Critical judgment

We would like to suggest corrections to Patrick Lejtenyi's article published in last week's edition of the Mirror, which quoted us ["The Colour of Judges," April 15].

The article leaves the impression that courts in Quebec are the provincial government's responsibility, which is not the case. The federal government appoints judges to the Superior Court, the Quebec Appeal Court and the federal court (both trial and appellate divisions) in Quebec. In this regard, the federal government is equally to blame for not appointing one single racial minority judge to the federal bench in our province.

Where the minority representation in the civil service is concerned, the report that the government must make is not on race relations--as your article quoted--but on employment equity measures for women, minorities and aboriginal peoples, which the president of the Treasury Board (who is also the minister responsible for the civil service) must implement. The Quebec Civil Service Act stipulates that the Treasury Board president must present the National Assembly with an annual report on the state of equity for the three target groups in public service; obviously one cannot make a report if there is nothing done.

Since the enactment of this provision in the mid-'80s, only twice did the government partially comply with this legislative requirement (in 1990 and in 1992).

In other words, the government breaks its own law. Both it and the Opposition have allowed this to go on with impunity. Contrary to Mike Harris' Ontario where equity measures are publicly repealed, politicians in Quebec attack equity more subtly: they don't implement what the law says on paper.

This is why CRARR (Centre for Research-Action on Race Relations) is planning to seek a court order to compel the government to do what the law requires. We invite anyone who supports employment equity, especially lawyers with time to donate, to join us in this litigation as co-plaintiffs, interveners or legal advisors. We can be reached at (514) 939-3342.

--Fo Niemi
Executive Director, CRARR

Taxi-man fights back

Dominic Roy, present president of Diamond Taxi, has failed in his attempt to poison relations between myself, as the executive director of Concorde GPS Taxi Systems, and various competing taxi companies ["Taxi technology," April 15].

For Roy to say that taxi companies want nothing to do with me is a total out-and-out fabrication to profit for his own ends. I meet with dispatch associations all the time and I am very well-received, as are my proposals. I have several letters of intent and am negotiating a number of contracts.

The Taxi Bureau says there are other security and card systems available, but neglects to mention that they may not be ideal for taxis. Are they without costs or expenses? Are they fail-safe against radio sabotage? Can they provide GPS code 13 crisis intervention? Are their magnetic card readers without cellular or rental charges? The other systems are not taxi systems and cannot provide any of the above.

The cost of a security system prevented its implementation, but I have solved this problem: paying owners for the use of advertising and equipping their taxis with with a GPS code 13 security system.

As a large company, Diamond Taxi can afford a GPS dispatch system, while smaller companies could not without Concorde's proposals. Mr. Roy is angry that, for once, he cannot have the edge over his competitors.

--Robert Brummer
Concorde GPS Taxi Systems

Correction

In the article titled "Taxi Technology" [April 15, p. 7], the Mirror reported that Robert Brummer accused taxi companies of not caring for drivers' safety and of obstructing him from doing business. Mr. Brummer did not make those accusations against taxi companies, but against the MUC Taxi Bureau, certain members of the Bureau's Table de concertation (made up of industry representatives) and Montreal's regional taxi leagues.

The Mirror apologizes for the error and for any misunderstanding which may have resulted.