Pedestrians make their way along Sparks Street Mall near the Peace Tower on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on Nov. 9, 2021.Sean Kilpatrick/The Canadian Press
Public good
Re “The federal public service is broken. Is it too late to fix it?” (Opinion, May 25): The purpose of the public service is to deliver services to the country. Full stop.
As employees, public servants should be encouraged to bring forward ideas and strategies to management. But following that, management decides the direction to be taken and the public service is expected, is obligated, to deliver.
It is not a democracy. Public servants can’t decide that a chosen path is “wrong” and not do it.
Much of the blame for failings in the public service is placed on the Prime Minister’s Office. While this concentration of power is of deep concern, it should be seen as a separate issue from the failings of the public service.
Policy decisions, be they from the PMO or cabinet, should be implemented by the public service as directed. If a public servant wishes to establish policy, they should be encouraged to run for office – or perhaps join the PMO.
David Schenck Vaughan, Ont.
The federal government employs thousands of professionals answerable to their peers and to their minister. If a professional opinion conflicts with political objectives, it may be ignored. The system works because even though ministers come and go, professionals in government provide the public’s first line of defence.
When I worked for the federal government, I was sometimes asked by the media to explain an issue. I reported these contacts to my director, but I was trusted to stay within my brief and have no opinions; I didn’t need prior permission.
Now, everything goes through a political level that seems to lack a full understanding and capacity to explain. But public servants work for us. Feel free to look them up and send a note. If they can’t answer, they will say so.
It is the political level that wanders all over the map in a relentless quest for media oxygen.
Robert McCandless Delta, B.C.
Yours to discover
Re “Visiting Ottawa, it was sad to see what has become of my hometown” (Opinion, May 25): Doug Ford says that “you got to get the economy going.” It should not be the responsibility of civil servants to get Ottawa’s economy going.
It should be the role of the economy to enrich the lives of the citizenry. Is returning the city to its perceived former vitality really the answer to its future success? Is maintaining the status quo a reasonable strategy for addressing the challenges of the next decades?
Why not let citizens choose where they work and create vibrant neighbourhoods to support them? This would negate the necessity to “bully the unions into submission,” a questionable long-term strategy. We would no longer have to build expensive, semi-functional transit in and out of the city centre.
And, most importantly, people would be happier, hence more productive, and invested in their jobs. Let’s think outside the city centre.
Elizabeth Hay Ottawa
Path to recovery
Re “Addiction almost killed Marshall Smith. Now, he’s overhauling Alberta’s drug policy” (May 25): As a retired pharmacist who supported methadone programs, I have been somewhat in favour of supervised harm-reduction sites and “safe supply.” After reading this article, it is obvious to me that current initiatives are not working and perhaps there is a better way.
There should be a combination of supervised sites and decriminalization, with better access to treatment centres. Access to safe drugs could be for a limited time as a condition of entering treatment to help individuals deal with addiction problems, which are a health issue.
The only way this would work is with more resources and financial support from various levels of government. Some politicians rant and rave about the downfall of harm-reduction sites, yet do so little to support addicts in their journey to solve their addictions.
I applaud Marshall Smith and the Alberta government in their initiatives to solve this crisis.
Jon Strom Toronto
Marshall Smith’s approach to drug sobriety seems to provide much-needed hope to individuals and families suffering with addiction.
I was a high-school principal. I was consumed by the cases of some students and their roads to addiction. When some parents couldn’t bear bringing their child to a short-stay counselling facility, they allowed me to bring them on their behalf. It was heartbreaking for all of us, but we all discovered the immense power of hope restored.
Today there is easier access to legalized drugs. Not all young people will progress from soft drugs to something stronger. Not all will seek comfort in drug use from abuse, anguish or mental suffering. Not all will progress to spiralling addiction. But some will.
Parents should keep watch, refrain from minimizing drug use, maintain open lines of communication and, if necessary, seek help. There’s nothing to be embarrassed about. It’s life, and it’s complicated.
Barry Armstrong Ottawa
Having been in recovery for more than 31 years (and having helped many addicts and alcoholics with the disease and having met thousands more, most of whom sadly do not recover), I am glad that more access to treatment is coming to Alberta.
But the “Marshall plan” seems premised on the faulty belief, if not conclusion, that if a person gets the right treatment program for a long enough period, even if it means involuntary incarceration, they will recover. I wish it were true, but it’s not.
Percival Odynak KC Edmonton
While I applaud and support Marshall Smith’s lifelong effort to help those severely addicted to hard drugs, the reasons behind the growing problem seem to be ignored: The proliferation of crystal meth, fentanyl and carfentanyl is at the core.
Mr. Smith’s personal experience demonstrates to me that, despite his desires for alcohol and cocaine, he was a highly functioning adult until he discovered meth. Almost immediately, and like so many others, he lost everything. Only a handful have the willpower to escape.
Those caught producing, possessing and distributing these drugs should be put into prison for a long time, perhaps permanently if they are repeat offenders. Those considering a career in deadly drugs might be deterred.
New rules in the justice system would be required. Why is this not obvious?
Instead of dealing with the cause, we are focusing on the symptoms. We should do both.
Michael Neill Kelowna, B.C.
Face of it
Re “Insulting a rival politician’s appearance is a low blow” (Opinion, May 25): It’s been said that “every man over 40 is responsible for his face.”
Alan Cooper Toronto
And here I had thought it was just Pierre Poilievre’s policies that were made up.
David Priebe 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