Carnegie Board Member Rebuts Ethel Whitty's Assertion

Videos

Ethel Whitty's interview on CBC Radio

see larger video

sourced by alawisious

Photos

Rachel Davis speaking up for homeless fellow Carnegie board member William Simpson

see larger image

uploaded by alawisious

Wednesday, Rachel Davis spoke up on behalf of homeless man William Simpson, who is barred from the Carnegie Community Centre where they are both members of the Board of Directors. They were being interviewed on the radio show, The Early Edition on CBC Radio One.

Thursday, the City's Carnegie Centre Director, Ethel Whitty, spoke on the phone to the Early Edition host, Stephen Quinn, answering his questions about the issues raised yesterday by Rachel and William. In responding to a question about how well the Carnegie accepts criticism and feedback, given that William was barred for linking his website to a blog (www.downtowneastsideenquirer.blogspot.com) that is highly critical of the Carnegie, Ethel Whitty stated, "...the situation with Mr. Simpson arose because of a BC Worksafe complaint that was filed by an employee...".

Rachel called the Early Edition's Talkback line and left this comment:

"I listened to Ethel Whitty this morning on your show and I noticed that she had two different explanations for why William Simpson was barred. First she said it was a worksafe issue that she can’t comment on, then she said that he simply violated the Carnegie guidelines.  Since William Simpson sleeps in the park because he’s homeless and has no phone, I thought I would call in and rebut both of her explanations.

You can tell that William Simpson did not simply violate any Carnegie Guidelines by the fact that he was not barred by Carnegie Security.  I have never heard of anyone being barred from Carnegie by City Hall before, it’s always simply Carnegie Security that deals with infractions of their code, that’s what they are there for. 

And as for her other, contradictory, explanation that it is a WorkSafe issue. She’s said this before, but she’s also denied saying it, both in person and in writing, so I called Gordon Harkness at WorkSafe to find out the real story some time ago. 

Mr. Harkness told me that there has been no assessment by WorkSafe of William Simpson whatsoever, so that really concerns me, because I think people are aware that WorkSafe only deals with cases of violence or extreme verbal abuse, and nothing like that has happened. So for her to use the Worksafe name in an attempt to legitimize this barring is really just a heartless blackening of William’s reputation and that makes me really sad, because if they will do this to him, a democratically elected board member, what would they do to your average member who disagrees with their policy?  I find it frightening. And I know other members do too. I stand by my statement:  The Barring of William Simpson was a political act against a whistleblower perpetrated by the city."