Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre listens to media questions during a news conference on safety in hospitals in Vancouver, on May 14.ETHAN CAIRNS/The Canadian Press
Race for PM
Re “Nobody asked you about Utopia, Mr. Poilievre” (May 16): The bear analogy to describe the competition between Pierre Poilievre and Justin Trudeau feels accurate.
Mr. Poilievre, who apparently has limited understanding of Canada’s division of powers between the federal government and the provinces, has personalized his campaign with invective and blames Mr. Trudeau for whatever ill strikes his fancy on a given day, regardless of accuracy. On the other hand, his own policy contributions so far are limited to slogans and platitudes.
At some point, Mr. Poilievre will likely have to prove he has something to offer. So far, the evidence suggests to me he is little more than an angry empty suit, capitalizing on anti-Trudeau sentiment.
Frank Malone Aurora, Ont.
I think Justin Trudeau is wrong when he says that Pierre Poilievre “will do anything to win.” It’d be more accurate to say that he will say nothing to win.
When this potential prime minister denies, deflects or changes narratives to direct questions at Mr. Trudeau’s capital-gains tax, electric-vehicle subsidies, $34-billion pipeline, etc., he also cleverly redirects to his “axe the tax” and other anti-Trudeau slogans. He would even deny military aid to Ukraine because of the carbon tax.
This overwhelming cleverness does not mean he is a phony, but rather that he seems to think he is the smartest person in Canada.
Jim Katsios Thornhill, Ont.
I have no doubt about two things: Justin Trudeau has been an unmitigated disaster and Pierre Poilievre has done a masterful job of attacking the Prime Minister. But, as pointed out, Mr. Poilievre rarely offers a hint of what he’ll do if he takes over the top job.
I, for one, feel ill when I think about casting a vote for the Liberals. That said, there isn’t anything that could make me vote for someone I see as a professional agitator and charlatan who would say anything to come to power; anything, that is, except to tell us how he intends to run the country.
Robert McManus Hamilton
Don’t overstep
Re “An election about the Charter? What does the PM have to lose?” (May 15): Why do premiers feel obliged to use the notwithstanding clause? Because of the constant intrusion of the Liberal-NDP government into provincial responsibilities.
The Constitution assigns protection of property and civil rights to provinces, but the federal government intervened during the COVID-19 crisis via the Emergencies Act. The Constitution assigns health care to provinces, but the federal government intrudes via the Canada Health Act.
The Constitution assigns development of natural resources to provinces, but the federal government seeks to massively intervene via the Impact Assessment Act. And the Constitution assigns responsibility for municipal institutions to provinces, but the federal government seeks to deal directly with cities via the National Housing Act and Canada Infrastructure Bank Act.
When the Liberal-NDP government is replaced, it is hoped that a future administration will be more respectful of the constitutional division of powers, thus reducing federal-provincial tensions that prompt the use of the notwithstanding clause.
Preston Manning Calgary
Come on in
Re “Joe Biden’s new China tariffs put Canada in a bind on electric vehicles” (Report on Business, May 17): Elon Musk, among many critics, has stated we will see our auto industry decimated if action is not taken to address this coming tidal wave of electric vehicles from China.
So what’s Canada’s response? We have very low tariffs on imported Chinese EVs. If Canada does not follow the U.S. lead, we could see tens of billions in EV-related federal subsidies drown in a tsunami of Chinese EVs dumped in our market.
Kevin Bishop Saanich, B.C.
Mind the gap
Re “Liberal nibbles that add up to a big bite” (Editorial, May 16): While the top quintile may have grown less percentage-wise than the bottom three quintiles, the absolute dollar amounts tell a different story.
By way of example: If a high earner sees their net worth grow 50 per cent from $1-million to $1.5-million, while a lower earner sees 100-per-cent growth from $50,000 to $100,000, the gap in absolute dollars goes from $950,000 to $1.4-million in favour of the higher earner.
Pretty good consolation for the top quintile.
Steve Pedretti Toronto
Camp out
Re “Quebec judge rejects McGill’s request for injunction to remove pro-Palestinian encampment” (May 16): I am all for free speech, but I find the Justice’s ruling flawed.
McGill is private property. The university has a right to ask people not to occupy it, at the cost of a great deal of money to monitor and repair damages.
Can we set up tents in the Justice’s yard to protest, as long as we are peaceful?
Lorne Rose Toronto
Re “The privileged Gaza protesters” (May 16): Young people protesting, in this economy? Seriously though, only well-off students can afford to protest, and thank goodness they are.
Our society has evolved through public demonstration and demands for change, such as women’s suffrage, Idle No More, We Demand for LGBTQ rights, Black Lives Matter and so many others. Dismissing student demands for recognition of the ongoing humanitarian disaster in Gaza with accusations of shallow motives seems the standard response to every protest by those who benefit from the status quo.
This response from older generations, though, should be seen as an essential part of the bumpy ride of societal change and serve to motivate further. These organized protests give me hope for change in an increasingly hot and fraught world.
Jillian Buriak North Saanich, B.C.
Re “Canada let Hamas off the hook in the latest UN vote on Palestinian statehood” (May 16): Canada’s abstention at the United Nations and students protesting for Gaza may have a couple of things in common: Both could be seen as self-serving, and it is unclear whether either will help stop the war.
Ken Sutton Toronto
One way
Re “Here’s why I check my bag on a flight, even though it complicates my trip” (First Person, May 15): These good-natured recollections about checked bags not making it to their desired destinations remind me of one of my favourite jokes.
A customer approaches an airline representative and says, “I would like to book a ticket to Paris and send my suitcase to Chicago.”
“I’m sorry sir, we can’t do that.”
“Why not? You did it last time!”
Dan Lyon Toronto
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