Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre rises during Question Period in the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa on June 13.PATRICK DOYLE/The Canadian Press
No gain
Re “Canada should give doctors every incentive to stay. By hiking capital gains, it’s doing the opposite” (Opinion, June 15): That an increase in the capital-gains inclusion rate would spark a mass exodus of physicians to other countries seems ludicrous. In addition, this change would have no impact on the number of students applying to medical school.
While I found Chrystia Freeland’s comments and Pierre Poilievre’s responses both hyperbolic, the reality is there has never been a tax increase where impacted parties haven’t screamed that the sky is falling.
Inevitably, a new day dawns and life goes on.
Frank Malone Aurora, Ont.
Doctors (and others who incorporate) could take a salary and set up a registered retirement savings plan and pay into the Canada Pension Plan like most employees. However, they are far better off paying corporate tax on active business income and leaving far more money in a corporation to invest for retirement.
I believe some doctors are not being compensated fairly, but this should be dealt with by provinces. Not surprisingly, most premiers have been silent on this issue as they stand to gain tax revenue without paying any kind of political price.
Mike Kobluk Calgary
Re “Poilievre wriggles out of the Liberal trap, with a commitment to much broader tax reform” (Opinion, June 15): Remember what it invariably means when right-wing politicians promise “tax reforms.”
They either mean modest tax cuts for working Canadians, which result in spending cuts for social programs that support working Canadians, or they mean big tax cuts for the wealthy, which result in spending cuts for social programs that support working Canadians.
Allison Mackay Guelph, Ont.
Do protest
Re “How a student petition on Israel sent a law school’s progressive ideals crashing into Bay Street’s hard realities” (June 15): Should I be shocked that several Lincoln Alexander law students, who signed the petition demanding solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza, “didn’t read the document closely?” Equally, should I be surprised that many thought it would not become public? Finally, did they not realize that expressing support for “all forms of Palestinian resistance” was open to a range of interpretations?
I am astonished by the combination of carelessness and naïveté in those studying to be lawyers.
Alan McCullough Ottawa
Leaving aside whether law firms or government agencies want to be associated with such comments, the conduct of students from the Lincoln Alexander School of Law shows me such a poor level of intelligence and logic that it belies the profession they seek to enter.
Most importantly, I believe it stains the memory of a fine man and legal giant. Lincoln Alexander the person articled for a Jewish lawyer and was forever grateful for the opportunity Sam Gottfried provided to gain entry into the profession as a Black man, when so many other doors were closed in his face.
If Mr. Alexander were alive to see the letter, I believe he would personally have tossed those students from the law school bearing his name.
Eric Grossman Toronto
The students who signed the letter have learned an invaluable lesson: Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequence.
We are free to say what we want, but others are free to take exception to what we’ve said.
David Morgan Ottawa
There is a troubling sense of familiarity regarding the student petition denying that Israel is a country, labelling it a colonial state and accusing it of genocide.
Since Oct. 7, we have seen this movie over and over. The denunciation, response, backlash and backlash to the backlash – all refracted through the toxic prism of social media – are deeply dispiriting.
Rare seems to be the interlocutor who has the requisite knowledge of the millennia-long history of the land in Israel and Palestine and the complex political and social context underlying the conflict, as well as the capacity to put themselves in the shoes of someone from “the other side.”
Without that, I see no moving forward, for anybody of goodwill.
Daniel Miller Chair, department of religion, society and culture, Bishop’s University, Sherbrooke
I was angered by reports of law firms attempting to punish Toronto Metropolitan University and its law students for exercising rights to free expression, as justified by former Nova Scotia chief justice Michael MacDonald in his report.
The taking of names and blacklisting of students feels like neo-McCarthyism at its worst. The callousness of these lawyers, sitting in their Bay Street towers, should be disappointing indeed to students seeking ethical role models in their chosen profession. Regardless of how one feels about the Middle East, this type of predatory bullying should never deter any university from protecting and sustaining academic freedom and free expression.
The universities who trained these lawyers should be very disappointed.
Donald Wasylenki Professor emeritus, University of Toronto
Good opportunity
Re “There is hope for reconciliation – but it will only get harder if we don’t get to know each other” (Opinion, June 15): As a senior public servant in Ottawa, I was often asked for advice by younger public servants wondering where the best opportunities for interesting and rewarding work might lie.
I had worked in what was then called the Department of Indian and Northern Affairs for four years in the early 2000s and I always recommended it. Not because it was a fast track to anything or because I had particular views on department leadership, but because, among other things, it would give public servants an unparalleled opportunity to work alongside First Nations, Inuit and Métis colleagues, and to get to know them, their backgrounds and their perspectives.
That opportunity had changed me in such a positive way. I hoped it would do the same for others.
Liseanne Forand North Saanich, B.C.
Short and sweet
Re “The modern wedding is breaking all the rules” (Pursuits, June 15): I appreciate the trend of weddings made simpler – though maybe not cheaper.
When I moved into the trendy neighbourhood where I am the minister, I surveyed people at the local coffee shop about what they would want in a wedding. The top three requirements were: short, fun and meaningful.
A church can be a place of ritual that matters. I have done more than 500 weddings over the years. Lots of things in life are great if they are short, fun and meaningful.
John Pentland Reverend, Hillhurst United, Calgary
..................................................................................................................................
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com