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
..............................................................................................................................
A matter of debate
Re BC Greens Strike Deal To Force End Of Liberal Era, Support NDP Government (May 30):The weak-kneed folly that passes for national energy policy in this country will ultimately almost certainly leave Alberta with just one place to sell its oil. Good luck with that, because when it comes to oil, the United States is becoming increasingly self-reliant.
Three MLAs in just one province are about exert influence on the Trans Mountain pipeline project that will pervert the will of the country as expressed by its national government. If ever there was an argument to reject proportional representation, with the clout it gives otherwise marginal parties, then what is happening in British Columbia with the Greens is it.
Government by faction.
Welcome to Canada's Knesset.
Gemma Masters Smith, Winnipeg
......................................
After the Prime Minister's confident assertion that the evidence shows that the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline expansion is a good thing, I propose a public challenge, a contest to test this assertion and expose the government's thinking and assumptions to daylight for the public benefit. The stock market seemed less sure, given the pipeline IPO on Tuesday morning (Kinder Morgan's Canadian Unit Debuts Below IPO Price On TSX).
I propose a televised debate between BC Green Party Leader and Green kingmaker Andrew Weaver, PhD, former member of the acclaimed UN Panel on Climate Change, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau or – in fairness, regarding the lopsided scientific qualifications – a champion named by the PM.
The topic: Resolved that the scientific, engineering and economic evidence shows that the KM Trans Mountain pipeline project is both safe and necessary, taking into account the broadest considerations such as the oil sands' impact on climate.
Lorne Salter, Gabriola Island, B.C.
......................................
Don't bank on it
Re On PBO Reform, Liberals Make The Right Call (May 30): The Liberals have opened a crack and allowed a little sunny-ways transparency into their governing style. They deserve kudos and encouragement for modifying the budget bill by removing the shackles they were placing on the Parliamentary Budget Office.
Now, if they could just de-omnibus the bill a little by separating the Infrastructure Bank provisions into a separate bill, so that this major change to how we fund these projects can be given the consideration it deserves. Too much to hope for?
Marc Grushcow, Toronto
......................................
A new leader
Re Scheer's Best Weapon: He's Relatable (May 30): For years, Conservatives have derided Justin Trudeau as a mere pretty boy, short on substance, yet when it comes time to pick a new leader, who do they choose?
Mr. Dimples, the man whose platform was almost as thin as his private-sector experience.
Eric de Vos, Canmore, Alta.
......................................
The thing I like about Andrew Scheer is that he won his new position as the Conservative Leader through talent and brains. Being 38 underscores this fact.
That's the opinion of a non-religious feminist who thinks it would be great not to burden Canadians' future with massive deficits and debt.
Mary Timmer, Kitchener, Ont.
......................................
Andrew Scheer is quoted as saying "Every kind of conservative needs to have a home in our party and feel welcomed."
Does that include David Orchard? Just wondering.
Roger Allen, Victoria
......................................
Housing, by choice
Re The Real Housing Boom: The 'Burbs Are Where We Want To Be' (May 29): So suburbs are the roomier, (apparently) less expensive alternative to condo living. Having a preference between two bad choices doesn't make one of them good.
It shouldn't be a choice between here and there. It should be a choice between building typologies and proximity to what's important to us.
Is an apartment best for me? Does my family need a backyard? Can I walk to work? What if I need a bigger house but want to walk to pick up my groceries or be able to take an evening stroll to a restaurant?
Why do we allow our governments to create an artificial separation between where we live, play and work? Why not have it all in one place? If I don't want to live in a bustling downtown, why is my only remaining choice a car-bound residential area, devoid of entertainment, restaurants and culture? And why can't I offer my services out of my own house, no matter where I live?
Canadians fawn over the quaint villages and bustling downtowns we find in Europe. We gawk in wonder as we witness the vibrant mix of work, play and socialization all jumbled together in each of these places. It's as though we are visiting a theme park, when in reality we are simply enjoying time away from the poor decisions of our local zoning enthusiasts.
Sean McAdam, founder and president, Landlab Inc., Chelsea, Que.
......................................
I urge anyone who is interested in the issue of affordable housing to look at what the Whistler Housing Society has done to provide affordable options in a municipality with expensive real estate and a need to house a local work force earning very average wages.
Letter writer Myles Ferrie's proposal – housing for residents, meant to be lived in, not speculated – is tried and true over many years at Whistler (Homing Instincts, May 29).
The City of Vancouver should have the courage to follow this excellent example.
Nancy Greene Raine, B.C. Senator
......................................
Picture it. Maybe not
Re Allies, Anglers (letters, May 30): J.D.M. Stewart is correct about prime minister John Diefenbaker and president John Kennedy disliking one another. Along with their fishing one-upmanship, paintings of naval battles during the War of 1812 also provoked their mutual enmity.
When the prime minister visited the president in 1961, he noticed several large paintings in the Oval Office showing American ships sinking British ships during the War of 1812. (Kennedy had served heroically in the American navy during the Second World War and had naval paintings and objects displayed wherever he worked.) Their meeting had not been going well, and Diefenbaker was angered by the pictures, presuming the president had placed them there deliberately to upset him.
As he was preparing for Kennedy's visit to Ottawa, Diefenbaker had his staff find the painting of the British ship, HMS Shannon, towing the American ship Chesapeake into Halifax Harbour after the British ship had won their engagement outside Boston Harbour in June, 1813.
Diefenbaker had the painting placed in his office directly across from the chair where the president would be seated.
There is no record of the president's reaction, but their relationship decayed completely after this meeting.
John D. O'Leary, Toronto