MODE AN TIMES WEEKLY
鐵路〗
"《二 '
S UTEEKlY A4
JR
rtionism rer to the ：urring in Industries' i tivo feet ：he new liari shoe it out、 l imporlied reduced.
m— Labour ill a t the .little is Of ;o find
'This is
kirid of
the rialized
ie Pac 1.1 ic
and exporters tured " 'requires 匚s of
t relative-caw
lathi nc their
/ulnerable i economy
ill level cs,   thell c i s t it s Lhem to • .Heace, bnq-teem
not ve；   in the
isp丄acred
"uni ikely roughs on
ba丄   （ .
ihora of ：y.ing need
i - a iairiq the
ible to : iq free teen ° states as ？ed by the :s will be :tending :3n3d丄can >mised a ist free As
-Kohl in >ne in isition. i trom the
buils up nsms. takes td
：s
ie „policy
^ freer ake their ,public
t:rade -L in systems
ttle orial
ich terid
is nof-ev qouf.a w
112 ；
ETTING CO:
R: PETER LUI
o
NT: K£NT LI
-A
M
：s,
'■'■l-fi-'^ 錢纏
，響 塌
：疆
..\-
饕纖
赚
保守1
ALAN RED WAY M„e EAST YORK 1
一九七九年十一月十白午夜時分 9經安，倫敦開多倫多愛靜角,貨 運場的一列火車，在密西沙加市出
軌。這部有一百i六卡的貨蓮列車: ，佔十九卡載有危險性極高的原料 9其中載有丙烷氣的三卡列車發生 、釋炸》頓時火珐四洩-變成火海；
有氯氣的卡車，則因出軌而 洩漏不,氧„氣，導致附近二 五萬名居民緊急疏散-停業及無
政可歸爲期五天1之久。經濟•損失大 約超過六千八百七十萬元，幸好這
場意外在未發展的她區發生；假若 再多廿分鐘-這列貨蓮火車便會到 達多倫多巿中心任何一處入煙稠密
的地方？那時挺果更不摔設想。'
這是六年前發\生的意外-自此人
鐡路安全已有不少改善.，可是》意
外仍然繼續發生'。過去四年來，载
宥極高危險性^品的貨蓮列車便曾 在ORI L LI A 、 PE TAW —
AW A 、SHARBOT LA — K.E及P A R R Y    S〇U N D出
軌。每年在大多市內^!有大約兩宗 牽涉危險性產品的鐡路意外
、現時，超過二千種加拿大工業常 細的危險性產品,由火車來蓮輸-'這,些產品包括丙：烷氣、硫酸、丁垸•
B的影响。至於Si漏毒 氣,，、波反範圍延伸至鐡路一公里^ 內的地方。、密S沙加市這一意外 而言-肇事地點五百米內的一築物
會受到損毀，而十公里外的^民亦
要疏散。 • - r
；：.-■■；•：/；-■；.' ；;- ？''   ：:,；''^{--：':：：^0：:C；：:^；；：：,'l^v'-'V^-^-\'： ，. -■：-.", ■；：,.,；.'.:• _■ '■：■ '；.'■：•：■■；..；：;〕：：.二:'；'^■ i '：： /-{'':：'^^：：'^^：^'y
究竟怎樣才可避免或降低大：小慘
劇發生的可能性？ 一九八六^三月' ,運輸部長馬山高華斯基宣佈'成立
特別專責小組-硏究ffr內危險；產品
的鐵路蓮輸◎專責小組同時硏究改 變列車路線（使之遠離人口稠密地 區）或重將鐡路鋪設在人口疏落. 地區的利害。此外，部長又要求專
責小組建議其他可行的安全措施-i口增加檢査次數，降低車速及制 使用沒有車務員車,火車o '
.要得到圓満答案並不容易^重新 鋪設路軌或改變行車路線的成本都
相當高。不少多倫多居民會支#上
逑的建議，但白林頓、雲漢及麥錦, 的居民則表示不希望把問題移到-他 們的地方。況且-大多市市內的工 業需要使用上述鄣份危險麁料，如
果沒有原料^倚靠它們'释作的行業, 及工作都不，持。 、
不過^可以肯定的是。在另一， 意外發生前必定要找出解決的辦法: ^否則，終有一天會發生難以收拾
的事情o
HE RA工 HAZARDQU
A few^ minutes before midnight on November 10/ 1379, a fre-ight train, from London, Ojitario", bound for the Toronto 、 marshalling yards at Agincourt„ derailed in Missxssauga. I Nineteen of that train's 10^ 、 cars were filled with dangerous materials.    Thre6 of its tank cars,  loaded with propane \ exploded, shooting great bails of fire into the sky.  (Another car, filled with chlorine, iWas ripped open by the impact. [ As a result, 1/4 of a million people? had to be evacuated from their homes and businesses ；for up to 5 days.    Economic losses were estimated at over $68,7 miljliori。 Luckily, the accident occurired in a relatively undeveloped area.    Twenty mirmtes later;, the train would have been somewhere in the centre of Toronto-
工,
F
00D
每f有大約二十五部.载 有此類危險產品的貨運列車駛經多
倫多市。如果其中一列出ii -誰會. "承受"這^危險呢？據估計，住 汪^:路軌二百五十米範圍內的居民
That was almost 6 years 'ago and a great deal has been done to improve rail safety. Bixt inspite of these improvements„ accidents continue to happen. During the past 4 yearsf freight trains carrying hazardoous ； commodities have derailed near Orillia, Petawawa, Sharbot Lake and Parry Sound, to name only a few.    Approximately 2 rail ： accidents involving dangerc>us goods have occurred each year in the qreaater Toronto area.：―
來論DISCUSSION PLATFORM
奮加華醫學會CHINESE
MEDICAL SOCIETY (ONT
加華醫學會反對將成爲法例的普'
及醫療服務議案（卽議|案9 4)，尤
其對安省政府的鐡腕推行方式甚爲'
o
議案8 4中所;，普及醫療服務-只 不過是剝奪一^醫生決定診費的自 由而己》並沒有眞正去推廣急需的 醫療服務-如長期治療中心的名額 短缺V急救服務之人手不足，反 安省北部偏僻地區俯簡陋設備等等 。若只是禁制額A收費，對上述服 務之不足又有何補益呢！
安省政府新民主黨反報界把醫 生刻劃成貪婪小人，只顧一己之利 益-而漠視大家的福利，對'醫生一 直以來爲大家谭供的免費服務 不提。譬如醫生參與醫 會反服務小組- It夜班
^電詰囘答病人及家人的種種問題 ^爲病人簽護照，塡寫政府#殘福 利金，工人福利金之類的表格，爲 病人安排社區服務-爲病人裤吿1P 事宜，全都不能收費的"這些 免饔服務差不多佔去醫生十分之」 到十分之二的工作時間，試卩』有那' ，門事業人士肯如此S期免費服務
HEALTH CARE ACCESSlBIlilTY ACT
大衆呢？還有很多醫生都參與義 工作》還未包括在內。所以指青 生一切以利爲前提的、未免太不公 平了。加華醫學會覺得政府有以議
案9 4來塞責之嫌，不去面對需：要 推廣的服務》眞正要解袂的問題， 而以禁制額外收費來轉移大衆的目
j The Chinese Canadian Medical Society is strongly opposed to the Health Care Accessibility Act, and even more so to the Draconian manner that the ： Government of,Ontario is introducing it.
While banning extra-billing by physicians in Ontario, Bill 34 has very little to do with
Presently, moreTIian 2,000 hazardous commodities used by Canadian industries are transported by rail. These include propane, sulphuric acidff butane and chlorine-    Every day of the week, approximately 25 freight trains pass through the Toronto area carrying hazardous ^odds- 二
If one of these trains doe is derail, who is at risk?   It is estimated that people living within 1/4 km of a railway line run. the greatest risk, but the risk from escaping poison gases extends to 1 km from the track. 工II the Mississauga casef howevers structural property damage occurred as far as 1/2 km from the track arid people 10 km from the accident site were evacuated.
What else can be done to eliminate, or for that matter, even reduce the risk of a major or minor disaster?   In March,! 1986,  the federal MiKister of 、 Transport,    Don Mazankowski s announced the establishment of a special task force, to investigate the flow of dangerous goods throughout the Toronto area and rail network。
This task force has been
health care accessibility- The long waiting lists at chronic care institutions,  some acute care programs r and various medical specialties are totally Unrelated to extra-billing. \ Neither is the, lac)c of medical services in. remote Ontario '、 communities.    Therefore the introduction of Bill 34 will not
asked to examine the benefits. arid the costs of either re-routing trains carrying dangerous commodities away from high density areas, or alternatively, relocating the rail lines themselves to less hazardous locations- In addition, the Minister has asked the task force toiadvise him of any other safety measures that may be desirable, suck as more inspections, speed reductions and restrictions on the use of the proposed cabooseless trains.
There are no easy answers. The relocation of tracks or even* the re-routing of trains will be expensive.    While, many Metro Toronto residents will support these ideas, the residents of Brampton r  Vaughan. and Markham have already indicated th^t they do not want the problem moved to their doorstep-    Besides that, Metro Toronto industries use and need at least ^ portion of these hazardous,materials- Without them, many businesses and tlhe jobs that go with tliem, would not survive。 r
One thing is certain, however.    An answer must be found before a disaster occurs-If it is not, one of these days there is going toi be Hell to pay!
improve accessibility. 1
The Government of Ontario, the New Democratic Party and the public media have depicted all doctors as greedy, which is grossly inaccurate and unfair. The medical profession, in ^ts dedication to the public, has provided many services free of charge, arid yet is rbther unappreciated for them.
These free services include: serving on hospital icommittees p being on-call at hospitals and in private practice, giving telephone advice, answering questions from relatives aad ： providing emotional support by t,phone , filling prescriptions , by phone, signing passport -, documentsr filling government forms for uneraploymerit insurance^ family benefits, etc, (writing medical support letters for sick leave, an,d speaking to community agencies on behalf of/patients.
These free services can occupy 10 to 20 ， of a physician's time -    How many ol^her professions would donate that, much time to their clients?
The Chinese Canadian Medical Society believes that the Government of Ontario is using , Bill 34 to avoid addressing the real health care accessibility issues -    In this proc+ess, the freedom of physicians ais independent professionals is sacrrificed^ and the public is being misled.
氺'
鉞31
i   }，
圍
-.,、.^-.--.-:
崎
2
5
6
8
9