactionary group will serve the town and the house in good.stead. Council can bring its considerable resources and highly talented staff to the issue. The provincial and federal governments will be more receptive to plans for the restoration and operation of the house that have the town's seal of ap- proval. The importance of the Lynde House to Whitby's heritage cannot be un- derestimated. It is one of the most important links with our past. The role it played in the early years of Upper Canada cannot be discounted. Assuming responsibility and ownership of Lynde House was the right and proper thing to do. Council's leadership will allow the society and other individuals and groups interested in the museum's future the time to plan, organize, fundraise and en- sure that it is used in the best interests of the community. My only hope is that the society has the fortitude to accept council's action and assume a vital role in the future of Lynde House. WITH OUR FEET UP By Bill Swan Now that the doctors' strike in Ontario is entering the protracted stage, a few stitches and bandages from today and yesteryear come floating by: 1) Services at 65 hospitals in Quebec were disrup- ted Friday. Nurses had staged an illegal walkout to protest the 3.5 percent increase they had been of- fered. The nurses were ordered back to work. 2) In 1981, hospital workers in Ontario staged an illegal walkout over an unacceptable pay increase. They were ordered back to work the day the goyer- nment called a provincial election. Hospital workers at the time were making $13,000 a year. Later that same year, the same PC government awarded the doctors a pay increase which averaged almost $13,000. 3) In 1962, the CCF-NDP government in Saskat- chewan set up the first medicare program in North America. The doctors went on strike for 23 days. They feared government control of health services. The history of socialized medicine in Canada dates back to 1919, when the Liberal Party of Canada approved the principle of state-run medicine. But no government tackled the problem until 1962 in Saskatchewan. The spade work for that was done by T.C. (Tommy) Douglas. The Douglas government in Saskatchewan had plans for Medicare in 1945. The medical profession approved of the plan then. But first came the introduction of hospital in- surance, another first. The government-run plan guaranteed free hospital care to every resident of the province. Even so, some hospital officials op- posed the plan, fearing "government interference. " But the federal government dilly-dallied. So 17 years later, tired of waiting 'until we can afford it" The CCF government decided to go it alone. But by then prosperity had changed the minds of the doctors. The Saskatchewan College of Physicians and Surgeons led the fight. By the time an agreement was reached, 23 days later, the college was having increasing difficulty holding the fort. Time was on the government's side. Most of these points are interesting to speculate on, 24 years later and in the middle of a doctors' strike in Ontario. The argument remains basically the same. With a fear bordering on paranoia, doc- tors fear a government dictatorship. Have they been reading too many comic books? All three political parties at the federal level have gone on record as opposing extra billing. Doctors have had ample warning that the bulk of society supports that ban. Granted, that may not be the preference the doc- tors have. But long ago society accepted the need for universal education. Teachers easily gave up the right to extra bill. So did nurses. In 1971 when Ontario introduced OHIP, many of us gave up superior private health insurance plans. If you worked for a large corporation at that time, you likely had an excellent plan. The difficulty was that huge blocks of society had no coverage. And to provide two health care systems - one for the rich and one for the poor - is a step down a road to a society based on class and privileee. Doctors have picked Ine wrong time and the wrong issue to draw battle lines. They claim the issue is not money; but the right to extra bill means money. To then change the argument and say the strike is about crushing governrnent control doesn't quitescrub. In 1962, Saskatchewan doctors feared the same government control. In 1971, Tommy Douglas was interviewed by a reporter from the Ottawa Citizen. In her book on Douglas, Doris French Shackleton quotes the following passage from that interview. Let's let Tommy Douglas have the last word: "The second thing - and this of course they would never admit - was that when bills were paid by the Medical Care Commission the T4 slips went to the Department of National Revenue. Every dollar they got was on the books, and they were paying income tax on it. In the next few years after Medicare the per capita income of Saskatchewan doctors was $3,000 higher than anywhere else in Canada. I don't think they were earning $3,00. more but they were reporting $3,000 more." .1'