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

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

Keep the doors open

I am part of a neighbourhood group in Halifax that mobilized in November in response to the Trudeau government's call to welcome Syrian refugees (Sponsors Frustrated By Slowing Pace Of Resettling Syrian Refugees, March 25).

By early February we had raised more than $30,000, found a donated apartment, and were connected with a small approved Kurdish family who were just waiting for exit papers from Turkey. We recently learned that since the government has met its target (i.e., kept its election promise), Canada has closed the special refugee processing missions abroad.

Our family – by now running out of food, resources and in a hostile country – has to get back into the long immigration line. There is still a crisis, but electoral expediency has triumphed. We feel manipulated and betrayed. Deal with these applications! They were launched in good faith and should be treated with respect.

Anne Muecke, Halifax

---------------------------

Why is the federal government backing down on its commitment to expedite processing of privately sponsored Syrian refugees? Our small Toronto group has the funds ready to bring over and support a family of five who have been stuck in Jordan for a year and are struggling to survive. The father suffers serious back pain due to torture while in Syrian jail and none of the three children are in school. We don't want them waiting for another year.

Given the continuing refugee crisis, Immigration Minister John McCallum should respond to Canadians' desire to help by excluding Syrians from the capped number of privately sponsored refugees accepted, and by speeding up processing for all privately sponsored refugees to Canada.

Jacquie Maund, Toronto

---------------------------

Brussels turmoil

Re Weekend Turmoil In Belgian Capital (March 28): If those balaclava-wearing, hate-spewing neo-Nazi thugs shown in the photograph feel they represent the superiority of Western civilization then I can only despair for the future of Western civilization.

Brian Caines, Ottawa

---------------------------

Actions, not words

Adam Radwanski argues that the federal Liberals are governing from the left of where they campaigned (Budget Delivers More Bad News For Mulcair, March 26).

The Liberals may be budgeting from the left, but other decisions point in a different direction. They are refusing to consult on CETA, the European trade deal signed by the previous government, and their consultation on the Trans-Pacific Partnership is tepid at best.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Foreign Affairs Minister Stéphane Dion have steadfastly supported the sale of light armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia. And in Washington, Mr. Trudeau agreed to share border-crossing data on Canadians – something at which even his predecessor balked – which doesn't bode well for the new government's review of powers granted by Bill C-51.

The budget may extend the honeymoon for a while yet, but savvy opposition members, and those who voted strategically last October, should keep an eye on policy decisions as well as purse strings.

Jason Scott, Kanata, Ont.

---------------------------

After the trial

It's not every day I agree with Margaret Wente, but she nailed it with the last several sentences of her column about the verdict in the Jian Ghomeshi trial (Truth And Deception: Verdict A Good Day For Justice, March 25): "The justice system performed exactly as it should. Public opinion will mete out its own sentence on Mr. Ghomeshi. And that, too, is just."

It is a tragic verdict for victims of sexual assault (women, men, boys and girls) who are frequently the ones on trial. Public opinion will hold Mr. Ghomeshi to a higher standard and, as Ms. Wente pointed out, that too is just.

Michael Bennett, Winnipeg

---------------------------

Re A System On Trial (Focus, March 26): Both in-depth columns about the Ghomeshi verdict were excellent. But one aspect of the trial seems to be constantly overlooked in the commentaries: The prosecution bungled the whole thing. They didn't do their homework, not did the police. They neglected to properly prepare the witnesses. They were overconfident, and it backfired.

This bungling produced hurtful results, and not only for the claimants. The trial became a symbol for abused women across the country, and can only discourage more women from coming forward.

But let our discussion move from guilt or innocence to the historical and continuing poor treatment by prosecutors and police of the women who are courageous enough to come forward. What can be done within the current system to at least give them a fighting chance?

Michael Beswick, Toronto

---------------------------

Assisted dying

As a physician, I have a problem with the concept of religious hospitals (Should Catholic Hospitals Be Forced To Kill People ? Focus, March 26). Religion is one thing, and health care is a different thing.

There are no Catholic diseases, Muslim medications or operations for atheists. Is the purpose of a religious hospital to deny patients (of any, all, or no religion) access to those legal medical treatments which are contrary to the moral beliefs of the health care providers? If so, the hospitals should not be part of the state-run medical system.

There is no plan to create an obligation for hospitals to kill anyone. If a sick patient requests help to die in comfort, physicians will be expected to put aside their own moral judgment and refer the patient to someone who is prepared to contemplate this option.

John Oyston, Toronto

---------------------------

Margaret Wente may wish to turn her incisive eye to the fact that hundreds of Canadians are having a constructive dialogue across the country about best practices in implementing physician assisted dying, and that many of these people work in Catholic institutions, and wish to help their end-of-life patients in their personal choices. In some communities the only hospice care may be in a Catholic institution.

Secular Canadians and Canadians of faith have been working side-by-side to ensure access to choice at end of life, now a Charter right. And yes, this should occur in publicly funded Catholic institutions in Canada. Let's continue discussing how.

Sue Hughson, Vancouver

---------------------------

Now, now children

Re PM's Senate Agent Has Few Power Levers (March 28): So Canada's august citizens continue to squabble over budgets and office size, like petty schoolchildren. All the more reason to abolish the entire institution.

Ann Lawson, Nanoose Bay, B.C.

Interact with The Globe