Corruption and Crosswalks- It's a Quebec Thing

What do crosswalks and corruption in Quebec have in common?

Sadly, they are both roundly ignored.

Few Quebeckers would step off a curb into a crosswalk without looking both ways, it's a sure ticket to the hospital. It's a wonder that municipalities bother painting the lines at all, we'd be better off without the false sense of security.
Why are crosswalks ignored by motorists? Enforcement, or rather the lack thereof. Have you ever heard of anyone getting a ticket for violating the sanctity of a crosswalk? If you did, it's mighty rare, police are just not into it and so crosswalks are roundly ignored by motorists.

It's the same way with corruption, as long as enforcement is virtually non-existent, it will flourish.

I recently returned from a short vacation in the States and was intrigued by how the nightly local and national news was filled with stories about dishonest elected officials being variously charged or being convicted in cases of bribery, misappropriation of funds and other corrupt practices.

Here's just a small sampling of stories about elected officials getting their just rewards for their  corrupt practices. Note that all these stories are culled from just one week. Imagine what fifty-two weeks of stories would look like. (Note- most judges in the US are elected.)

Dec1  Dallas City Hall corruption case
Dec2  Pennsylvania judge faces corruption charge
Dec3  New York State Officials Took Payoffs from Equity Fund
Dec3  NY Supreme Court judge convicted of trying to shake down lawyers 
Dec3  Former Jersey City Deputy Mayor faces with five federal corruption charges. 
Dec3  Georgia judge gets probation, fine for corruption
Dec4  Former Secaucus Mayor arraigned
Dec4  Ohio Judge Charged with Honest Services Mail Fraud
Dec4  Two suspended Levy County commissioners (Fla.) found guilty of federal bribery charges
Dec5  California mayor convicted of voter fraud
Dec5  Port Authority of New York and New Jersey official convicted of taking bribes

Dec5  Jury deliberating in the political corruption trial of former NY Senate leader.
Dec5  Two Pennsylvania judges accused of pocketing millions in kickbacks  

Dec5  Baltimore Mayor convicted of gift card charge
Dec5  Florida statewide grand jury empanelled to investigate public corruption.

Dec6  Grand Jury investigating corruption in Raleigh

Dec6  Florida County commissioners found guilty of federal bribery charges

Dec6  Montana County Commissioner charged with felony theft charge.

Dec 6 Jersey City Deputy Mayor charged charged with corruption

Dec 6 Former State Representative charged with taking a no-work state job.

I found these entires using a simple Google search and the keyword "Corruption" The list above is just a fraction of the stories concerning corrupt elected officials in the US being pursued in the courts. Curiously I found not one story about a corrupt elected official in Quebec, or Canada for that matter as well.
Why?
Are we that much more honest than the Americans? Somehow I doubt it.

How is it that amid swirling accusations of corruption at all levels of our local and provincial government, not one Quebec elected official is presently under indictment for corruption?

Who's fault is it?
It's really quite simple, sadly our criminal justice system is not up to snuff.
In order to bring charges forward, an onerous and cumbersome system is in place, one that requires a complaint to be laid by police, who are undermanned and overwhelmed by serious violent crime, which takes precedence over corruption cases which usually require long and expensive investigations.

The reason the Americans are so successful at rooting out and punishing elected crooks is that they have another investigative element aside from the police- the District Attorney's office.
As the Crown Prosecutors office in Canada, the District Attorney's office is responsible for representing the government and prosecuting those charged in criminal court.
Unlike our crown prosecutors, the District Attorney has investigative powers and can (and does) initiate criminal investigations on their own. Those facing an investigation and or those with information concerning an investigation are required by law to answer questions truthfully (or invoke their rights against self-incrimination)  or a face criminal charge of lying. The system is infinitely more effective than what goes on here and has shown itself to be highly effective in dealing with corruption of high officials.


Let me give you as silly example of how this would work relating to a story that I read about this week in the French press.

The Journal de Montreal ran a story about the director of the Cégep de l'Outaouais whose expenses concerning a trip to Arizona on school business were being questioned. She had made some dubious expense claims which included a charge for a tourist visit to the Grand Canyon, some purchases at Wal-Mart and a charge of $150 in a local museum while on the trip. When questioned about the expenses she defended them all as perfectly legitimate and when interrogated specifically about the museum charge, she responded that she had entertained some colleagues from Mexico in the museum restaurant.  After some digging and fact checking by the reporter, it was revealed that the museum didn't even have a restaurant and the purchase was probably linked to the gift shop! Gotcha!!!!

Asked to respond, the director clammed up and had a spokesperson offer a curt "No Comment!"  

It's likely that this is the end of the story, but in the States, someone's interest would be piqued, after all a directer of a CEGEP is in a powerful position and authorizes a lot of expenditures. If she is dishonest over small things, it's likely she's dishonest over big things. Making false expense claims against a CEGEP (which is publicly funded) has got to be against the law.

Here's how an imaginary case similar to this one might play out in the USA.

The District Attorney is made aware of the story of the alleged false expenses, perhaps when reading the story over coffee in the morning. To her, it's a bad example of a public official abusing their position. She goes into her office and asks a junior assistant district attorney to invite the director to come down to the office to discuss the matter, and to bring her attorney with her, as she'll need representation. A member  of the school's Board of Directors is also summoned and asked to describe the policy for expense reimbursement.

The meeting with the director is adversarial and she is asked point blank by the government lawyer about the false expense claim. "Tell the truth or face the consequences."
"My client was tired and made an honest mistake. It's a small matter that's already been resolved. She's paid back the money already." answers the attorney for the director.

"Bullshit!" announces the assistant district Attorney. "It's not good enough. She clearly lied about the restaurant, there was no mistake or oversight. Your client is in a position of authority and is bound to set an example to her students.
So here's the deal, she either faces disciplinary action by the school or we charge with felony corruption. It's up to you and the school"

The matter is quickly resolved. The director accepts a letter of reprimand and writes a letter of apology to the Board of Directors and the general school population. She is given a one day suspension without pay and the incident is recored in her permanent record (Ha! Ha!, just like her students.) The CEGEP agrees to audit all her previous expenses and to exercise more diligence in the future.

Case closed. One meeting, one day.  JUSTICE is served.

The students learn a powerful lesson, that cheating will not be tolerated regardless of position. Other expenses padders take notice and hopefully modify their behaviour. Hooray!!!!
Sadly, we can only dream of such scenarios in Canada...

Our society is ineffective in battling corruption largely because our politicians want to keep it that way. Until the justice system is truly independent and has the means and the brief to initiate independent investigations, we will forever live under the yoke of corruption.

Hasid's Demands for Accommodations Hurt Image of Quebec Jews

Every year as the Jewish high holidays approach, local TV is apt as usual, to show scenes of bearded Jewish orthodox men, replete in black hats and robes, trundling their large families off to synagogue to usher in the New Year.

This stereo typical depiction of Jews, presented by well-meaning, but misinformed television editors, is a misrepresentation that has been harmful to the reputation of mainstream Jews of Quebec, who have as much in common with the ultra-religious Jews known collectively as the 'Haredim", as Christians have with the polygamists in Bountiful, British Columbia or the Amish in Pennsylvania.

Although the Haredim consist of many ultra-orthodox religious Jewish sects, it is common among secular Jews in Quebec to refer to all of them as 'Hasids.'

Because of the large amount of publicity (mostly negative) generated by the Hasids, most Quebeckers are under the impression they are representative of Quebec Jews and that is unfortunate.

The various ultra-religious sects make up less than 10% of Quebec Jewry and less than 4% of Jews worldwide, yet for most Quebeckers, the Hasids and their lifestyle are what they think of, when asked to describe Jews.

Jews have had a long and successful history in Quebec and are the most integrated and bilingual of all the minorities. Most Quebeckers would be surprised to learn that most Jews speak French, rather than English at home.
Mainstream Jews, like their Christian brothers and sisters practice various degrees of orthodoxy, but enjoy and support the secular nature of Quebec society and the separation of church from state.
The various Hasidic groups living in Quebec migrated to Canada after World War II. Their view of Judaism is fundamentalist and literal. They live in tightly knit communities and practice their faith far away and apart from the regular Jewish community.

Their religious leader (the ‘Rebbe’) is revered and ascribed a god-like status. Hasids view God’s word and that of the 'Rebbe', as supreme and literal and believe firmly that religious law trumps laws imposed by the state.

Similar to other religious cults, Hasids live in a parallel, yet separate world. They socialize and marry exclusively within their community and work in jobs that keep them as far away from society as possible. Children are tightly controlled and undergo a thorough indoctrination in segregated religious schools and are kept apart from outside influences. Life for Hasids is centered around a complicated set of rules and standards in which daily prayer and the study of religious texts is fundamental and veneration of the spiritual leader is exaggerated.

Hasids are serene and confident, believing in their infallible faith and convinced absolutely (like other cults) that everyone outside their faith is not only wrong, but irrelevant.

Unlike most other cults, Hasids prefer to live in urban areas, carving out enclaves that invariably bring them into conflict with their neighbours. Most of these problems arise from the opening of synagogues and religious schools in direct violation of zoning laws. When faced with local opposition, Hasids employ a sophisticated barrage of legal tactics, which includes escalating disputes into cases of religious persecution, financed by wealthy members of their community.

As in Montreal’s Outremont district or in the Laurentian community of Val-Morin, those who are opposed to the Hasids open disregard of civil authority are painted as racists and the fallout and negative sentiment that the conflict engenders, tarnishes the entire Quebec Jewish community.

Employing expensive legal talent, like Montreal’s Julius Grey, (a lawyer who never met a law, rule or regulation that couldn't be challenged under the guise of religious freedom), the Hasids engage in an expensive and painful war of legal attrition, one that invariably leads to extreme ill will.

Aside from their total disregard to zoning ordinances, Hasids tend to ignore other rules and regulations that they find inconvenient, all the while pretending that they are cooperative and respectful citizens.

Recently it was revealed that certain congregations of the Hasidic community in Montreal have been operating schools in direct violation of provincial educational standards and have been doing so since 1952! The schools pursue a religious syllabus that dates back to Tsarist Russia and is so overloaded with religious study that other subjects are hardly taught at all. The teaching of the French language is deemed unnecessary and it's omission serves to underline the contempt Hasids hold for the 'goyim', (a Yiddish pejorative for the non-Jewish world.) Of the hundreds of minorities in Quebec, Hasids rank at the bottom in their inability to speak the language of the majority.

When a permit was rightly denied by police last May, to hold an outdoor bonfire in celebration of a religious holiday in a schoolyard, the Belz congregation of Outremont went ahead with it anyway, packing hundreds of celebrants into a schoolyard and lighting a huge fire in densly populated neighbourhood.
Hasids, full-well in the knowledge that the practice is illegal, run a daily unlicensed bus service to Brooklyn, picking up and depositing passengers without any regulatory oversight.

When confronted, Hasids pooh-pooh the problems and put forth the notion that they are cooperative and amenable to compromise.
It is patently untrue.

To understand the Hasids propensity to circumvent the law, it's important to understand how Hasids themselves practice their own religion, which is bound by overly harsh restrictions and rules that make modern life difficult.
The Hasids have developed certain strategies that allow them to violate the spirit of the religious edicts while remaining technically in compliance.
One of the most important religious rule is the sanctity of the Sabbath, where no work can be performed. The rule is so draconian that Hasids may not use any machine or electrical device or for that matter, even turn on a light. They may not even tear toilet paper! In order to get around the problem they will leave lights on and tear the toilet paper into pieces the night before. For religious services in the synagogue a non-Jew known by the derogatory term "Shabbos Goy"(Sabbath Gentile) is employed to do all that they may not. (open the lights, turn on the heat, shovel snow, etc.etc.)
When a religious holiday demands that the Hasids remain in their homes, a string is run all around the neighbourhood thus discerning a boundary that is declared a common home! Weird strategies are concocted to circumvent many other rules and recently a Sabbath cell phone has come on the market! To Hasids, a rule, a regulation or a law is just something to get around, it's no big deal!

In Israel, the Hasidic minority exploits the fact that they hold the balance of political power by imposing extreme religious standards on the largely secular Jewish majority. They regularly interfere in all manner of national affairs.
It is not uncommon to see violent outbursts by these ultra-orthodox, when their religious hold on Israeli society is challenged.
Read a frightening account by an ABC news reporter about her harrowing experience in a Hasidic neighbourhood. So much for benign piety.

Stores that sell non-kosher food are routinely stoned, buses that don’t provide separate seating for men and women are attacked and those who disrespect the sabbath in religious neighbourhoods put their personal safety at risk.
Exemption from army service and special subsidies for Hasids are just a few of the special privileges demanded and received for their political support. The general public is not amused and the majority of Israelis hold them in utter contempt.
So much for peaceful co-existence.
The conflict between the Hasids and secular Israelis has risen to an alarming level as the secular Jews are now demanding that Hasids refrain from moving into secular neighbourhoods. They fear quite correctly that with the arrival of the Hasids, demands for religious obedience will follow. Graffiti, like the one depicted here on the right, is starting to appear onto buildings in these neighbourhoods. The message is clear- "NOT AMONG US"

Read an unsettling account of the 'war' between religious fanatics and the secular state of Israel, it will dispel any notion that you may have that it is all just a 'misunderstanding'.

These problems are unlikely to appear in Quebec, the Haredi community's small numbers preclude it. They do however serve to underline that the problems between the Hasids and the community at large have nothing to do with antisemitism or racism, the problems occur because of the refusal by the Hasids to accept the rules and regulations of a secularist state.

The whole divisive religious accommodation debate that rocked Quebec these last years, was largely (but not exclusively) triggered by incidents whereby Hasids demanded 'special' treatment.

Hasidic demands for female doctors for female patients and the demand for the installation of curtains in windows of a certain gym (so that neighbouring Hasids would not be offended by scantily clothed women) rightly offend the sensibilities of all Quebeckers.

The Montreal Police are so intimidated, that they sent out a notice advising female police officers to defer to their male counterparts when dealing with the Hasidic community.
In Quebec, Hasids exploit the fact that the Christian majority is reluctant to challenge their excesses because of the fear of being branded anti-Semitic.
It is unlikely that Hasids will come into compliance with Quebec educational edicts without a fight, one which will again tarnish the reputation of mainstream Jews.

It is an open question whether Hasids can successfully live in Quebec society within the bounds of secular law.
So far, the governments reaction to the community's open disobedience of the law has been to avoid the problem by caving in shamefully.

Mainstream Jews should not remain silent, because as long as Hasids flaunt the law, make unfair and unrealistic demands, secular Quebec Jews will suffer the consequences.

Bagel Debate Rages On

I read an interesting article written by a New Yorker writer that once again compared Montreal bagels to those insipid New York produced rolls that have falsely absconded with the appellation of "BAGEL"
New York 'bagels' are as true to the original as California "CHAMPAGNE" is to the nectar of the Gods created in France and France alone.

But I have no preference, ahem, and in the interest of fairness, read the article yourself. LINK

Better yet, read the comments.

I can say this about New Yorkers, they may not know crap about food, but they sure can write. I can't remember reading as well written, lucid, emotional and thought provoking comments.

"As an expat Montrealer, ensconced in New Jersey for more than a decade, I can share this: We are stamped with preferences based on childhood, and they’re mighty tough to shake."— Gary K

The real problems with the New York view of bagels is the perception that they are a 'platform.'

"I was raised on NYC bagels, eating at La Bagel Delight in Park Slope and going to H&H for a once in a while treat. I tried these so called “bagels” from up north. They’re okay, but they’re main problem is that their flimsy construction can’t support a full schmear, an appropriate amount of lox, plus tomato and onion."— Dan Kleinman

AAARRGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!

Right there is the problem!
A bagel must be enjoyed as the centrepiece. Everything you place upon it (if anything) is meant the highlight the bagel's delicious taste.

The real taste test is this- Can you eat a New York bagel with absolutely nothing on it? Eccchh!!!

New Yorkers and Americans in general cannot understand the food concept of 'Less is More'

It is like putting Cassis or orange juice into Champagne (a travesty, unless the Champagne is Californian.)

The best accoutrement to bagels is butter or margarine (as a second choice), whether toasted or freshly baked out of the oven. Anything more than a tiny of bit of cream cheese is as an abomination, as sickening as ketchup on eggs or steak.

But don't those sophisticated New Yorkers do that too?

Global Warming and Other Fun Environmental Myths

The disciples of the United Global Warming Evangelical Movement (are you a member?) took it hard across the jaw last week as revelations by a whistle blower hacker revealed that some of the prime data used to advocate that the Earth was warming had been tampered with. LINK.

And so it appears that the vaunted "Hockey Stick Graph", the chart that shows the Earth's temperature rising precipitously has been, if not discredited, badly diminished. While true believers continue to pooh pooh the impact of the manipulated data scandal, a clear and decisive victory has been posted by climate change doubters.

Sweet revenge for those scientists who have withstood ridicule and ostracization because of their resolute refusal to give in to climate hysteria.

Now that a crack has been punched into the foundation of radical environmentalism, let's explore other myths and misconceptions of the movement with an open mind. At least let's have some fun!!

Re-cycling is bad for the environment.
Don't waste your time. Curbside recycling is by far the worst form of environmentalism, a counter productive act that actually increases your carbon footprint. Come to think of it, almost all forms of re-cycling are bad for the Earth!!!
Read my favourite article debunking the myth of re-cycling written by John Tierney in the New York Times. Some delicious quotes;

• ...the simplest and cheapest option is usually to bury garbage in an environmentally safe landfill....
• The typical household in Mexico City buys fewer packaged goods than an American household, but it produces one-third more garbage.
• A typical McDonald's discards less than two ounces of garbage for each customer served -- less than what's generated by a typical meal at home.
• If Americans keep generating garbage at current rates for 1,000 years, and if all their garbage is put in a landfill 100 yards deep, by the year 3000 this national garbage heap will fill a square piece of land 35 miles on each side. This doesn't seem a huge imposition in a country the size of America. The garbage would occupy only 5 percent of the area needed for the national array of solar panels proposed by environmentalists.
  

Ha Ha. Read the article if you have an open mind, environmentalists, skip it!!!!!

Hybrids vehicles are worse for the environment than Hummers!!
According to a report, entitled "Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal," when the amount of energy it takes to produce the vehicle before it gets on the road -- and the amount used to dispose of it are figured in to the carbon footprint, the Hummer comes out far ahead of the Prius.
In "dollars per lifetime miles," a Prius' "energy costs" average $3.25 per mile, compared to a mere $1.95 per mile for a Hummer H3.
Implausible-probably. The report was attacked by a enviormentalists who drew other conclusions, but the inference is clear. Don't assume politically correct environmental alternatives are a panacea.

Buy local programs are a bad idea.
Transportation is just one of the factors in determining a product's carbon footprint. The marketplace buys products from far away producers because it is cheaper and more efficient and that usually includes the overall carbon footprint.
Buying fresh grown flowers from a local hothouse is usually a poorer environmental choice that getting them from a hot climate country that grows them in bulk outdoors. Buy local programs are usually a smokescreen to encourage local producers to shut out foreign competition. Don't buy into the myth.

Organic Food is Crap
Studies have conclusively proven that organic food is nutritionally equal to mass produced food. There are no health benefits and the 'natural' pesticides used by organic farmers are more dangerous and toxic than those big bad chemicals provided by big pharma. Producing organic food uses up significantly more resources and has much higher carbon footprint than conventionally produced food. If all the world's food were produced organically, we would starve. Watch the incredible entertaining episode of Penn and Tellers' exposé on the organic food industry on their cable show "BULLSHIT"
Watch a funny video about an organic taste test from the show. LINK

Compact Fluorescent Light Bulbs are no big deal.
We've all been bombarded with exhortations to change our regular inefficient incandescent light bulbs to those curly CFL neon bulbs to save energy. You know, those new-fangled bulbs that emit an uncomfortable and annoying ghoulish white light.
Truth be told, in our situation in Quebec and almost all over Canada where electricity is cheap and the weather cold, they don't make economic or environmental sense.
CFC's may use electricity more efficiently but really are no money savers at all, even if they consume up to three quarters less energy than regular light bulbs.
The problem with conventional light bulbs is that they turn up to 90% of the energy consumed into heat. But in Canada, this heat is not wasted, at least not for the 7 or 8 months a year that we heat our homes. On top of it, in the summer when the heat is actually wasted, we hardly use the bulbs at all, given the extended hours of sunlight. Instead of the 75% savings that are touted, we actually reap less than 10-15% savings. The expensive and resource rich manufacturing process destroys almost all believed to emit dangerous radiation. Although manufacturers claim that CFLs outlast regular light bulbs, in my own experience the opposite is true, with CFLs burning out or reducing output to the point that they have to be changed, at a rate far superior to incandescent bulbs. By the way, don't ever drop a CFL, the mercury inside them is toxic!

En garde, environmentalists!!!


Back to the data-fixing scandal.
Isn't it puzzling that environmentalists have roundly rejected the notion that the case for global warming has been weakened by the data fixing scandal?
Wouldn't normal and reasonable person be happy that the possibility that the case for global warming has gotten weaker?

Imagine if your doctor told you that one the major diagnostic tests which was conducted on you and which confirmed a medically terminal diagnosis was faulty. Wouldn't you be happy and wouldn't you shout out in joy at the possibility of living longer!

How would you react if your family jumped up to deny the results.
NO! NO! We don't care about that. We're sure he's dying!! Arggh!

Ethnocentrism Alive and Well in Quebec

Just as we said good riddance good-bye to Pierre Falardeau, a nasty and cruel racist, a new breed of immigrant and anglo bashers is rising to take up the mantle of ethnocentrism.

A good example of these type 'intellectual' haters is blogger Louis Prefontaine, who's pseudo intellectual bashing of all things not francophone is gathering quite an audience.

His latest rant concerns the bone fides of Anglophones and ethnics and their right to be considered "Quebecois" Les anglophones sont-ils Québécois?

According to Mr. Prefontaine, Anglos can never be considered part of the Quebec 'tribe' because their first language is English and that they share a point of view that is different from the francophone majority.

It is this type of ethnocentrism that has been a hallmark of the ultra-nationalist Quebec movement, from Lionel Groulx, to Pierre Faladeau to the latest crop of French, white Catholics, who demand that Anglos and ethnics mimic their views and behaviour.

As a statuesque Black African immigrant woman told the Bouchard-Taylor Inquiry (in perfect French;)
"I guess I have to eat poutine!" I guess I have to eat maple syrup!"

That's what being a Quebecker is to these racists. Everyone can be a Quebecker, as long as they act like a francophone, speak like a francophone, think like a francophone and vote like a Francophone.

This recurring theme is so racist that it demands denunciation.

The discussion of who is a Quebecker is uncomfortably reminiscent of the Nazis discussion of who is a Jew and begs the question -to what end?

What exactly is Mr. Prefontaine's point.

If Anglos and immigrants are not Quebeckers, what is the inference. Should they be denied civil rights? Should they wear a scarlet letter? Should they be asked to leave or be shown the door? Should their votes be counted or discounted? WHAT EXACTLY IS THE POINT?

Every day ethnocentrics rain down scorn and invective on Anglos and ethnics. They use the word 'meprise' (contempt) to describe our behaviour, all the while using the foulest of references and terms to describe Anglophones, Ethnics and our language.

They tell us that our existence threatens their Quebec culture, French language and Christian heritage. The hate is real.

One of the more twisted aspect to this ethnocentrism is the idea that Anglos and Ethnics owe Francophones 'respect'.

It is a recurring theme. RESPECT RESPECT RESPECT.

If you are born to an English or Ethnic family in Quebec, you are automatically assumed to "owe respect" to Francophones by virtue of their majority status, while Francophones, of course, owe no such respect to minorities.
According to these militants, everyone is born as an equal, but some more equal than others, the concept of 'Original Sin' perversely re-defined.

The idea is as ludicrous as right-handers demanding that minority left-handers give them 'respect', yet the concept is a hallmark of the collective mindset of nationalists and goes largely unchallenged.

Here's a typical comment that I pulled from an article denouncing the perfectly legal English only election signs erected by an Aylmer candidate. It is sadly typical.

"Every time that they can 'legally' post a sign in total disrespect for the French language, they will."
("Chaque fois qu'ils peuvent « légalement » s'afficher en total manque de respect pour la langue de la majorité, il vont le faire.")

And so it seems that availing oneself of legal rights is contemptible, if you are English, that is.

When René Levesque first imposed Bill 101 on Quebeckers, he did so with a profound sense of sadness, understanding full well that while he believed the law to be necessary, it represented a setback in terms of personal freedom.

Bill 101 was the thin edge of the wedge that led us to the present situation where militants view the limitation of rights not only as no big deal, but righteous.

It reminds of a policy enacted by the town where I live in and the consequences of giving people power over others.

The city was disturbed by the large houses that were being erected in place of small homes that were being razed. Because some citizens felt that their smaller homes were being overshadowed, a consultation process was initiated to allow neighbours to have input on proposed projects.
It wasn't long before neighbours were no longer commenting on the outside dimensions of the planned homes.
At one meeting a woman demanded to know what colour carpeting was being contemplated. Aargh!!