Keep that train in the station
The rest of Canada should not, as Jean Charest suggests, catch up to Quebec ( No Veil Or No Service From Public Institutions, New Bill Urges Quebeckers - March 25). Canada's approach to resolving competing constitutional values is to find a way for them to exist together, not to uphold one and reject the other. Supreme courts around the world have adopted our approach, which focuses on minimal impairment and proportionality. Neither of those things exists when a niqab-wearing woman is banned from working for government agencies or accessing services she has paid for through taxes.
Derek Smith, Toronto
............
Canada is a secular, not religious state. Although it guarantees freedom of religion, when this freedom interferes with the proper functioning of state institutions, the state has a right and obligation to override it.
Nick Gurevich, Toronto
Mission (im)possible
Ann Coulter should've been allowed to speak - at all costs (A University Fails In Its Mission - editorial, March 25). If there was a valid concern regarding security, staff should have been increased to deal with it. As always in such cases, she's achieved far more notoriety than she otherwise would have: Such speakers destroy their own credibility far more effectively than anyone else ever could.
Phillip S. Utting, Uxbridge, Ont.
............
As a left-wing liberal, I attended Ms. Coulter's event at the University of Ottawa. I didn't go to heckle, protest or "riot." I went to show Ms. Coulter that, regardless of her concerns with censorship in the U.S., in Canada she'd be given a space to be heard and a crowd of polite Canadians to hear her out. That is exactly what she got. I witnessed no violence or even loud expressions of opinion.
I should have known better. In the end, I was left out in the cold (literally), along with hundreds of others who came to participate in the free expression of ideas she so boldly advocates. Let's not play games here. Ms. Coulter shut herself down.
Tabrina Clelland, Ottawa
............
Ian Hunter's assertion that Canada's Criminal Code provisions against the public incitement of hatred have "a chilling effect on free speech" isn't credible (Universities Are Bastions Of Free Speech? Not In Canada - March 25). Not only does the Criminal Code contain four defences against a charge of willful promotion of hatred, but the Crown must prove that an offender was motivated by hatred toward an identifiable group; a tall order indeed. Freedom of expression is not an absolute right. To ensure social equality in a multicultural society such as Canada, certain restrictions on extreme forms of speech are necessary.
Michael Boudreau, chair, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice, St. Thomas University, Fredericton
............
Ian Hunter's "louts and yobbos" are on to something. Free speech is meant to ensure the respectful exchange of views, which doesn't seem to be a method used by Ms. Coulter. If I suggested Mr. Hunter and other defenders of Ms. Coulter's right to free speech were acting like horses' arses, that is a different thing than saying that they are horses arses. Expression can provoke thought or hate. Students know the difference.
Bruce Henry, Brampton, Ont.
............
If you understand freedom of speech as the free exchange of ideas, let's distinguish between legitimate "ideas" and the exploitation of minorities for ideological and discriminatory purposes. Our Charter is a cherished institution; we should not demonize provost François Houle for clarifying the otherwise obvious distinction between Canada's balanced freedoms, and the (capital F) Freedoms of the U.S. that do not underscore the essential relationship between freedom and obligation.
As Canadians, let's not genuflect to libertarian perspectives on Freedom so prevalent in the U.S.
Graham Denyer Willis, Cambridge, Mass.
............
What's all the fuss about? We've all heard right-wing conservatives deliver diatribes that are met with derisive bellows and belligerent retorts before. The same thing occurs when those with opposing views try to speak. We also recently witnessed a conservative speaker step away from the podium and cancel the assembly altogether. It's called Parliament.
Why should we expect our daughters and sons to act any differently when we send them to university?
Robin Breon, Weston, Ont.
The ABCs of prison folly
California spends more on its jail system than it does on education - and is now having to cut parole supervision to make ends meet ( Massive Deficits Have Investors On Edge - Report on Business, March 25). With our economy already far behind on innovation, we can't afford a similar folly. It's time for the Harper Conservatives to put that "tough on sentencing" agenda to rest.
James Russell, Ottawa
Death, on camera
I was appalled to find out that the Immigration and Refugee Board asks refugees to provide documents that could prove they or their family were victims of violence ( 'They're Going To Kill Me' - March 25). I don't understand how people who are caught up in horrific events could possibly document them. As Charlotte Umutesi's aunt says, are people living in poverty supposed to carry cameras around in case they or their loved ones are targeted? Beyond that, forcing Ms. Umutesi to go back to Rwanda is forcing her to go back to a place where she witnessed bloodshed on a scale humans have rarely experienced. Isn't that enough to motivate the refugee board to let her live here with her Canadian husband?
Mathieu Le Corre, Kitchener, Ont.
Time to talk: Argentina, the U.K.
We disagree with The Globe's position on the dispute between Argentina and the U.K. over the Islas Malvinas, which the British refer to as the Falkland Islands ( Dialogue Unwelcome - editorial, March 10).
Since 1965, the United Nations has recognized the existence of a sovereignty dispute between Britain and Argentina surrounding the Islas Malvinas, and called upon the parties to resume negotiations. Argentines who lived peacefully on the islands were expelled in 1883, and replaced by British subjects.
Britain is unilaterally prospecting fossil fuels in the disputed continental shelf area surrounding the Islas Malvinas. Recently, 32 states from Latin America and the Caribbean, gathered at a summit in Cancun, as the OAS did before, expressed their unanimous support for Argentina's rights in this dispute and called for the resumption of negotiations between Argentina and the U.K.
The summit nations supported the UN resolutions calling on both Argentina and the U.K. to refrain from unilateral actions while the islands are going through the dispute resolution process recommended by the General Assembly. Argentina and the U.K. must resume negotiations to find a permanent solution to the sovereignty dispute over the Islas Malvinas, South Georgias and South Sandwich Islands and their surrounding maritime areas.
Arturo Bothamley, Ambassador of the Argentine Republic in Canada
Breast cancer research, screened
Re What Breast Screening Delivers (letters, March 25): I wholeheartedly agree observational studies are useful, particularly when stronger studies are not available. However, even the authors of the Danish research about breast cancer screening agreed that observational studies should not be regarded as providing evidence about the effectiveness of that screening (Routine Breast Scans Don't Affect Mortality - Life, March 24). In contrast, we have many randomized control trials - considered the gold standard in research - which overall clearly demonstrate regular screening by mammography saves lives in women aged 50-69.
We know breast cancer death rates have dropped by 30 per cent since 1989, which is likely due to a combination of organized screening programs and improved treatment. Heather Chappell, director, Cancer Control Policy, Canadian Cancer Society
The real bad guys are ...
John Doyle ( The CRTC Justifies Its Existence - Review, March 23) largely missed the point. The decision Mr. Doyle applauds will transfer millions of dollars from consumers' pockets into the coffers of our largest TV broadcasters. In return, Canadians will get nothing. Cable bills will rise dramatically, but the extra money won't go to Canadian programs. It will go directly to Hollywood to underwrite CTV and Global's efforts to win the rating wars. But that's not all. Monday's decision also imports a U.S. "fee-for-carriage" negotiation model into Canada that empowers broadcasters over all other stakeholders and that has already proven a failure south of the border.
Under that model, broadcasters who can't force cable companies to collect more money from consumers will be empowered to deprive Canadians of their favourite shows. Instead of seeing the Super Bowl, the Olympics or a popular prime time sitcom, consumers will get a black screen. It will stay black until broadcasters get the payouts they demand.
"The Canadian TV racket," Mr. Doyle says, "is shark-infested waters, and somebody has to regulate." Maybe, but what the CRTC did is throw Canadian consumers and our creative community overboard.
Phil Lind, vice-chairman, Rogers Communications Inc.
Looking for a clue
Your headline (Spurned In Ottawa, Calgary Rolls Out The Welcome Mat For Coulter - March 25) tells us what Ottawa thinks about Calgary, but gives no clue about how our nation's capital views Ann Coulter.
John Butler, Toronto