Letters to the editor: ‘Not clear why Canadians … would invest in another pipeline for a province threatening to separate and led by a Premier who seems intent on paving the way for this to happen.’ Letters to the editor for May 20
Open this photo in gallery:
Prime Minister Mark Carney shakes hands with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in Calgary on Friday.Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press
Provincial problems
Re “Mapping how Alberta’s electoral boundary changes could reshape the political landscape” (May 19): No premier or prime minister should be able to ditch an electoral map recommended by a non-partisan committee for a proposal more favourable to their own party.
I believe this has the fingerprints of David Parker, founder of Take Back Alberta, all over it. He has called Elections Alberta “evil.” The group has said it holds the majority of seats on the UCP board.
Alberta separatists have also reportedly gone to Washington multiple times to get help from U.S. Republicans, who are masters at developing electoral boundaries to dilute the votes of urban dwellers.
Next, I predict Danielle Smith will use the notwithstanding clause to inflict the UCP’s electoral map on Albertans in order to cement her power.
Alison Dennis Calgary
Re “New energy accord will ease concerns of ‘disaffected’ Albertans, Danielle Smith says” (May 16): Building the Trans Mountain pipeline at Canadian taxpayers’ expense has clearly not won over Alberta separatists, so it is not obvious to me why a new pipeline will change attitudes.
Equally it is not clear why Canadians, or anyone else for that matter, would invest in another pipeline for a province threatening to separate and led by a Premier who seems intent on paving the way for this to happen.
Richard Stubbs Toronto
Re “Canada is one of history’s most successful countries. Here’s a look at who’s trying to destroy it, and how” (Opinion, May 16): This largely treats Western alienation as the product of fringe activists, conspiracy theories and foreign influence, while paying insufficient attention to the political conditions that helped create it.
Most Albertans are not separatists. Most remain proud Canadians. But many increasingly believe that Confederation no longer treats their region fairly or respects its economic contribution. That sentiment did not emerge in a vacuum.
For years, federal policies affecting the energy sector were viewed across much of Western Canada as punitive, ideologically driven and dismissive of regional concerns. More broadly, rising concerns about housing affordability, immigration levels, federal debt and declining institutional trust have deepened public frustration well beyond Alberta.
None of this justifies separatism. Canada is stronger united. But national cohesion cannot be sustained through moral denunciation alone.
A durable federation requires reciprocity, mutual respect and governments willing to recognize legitimate grievances before alienation hardens into something far more dangerous.
Bryan Brulotte Ottawa
Nuclear option
Re “Nuclear power means backing yesterday’s horse while sacrificing Canada’s future” (Report on Business, May 13): Governments, labour organizations, chambers of commerce and communities across Ontario strongly support nuclear energy, and for good reason.
Ontario’s nuclear sector sustains tens of thousands of high-skill, well-paying jobs and supports a domestic supply chain that keeps investment, expertise and manufacturing in Canada. It is also the cornerstone of Ontario’s electricity system, delivering reliable electricity rain or shine, 24/7/365, including during periods of peak demand when intermittent resources alone cannot be counted on.
The conversation about our energy future should not be framed as choosing between nuclear and renewable energy. Ontario’s success has come from recognizing that a resilient, affordable and low-carbon grid requires a balanced mix, with nuclear energy providing a dependable foundation that supports other clean technologies.
That reality explains why support for nuclear energy continues to grow across Ontario.
Julie O’Driscoll Executive director, Ontario’s Nuclear Advantage; Vaughan, Ont.
So why is Canada investing in a failing industry? Such is the power of advertising that one would be forgiven for thinking that nuclear plants are exploding across the landscape like dandelions.
There are at least two things that cannot readily be produced any other way than by nuclear power: tritium and plutonium. Both are required for the current big project embarked upon by nuclear states: the modernization of their bombs.
This was the problem U.S. weaponeers faced. The population was not in favour of nuclear power, but the United States wanted to keep its bombs. So then-president Dwight Eisenhower gave his “Atoms for Peace” speech to the United Nations, and gradually monies were also released to the military.
Is this the history we are bound to repeat?
Dale Dewar Wynyard, Sask.
Must listen
Re “Supreme Court opens new legal avenue for victims of intimate partner violence to seek damages” (May 16): I applaud the Supreme Court’s ruling in favour of intimate partner violence survivors. The right to seek financial compensation for harms inflicted by abusers offers women and others hope of moving forward with agency.
IPV is a deeply ingrained and complicated tapestry of factors. Neither ethnocentric nor gender-biased, it thrives on intimidation and control.
Partner isolation and shame inhibit a survivor’s ability to recognize the truth of their existence and trust in themselves. Awareness is essential to people’s capacity to stand strong and take that first step toward freedom, if they are to benefit from this change.
The onus lands on communities to turn up the volume by offering more support, sharing insight and telling IPV stories if we are to eradicate this demoralizing tyranny of abuse. The Supreme Court has made the conversation a little louder.
I hope people listen.
Joanne Betzler New Westminster, B.C.
Bank it
Re “Canadians’ plasma is now a liquid asset. Is that ethical? I donated to learn more” (May 14): While ethical issues around paid plasma donation certainly exist, it should be mentioned that, according to Canadian Blood Services, 70 per cent of immunoglobulin supply comes from international sources, mostly the United States, while demand is expected to rise about 10 per cent each year.
Plasma is not a luxury good. It is used to make medicines that patients with immune deficiencies, cancer treatment complications and other serious conditions rely on.
Canadians should be relieved that the country is starting to build a stronger domestic supply, even through paid plasma donation. Imagine if Canada were still almost entirely dependent on the U.S. today, at a time of trade tensions between the two countries.
The leverage this could create should be concerning to Canadians.
Lucas Orfanides Tantramar, N.B.
‘Till you drop
Re “The doors are opening (slowly) to holiday shopping” (Editorial, May 18): So the lowly retail worker, who most often works for minimum wage and has few benefits, is not entitled to statutory holidays in order to not inconvenience commercial interests and the rest of us, so we may shop on these days even though we have the rest of the days of the year to do so.
I am curious as to when Scrooge joined The Globe’s editorial board.
Kimble Sutherland Ingersoll, Ont.
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: [email protected]
