Editor's note: See "Porter Airlines to change passenger diversionpolicy after Star complains":
thestar.blogs.com/travel/2010/07/porter-airlines-to-change-passenger-diversion-policy-after-star-complains.html



I just sent this reply to The Toronto Star blog of Jim Byers, who is now praisingPorter--as are those responding on the blog--for Porter's customerservice:

"The planet is running out of oil. Our waters are polluted. Fish aredying at an alarming rate. there are health risks to those living inthe vicinity of airports, and yet the author of this article and thoseresponding so far don't seem to care.

Why would anyone use shorthaul aircraft in light of the destruction they bring to the environment?I understand that the people of Canada have lent approx. $283 MILLIONto Porter Airlines under an export development loan. How in the worlddoes Porter qualify for an "export development loan? What are theyexporting?

Porter owes over $44 million in back taxes to the Cityof Toronto. Will the City be repaid? Porter ignores curfews and isfined. Have these fines been paid?

The Toronto Board of Healthsaid at their meeting a few months ago: "Toronto City Centre Airport didnot respond to requests from Toronto Public Health to provideinformation about its operations of environmental activities for thisreport." Bu using Porter I am assuming that you don't care what happensto their hazardous wastes.

The writers appear to feel a certainpride that people are now paying to destroy our planet even more rapidlythan comfortable living might accomplish, so that they can have a "good"and convenient service.

I am appalled."

Laura Cooper