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
.........................................................................................................
Don't taint reform
Re Liberals' Consultations Leave Little Room For Compromise (May 12): If our current democratic structure does not result in an accurate representation of the voice of the people, why is it valid to use those "distorted" results as the basis for the composition of the government committee formed to seek the solution?
Could it be that the panel composition would be Liberals, four seats, Conservatives, three, and NDP two – rather than the 60 per cent majority the Liberal government has reserved for itself?
If ever there was a decision worthy of a referendum, this would seem to be it. Our democracy has survived for 150 years. If we don't have a new process in place by the next election, I dare say we will survive beyond 2019. The promise of reform was a good one but the timeline is overzealous. This is one of the most important legacies this government can leave. It should not be seen to be tainted with haste or self-interest.
Katherine Baxter, Toronto
.........
Re Tories Pan Electoral Reform Panel (May 12): Raise the issue of different electoral reforms, but don't consider either mandatory or online voting. The last people we want casting ballots are those who don't follow current affairs, and whose vote would not, therefore, be an intelligent one.
There's too much scope for technical mischief and meddling with online voting. Physically getting to a voting station is a worthy, laudable tradition.
The PM should hold a referendum – the ultimate democratic exercise – on the short-list options his reform committee produces and axe the notion that a few hundred town hall meetings on electoral reform would amount to anything meaningful.
Wayne Eyre, Saskatoon
.........
Reverse hypocrisy?
Re Hard Evidence Of Soft Hypo-crisy (May 12): I'm angry with the media – The Globe and Mail, but generally, too. You take a position of piety on this issue that I'll call "reverse hypocrisy," condemning the government from an easy platform, one we wish we all had.
You rightly point out the conflicting issues, but you take the easy high road. Western, democratic governments in particular, most governments in fact, don't have that luxury. The United States still has the death penalty, its police (and ours) still shoot and ask questions after. Do we stop selling them goods because of these "human rights violations"? No. We work with them.
Given these tough economic times, our country and our workers need the revenue from this deal – especially considering your constant reminders of our country's debt. Give us, and the politicians, a breather – this is a new, young government. Give it a chance to get most things right, not be perfect. You're not, I'm not, so how can we expect perfection!
Bob Baker, Toronto
.........
Only someone who's been living under a rock for the past 30 years can be deluded into believing that combat vehicles supplied to the Saudi regime will not be used to oppress civilians and abuse human rights. The videos published by The Globe and Mail merely confirm what the rest of us already know: The Saudi regime is a human-rights-abuse machine that will use whatever weaponry it has, any way it wants.
Canada as I understand it isn't "back" unless and until this disgusting arms deal is rescinded, whatever the cost.
Margaret McKenty, Winnipeg
.........
Hard diversity lesson
Re Universities Fail To Meet Diversity Hiring Targets (May 9): The main reason for the underperformance of diversity has to do with the inability of some academics to acknowledge they are biased. They are teachers, yet don't wish to learn.
Having worked as an employment equity practitioner in the university sector, I can say that the reasons for not choosing a qualified candidate often bordered on absurd. The only advice to universities who wish to make diversity a priority is to start at the top – choose board members wisely. Have qualified diversity practitioners sit on hiring committees in problem areas so that biases can be immediately addressed. Reporting back to the board will help push the agenda forward constructively.
Those universities that can't make the grade need to be pushed out of the program.
A hard lesson? Definitely.
Shenaz Modi, Toronto
.........
This self-flagellation by Canadian academics is nothing more than a descent into the ideological morass that is identity politics. The notion that people of a particular skin colour are likely to hold views that are "diverse" (i.e. representative of people who share their race) is in itself racist. If universities were interested in fostering true diversity, they could start by hiring profs who, rather than spouting tiresome platitudes about gender equity, social justice or the evils of colonialism, promoted the benefits of minimalist government, capitalism or the Western liberal tradition.
Matt Watson, Orillia, Ont.
.........
'Q'uite disillusioned
Re Ghomeshi Apologizes To Put End To Sexual Assault Trial (May 12): As the whole depressing Jian Ghomeshi saga continues to unfold, it becomes increasingly evident that the CBC has hardly covered itself in glory.
Its executives once again assure us things have changed, that the CBC offers a safe, comfortable working environment. Can we believe this pledge from a corporation that is still clinging to the old branding? A corporation so daring and innovative that when it realized that its radio program Q (upper case) was associated with so many problems, it renamed it q (lower case).
When listeners hear the sound of that letter, thousands also hear its baggage, its history of demeaning behaviour and toxicity. "Q" for keep "quiet," "Q" for don't ask "questions." The CBC needs to cut the half-hearted revisions. It's time to build a truly positive and fresh beginning – a program with a name we can all be proud of.
Glenn Kletke, Kanata, Ont.
.........
Off to the Tower
Brian Gable's cartoon on Thursday about a journalist being hustled off to the Tower of London à propos of the accidental recording of the Queen's comments about China imagines a fate I might have suffered.
In the 1970s, as a member of the student TV club commissioned by Imperial College, London, to record the inauguration by the Queen of the refurbished Queen Anne Tower and library, my role was to record ambient sound as the royal party passed from one part of the university to another.
Toward the end of the visit I ensconced myself, mike in hand, among what I took to be students studying at library desks. Lo, when the entourage arrived, the student-toadies leaped to attention – leaving me, a scruffy colonial, conspicuously seated, worried a sudden move would ruin my recording. I received a searing dart from the Royal Eye.
Later, I was drawn aside by the chief of security, a burly closely-shorn suit, the very image of what a royal dick should look like. "Back off," he told me, "you're coming close to violating the laws against recording the Queen's conversation."
Wheeeuw, close call!
Dennis Dicks, Senneville, Que.