Editor:
Re: Fatal crash heightens Massey replacement, Sept. 10.
Many, if not all of us, have lost a loved one whether it be by natural causes, accident or other means, but using such a tragedy to further a political agenda is questionable to say the least.
In the article, should it not have said that the George Massey Tunnel be replaced? Not that Massey be replaced.
It refers to the dangers of meeting traffic head on, with little division in between, when we still do this on many of our highways and bridge crossings today and have for decades. What about the Patullo and the Lions Gate bridges and the tunnels through the mountains in the interior of B.C.?
It talks of old reports that were doctored for the previous government to try and justify the construction of a 10-lane high level bridge and satisfy the wishes of the Vancouver Port Authority to remove the George Massey Tunnel and dredge the Fraser River deeper.
It cherry picks the accident reports to make people think that all the accidents that occurred leading up to and from the George Massey Tunnel all occurred inside the tunnel or because of the tunnel.
All due respect to the writer, but one would think that the article is written by or for the former political party that lost the election.
There is no question that a new modern tunnel crossing is needed, sooner than later. One that meets all the safety and environmental requirements of today.
Let us do this without misleading the public to meet a political agenda.
Douglas George Massey
