Skip to main content
letters

Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com

......................................................................................................................................................................................

In a PM's purview?

Re Liberals' Values Oath Is Odious And Kills Jobs (Jan. 19): John Ibbitson states the Liberal's employment-grant rules violate the very Charter rights they claim to defend. He then explains the requirement for organizations to check a box stating that they will adhere to the Charter and fundamental human rights in order to receive grants supported by taxpayers' dollars.

He has a problem with requiring them to check that box, as it excludes organizations that refuse to adhere to such "offensive" requirements, including the respect for "reproductive rights and the right to be free from discrimination on the basis of sex, religion, race, national or ethnic origin, colour, mental or physical disability, sexual orientation or gender identity or expression."

Evidently these organizations should be free to receive grant money without respecting one or all of these values and rights? What kind of pretzel logic is that?

David Chato, Guelph, Ont.

.........................................

As a party leader, Justin Trudeau may impose his views respecting abortion on those who run as Liberal candidates. In so doing, he forces many competent Canadians, if they wish to become MPs, to do so as independents or as members of the oppostion. It is destructive of the Liberal Party, but nevertheless within Mr. Trudeau's purview.

As Prime Minister, however, his duty is to a secular government that is not permitted to favour one citizen over another based on their religious leanings or convictions, especially in matters involving hiring that affect one's right to earn a living or the independence of thought required to perform one's job. By upholding this duty, the Prime Minister can spare Canada the political polarization that currently besets the United States.

Whether one agrees with abortion clearly is a matter of conviction, and just as clearly, those who believe that abortion is unsavoury are capable of obeying Canada's Constitution and laws. Our government has no right, therefore, to use publicly owned resources to compel Canadians to think one way or another. Dictators with whom we agree are just as loathsome as those with whom we disagree.

Patrick Cowan, Toronto

.........................................

Canadians' best interests

Re China's State-Owned Aecon Buyer To Install Communist Party Unit (front page, Jan. 18): I am looking for a Canadian multibillionaire who would spend $1.5-billion to buy out Aecon. This is "our" 140-year-old construction company being actively pursued for purchase by a Chinese "business," with a poor reputation for safety and corruption. That makes them a dubious choice for projects involving security concerns (e.g. nuclear power stations, military facilities).

This wanna-be buyer is 63 per cent owned by the Chinese government, which wants to "make room inside the corporate structure for a Communist Party section." The CEO of Aecon has "played down" problems that might arise from this, and shareholders have overwhelmingly voted in favour of this sale.

All of which makes one hope our government will act in the best interests of all Canadians – and not in the interests of the pocketbooks of a relatively few.

Nancy Erwin, Kingston

.........................................

Framing the debate

Re You're Either With Trump Or You're A Reasonable Person (Jan. 18): Much as I would like to agree with Mark Kingwell, he is wrong to support the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Dead wrong. As yet, no proof of a crime sufficient to justify impeachment has come to light.

If he were impeached now, Mr. Trump would, with some justification, argue that he was the victim of a coup engineered by his enemies. (Can you picture Mr. Trump walking quietly into the night after such an event? I can't.) His most vociferous supporters also happen to be some of the most heavily armed civilians in the history of the planet. Civil war could ensue.

Patiently waiting out the period until his term ends is the best option.

Peter Love, Toronto

.........................................

I have have to wonder just who Mark Kingwell is speaking to.

I should state that while I do not actually disagree with Prof. Kingwell (much), I do object to the tenor of his column. The article does not seem to be attempting to argue a point or attempting to convince anyone to adopt his viewpoint. If he is trying to convince people not to support Donald Trump, then he is repeatedly insulting his target audience. Certainly a strange way of convincing people to change their minds.

I suggest that rather than trying to argue a point or convince anyone of his point, Mr. Kingwell is merely attempting to boost his status with those who already agree with him. If that's the case, that is contemptible, in this reader's opinion.

Jeff Breukelman, Richmond Hill, Ont.

.........................................

Minimum-wage backlash

Companies are no more obligated to volunteer wages and benefits beyond what the law requires than a reader of letters to the editor is obligated to shelter a homeless person in their house. Although both ideas may be "right" on some moral level, judging by the views of many of your letter writers, they seem to be especially so when it isn't their business or their house.

Notwithstanding the very real issues of income inequality, many Canadians imagine themselves as mere bystanders, rather than active participants in wealth creation through work and debt and investment. Companies are owned for one reason – to create profit. Just about all Canadians (certainly most letter writers to The Globe and Mail) own pieces of companies, either directly as shares, or indirectly through ETFs and mutual funds, directly lend money to companies through bonds, or more indirectly through bank deposits (in effect, a "loan" to a bank for it to make investments).

Ignoring these facts when considering the fallout from the minimum-wage increase doesn't make them go away. Financial fiduciaries have a responsibility to legally maximize profit to ensure our financial well-being. And treating our fellow citizens with respect helps ensures our communal well-being. Imagining that a hastily conceived, clumsily implemented single economic lever for arguably political rather than economic reasons would work was at best naive, at worst purposefully divisive. As usual, the least powerful will suffer the consequences.

Dave McClurg, Calgary

.........................................

About that test …

Re Trump In Excellent Overall Health, Did 'exceedingly Well' On Cognitive Test: Doctor (Jan. 16): Everyone can take a collective sigh of relief: According to his cognitive-test results, Donald Trump can recognize a lion, rhino and camel. Things are not as bad as we thought.

Kathleen Hanna, Picton, Ont.

.........................................

As a self-declared "stable genius," shouldn't he have taken a Mensa test? I suspect the result would be somewhat different.

Michael Edwards, Toronto

Interact with The Globe