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
..............................................................................................................
Statues of limitations
When societies erect statues, they're indicative of who and what people consider important (History Lessons, Cast In Bronze – Oct. 28).
We live in an era that recognizes Canada as a colonial project on indigenous land. We also live in an era that wants to understand and reconcile relations between native and non-native peoples.
Erecting even more statues of the prime ministers who helped marginalize native peoples does not reflect current Canadian values and goals. We have plenty of memorials to prime ministers. Why not erect statutes recognizing Canada's indigenous past in hopes of making a better future?
Melissa J. Gismondi, PhD candidate in history, Charlottesville, Va.
.........
Christopher Dummitt argues that the prime ministers' statues, like biographies, can be part of historical debate and teaching. This confuses commemoration with history. In books, lectures, newspaper comments and debates, we can weigh historical evidence, and change our understandings of the past. Statues do none of this. They cast people in a particular image and leave them for decades, unaltered, unreflective, free of logic or reason.
James Muir, associate professor, Department of History and Classics, Faculty of Law, University of Alberta
.........
Every day on my walk to work, I greet a bust of Winston Churchill, his trademark scowl no doubt a result of the white streaks of avian excrement covering his bald head. My children think of him not as a great leader who stood steadfastly against Nazi Germany, but as "the guy with bird doo-doo all over his head."
Perhaps we should save our former PMs the embarrassment and be satisfied to let their likenesses reside safely inside the parliamentary portrait gallery.
John Sandlos, Department of History, Memorial University of Newfoundland
.........
Conservative future
Re Why Canada's Shift To Conservatism Isn't Dead (Oct. 28): Darrell Bricker and John Ibbitson write that they "believe that in this century the conservative coalition is also broad and deep and coherent." Accurately predicting our political trajectory over the next 85 years seems a little grandiose – given their failure to do the same over the previous three.
Peter Stewart, Ottawa
.........
The case for the "big shift" toward conservatism driven by more conservative suburban immigrant voters assumes that more conservative social and economic values will dominate over general Canadian values.
The Conservatives lost decisively in most of the ridings in the Greater Toronto Area and in B.C.'s Lower Mainland that they so assiduously courted. Look at the seat counts in 33 visible-majority ridings: the Conservatives: 2; the Liberals: 30; the NDP:1.
The Conservatives took 32 per cent of the total popular vote in these ridings, compared to 52 per cent for the Liberals, a much wider gap than the overall popular vote. While many of these voters may have more conservative values, these did not trump concerns over restrictions to immigration and citizenship, the divisiveness of the Conservative campaign, and the likely attraction of infrastructure investment to reduce gridlock.
As Michael Adams has argued, "Canadians deeply value their pluralistic society; they believe government has a role to play in building a fair country; they believe in empathy and compromise as social habits."
The election results indicate that these values are shared by new and old Canadians alike.
Andrew Griffith, author of Multiculturalism In Canada, Ottawa
.........
Inept at governing
Re Tories Call For Probe Into Liberal Payments To Teacher Unions (Oct. 28): When I was a school board trustee, I quickly learned that – despite the importance of education – from the classroom teacher to Queens Park, common sense wasn't part of the curriculum. Seems nothing has changed.
Some of the highest paid, most pampered segments of society are the recipients of $2.5-million to compensate for the "complexity" of bargaining? Handing over those millions to the teacher unions, depending on which way one is facing, is a slap in the face or a kick in the rear to the working people of this province.
If some of the richest unions in the country can receive our tax money, I should be entitled to some, too. Unlike the unions, I can supply receipts – for sleeping pills and high blood pressure, but not for the other anxiety and stress caused by a government completely inept at governing: Hydro One, gas plant and race track fiascoes – need I go on?
Alex Jackson, Peterborough, Ont.
.........
Wasted votes
The Liberals have pledged to abolish the first-past-the-post voting system. What will replace it?
One option is proportional representation. There are assurances in some quarters that "every vote would count, in every part of the country." As Gershwin said: "It ain't necessarily so." Would each party get seats corresponding to its share of the national vote? No, the Constitution allocates seats to provinces – a huge constraint on electoral reform.
PR systems require a threshold to win seats. The threshold would vary by province. (In PEI, it might be 20 per cent, in the territories 50 per cent.) In the six smallest provinces, the Green Party would be shut out by the threshold.
Will large provinces volunteer to give up seats so Green voters in small provinces are represented? Not likely! Unless Parliament chooses to ignore provincial and territorial boundaries, some votes will always be "wasted."
Larry R. Custead, Saskatoon
.........
Wanted: 20-year rule
The duelling petitions over renaming Calgary's airport after Stephen Harper highlight the partisan use of public funds for political purposes – just as the Pearson, Stanfield and Trudeau airport renamings did previously.
Not just federally, but at every level, we have schools, buildings, bridges, roads, airports etc. named for politicians in an orgy of enduring political advertising.
The shameless Conservative renaming of the Ottawa finance building after Jim Flaherty a month after his unfortunate death, when common decency would mute opposition, is just one sad example.
We need a law, or at least a protocol understood by public officials, that no public entity can be named for a political figure until a minimum of 20 years after the end of his/her tenure or death. This would allow partisan fervour time to cool and help ensure only the exceptionally deserving are recognized. In the interim, and way more fittingly, we have a rich history and lots of non-political figures whose lives and deeds are worthy of recognition.
Michael Farrell, Oakville, Ont.
.........
An international airport is premature. But wouldn't a Stephen Harper Penitentiary be appropriate?
F.J. Thorpe, Ottawa
.........
If Calgary's airport is renamed for Stephen Harper, I assume that in the interests of security, all arrival and departure times would be kept secret?
Steve Soloman, Toronto