Media release NSCES

Date: Fri, 20 Mar 1998 12:55:31 -0400 (AST)
From: "David M. Wimberly" <ag487@chebucto.ns.ca>
To: Sustainable-Maritimes <sust-mar@chebucto.ns.ca>
Return-Path: <sust-mar-owner@chebucto.ns.ca>

next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects


These responses were extremely telling.  The Liberal response was like a 
slap in the face it was so reactionary.  The PC response was quite good, 
but the NDP response was fantastic.  They really know our issues, agree 
with us, and know how to help us in a fair way.  The NDP is clearly the 
party that most deserves support.

Please distribute this wherever it will be of help.

The Liberal and PC responses are available as e-mail, IF they are 
requested by any of you.  The NDP response is available as a fax, or as a 
an attachment in e-mail as a QuickLink II fax file which can only be 
opened if you have that fax program.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
*****************************************************************************



For Immediate Release                               19 March 1998
	
			MEDIA RELEASE                 

	Environmental Illness Questionnaire Responses
		   PROMISES  TO  BE  KEPT


(Halifax, NS) Those with Environmental Illness/Multiple Chemical 
Sensitivity (EI/MCS) represent a sizable and growing segment of the 
population desperately in need of improved health care. Since health care 
reforms have become the biggest issue in this provincial election, the 
Nova Scotia Coalition on Environmental Sensitivity sent a questionnaire 
to each of the three political parties.  It is in commitment to the 
details that the strength of promises are to properly understood.  The 
response has clearly shown a wide division in understanding of the issues 
and in true commitment to improvement.  We expected all three political 
parties to pledge greatly improved health care and responsiveness for 
those with Environmental Illness/Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.  But we 
were wrong!

We expected the Liberals to promise to be willing to do much better in 
the future than they did in the past, but instead they consistantly held 
to current policy.  The questions presented represent political problems 
created during this Liberal government.  Their answers clearly indicate 
they will do little different in the future. The previous Liberal 
government started out with great promises of improved health care, but 
things were actually made much worse.  Failure to make real improvement 
will prove costly to the economy, to individuals and business and to the 
health of our citizens.  The Liberal policies seem destined to create a 
health deficit that will impoverish our future lives.

The Conservative party was well informed and helpful in questions 
involving the Clinic and treatment issues and the Langley and Beresford 
Reports. They gave only one yes answer without qualifications. On home 
care, air quality, schools and pesticides, responses were generalized 
support or indicated the use of process or agencies that have not 
resolved these issues properly in the past. We need firm commitments and 
better public processes. Thus, these responses do not give us complete 
comfort. The Sable gas response particularly shows no understanding of 
the severity of the problem and offers not even an open and detailed 
examination of the issue.  To give credit where it is due, we note that 
it was the previous Conservative government that established our 
Environmental Health Clinic that was of so much benefit. This Clinic was 
taken away by the Liberals and replaced by a much more limited research 
centre.

The NDP response holds out the gratest promise.  Consistently better 
understanding was shown of the severity of the problems of those with 
EI/MCS and of the immediacy of the need for tangible help.  Processes for 
solutions in home care, indoor air pollution, schools, Clinic issues, and 
the reports showed real understanding of the subleties of the issues and 
how to work with all parties to achieve lasting, quality results.  Even 
in the Sable gas issue, the promise of a thorough examination of the 
potential health effects is a reasonable approach.  At least one NDP 
candidate has seen the impact of EI/MCS in his own family which glives us 
more confidence that an NDP government would actually prove the most 
caring and compassionate to those with, or at risk of, Environmental 
Illness/Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.

We count these questionnaire responses as firm commitments we expect to 
be adhered to with no excuses. 

"These statements are intended to give our consituants a guide when they 
cast their votes on March 24.  The Conservative Party gave us several 
very good responses, but also many generic answers to our questionnaire.  
The Liberal party provised to do just a little better than their current 
policies.  The New Democratic Party acheived a mark of excellence based 
on their responses to our questionnaire." observed Dr. Jacobo Asuncion, 
Jr., MD, former professor, Dalhousie Medical School and now Co-chair of 
the Allergy and Environmental Health Association-Nova Scotia (AEHA-NS).

The NS Coalition on Environmental Sensitivity strongly recommends that 
voters concerned with health care look to the details and to history in 
making choces.


For more information contact: 	Dr. Jacobo Asuncion, Jr., MD, 477-7409.


				- 30 -

The NS Coalition on Environmental Sensitivity is composed of 
organisations and individuals with a common interest in promoting proper 
treatment, education, prevention and research in the field of 
Environmental Illness/Multiple Chemical Sensitivity.  The Coalition was 
drawn together by recognition of the profound threat of harm represented 
by the Langley Committee Report and the attendant political process. 





next message in archive
no next message in thread
previous message in archive
Index of Subjects