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

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

Not as advertised?

Re Trudeau Concedes Government Business Discussed At Fundraisers (Dec. 13): Who knew?

Brian Caines, Ottawa

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

Expensive $1,500 tickets for functions allow privileged access to the Prime Minister's ear. But he doesn't let them actually bend his ear. Oh, wait a minute: Justin Trudeau has finally admitted that he doesn't wear earmuffs at those gatherings, and yes, the ticket holders do whisper in his ears.

He is lobbied. But not to worry, he doesn't actually pay any attention to the big spenders, as he works for our best interests and does what's best for Canadians.

Not exactly as advertised? Should ticket holders get refunds? What they thought they were buying never was for sale. Phew.

Jane Martin, Toronto

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

After all the coverage, it's astonishing that only 62 per cent of Canadians disapprove of the Liberals' fundraisers. Of course, per-vote public funding of parties was also widely disliked, and the Conservatives received plaudits from, among others, The Globe and Mail's editorial board for doing away with it federally.

Apparently, we insist on a responsive, responsible government that does what it promises and also what we want it to do, but we don't approve of paying for the politics that make this possible. This is one circle that cannot be squared.

Jean Chrétien was correct: Stop the fundraisers; bring back public financing of political parties.

Justus Havelaar, Campbell River, B.C.

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

No one seriously thinks the PM makes decisions based on what one single person says at a $1,500 fundraiser. But when you pay special attention to a small segment of your supporters, it is bound to affect your thinking. It's a $1,500-a-shout echo chamber for the wealthy. It should stop.

Jason Scott, Kanata, Ont.

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

Lobbied, but not influenced: "I smoked but I didn't inhale."

Petra Pantazis, Sarnia, Ont.

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

I learned three things this week from our political masters: 1) Influence peddling (a.k.a. cash-for-access) is alive and well here as long as you follow the rules;

2) Grandiose promises about influence peddling and transparency and new ways of doing business are allowed and can even be made public, as long as you have no intention of enforcing them. (Remember: Follow the rules);

3) Everybody has a price. This has been established in Canada at $1,500 per event. With the results so far, would a higher entry level, say $2,500, achieve even more? The only thing missing is instruction on how a lowly, tax-paying citizen can apply these lessons to his/her personal life in Canada.

John Terdik, Brantford, Ont.

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

Gain/pain ratios

Re Trudeau's Climate 'Deal': All Pain, No Gain (Dec. 13): It is difficult to dispute Margaret Wente's argument. With Canada producing a minuscule 2 per cent of overall greenhouse gases, any effort by Canada will have negligible effect. With the Trump administration not planning carbon taxes and curbing the EPA's clout in order to allow easier resource development, including oil exploration and fracking, Canada will be further disadvantaged.

The carbon tax will directly harm Canada's already struggling oil and resource industries, as well as consumers with the cost of everything rising. This is just ideology trumping common sense, with Canadians as the big losers.

Larry Comeau, Ottawa

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

Ottawa's climate plan and carbon tax are good baby steps. But they won't get us near the promises Justin Trudeau made in Paris to lower emissions by 30 per cent by 2030. The carbon tax will take six years to add just 11 cents a litre at the pumps. What will that do?

Three years ago, pump prices were 30 to 40 cents a litre higher because international oil prices were double those of today. Those pump prices did zilch to restrain emissions. It's time to end the charade and do something serious, such as capping and then cutting Canada's largest and fastest growing source of emissions – those that come from the production of oil and gas, especially from Alberta's dirty bitumen.

Gordon Laxer, author, After the Sands, Gravenhurst, Ont.

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

Death's incongruities

Re Hospitals Have No Right To Opt Out Of Assisted Dying (Dec. 13): André Picard is so very correct. Even though the federal Liberals passed compromised legislation, it gives hope to suffering people who wish to protect their dignity as they near death. The legislation's hallmark is that it is an individual's choice to proceed, not a priest, pastor, rabbi, imam, relative or anyone else.

Now, incongruously (putting it mildly!), we have faith-based institutions that receive public funds attacking this important and legal right of an individual. This is another strong example of why religion should be banned from intruding in the public domain. Let's all hold our breath and wait for a party or at least a politician to grow a spine and confront this issue head on.

Roy Sullivan, Sudbury, Ont.

PS: Don't hurt yourself. Exhale.

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

André Picard states baldly: "Institutions do not have rights."

Group rights are commonly respected – or violated – in our society. We believe, for example, in the right of a nation or people to be self-determining. When same-sex marriage was prohibited, this was not a restriction of rights of a specific couple, but of all gay couples. This "group right" trumps the rights of individual public officials who abhor same-sex marriage to refuse to recognize it.

We might, after public debate and consultation, decide health-care delivery institutions do not merit group rights – but Mr. Picard cannot simply declare it.

Mr. Picard asserts that publicly funded institutions cannot arbitrarily decide what services they will provide. Not all hospitals provide all services – for example, obstetrics or ERs; relatively few do organ transplants. Patients who require such services must be transferred elsewhere. Would this also be "a perversity," as Mr. Picard deems the transfer of patients desiring death?

Since Parliament adopted Bill C-14 in June, there have been some 600 assisted deaths. At my hospital, 42. These figures fill me with horror and disgust.

I share the concern that we "shunt dying patients around like sacks of rice" and then kill them. To Mr. Picard, the shunting is upsetting; to me, it's the killing.

Richard Wells, MD, Toronto

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

Hmm …

Re I'd Rather Read The Deaths Than The Comics (Facts & Arguments, Dec. 12): I, too, regularly read the death notices and find it interesting to discover what attributes of the deceased are considered important.

I'm often bemused to read that the family "is saddened to announce that X passed away peacefully." Would they really have preferred that their loved one suffered terribly at the end?

Reading that people over 90 "were predeceased by their parents" is also intriguing. Surely it would be more noteworthy if the parents had survived the deceased?

Interesting as the notices are, I hope it will be some time before readers get to critique mine.

Avril Taylor, Dundas, Ont.

Interact with The Globe