Prime Minister Justin Trudeau speaks during a press conference outside the GLOBE Forum at the Convention Centre in Vancouver, on March 29.CHAD HIPOLITO/The Canadian Press
Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.
Ocean away
Re Delegates View Indigenous Artifacts At Vatican With Mix Of Awe And Anger (March 30): Indigenous peoples in Canada have been betrayed by unfair treaties, discriminatory laws and unscrupulous Indian agents. Unmarked children’s graves at residential schools are a tragic national disgrace. However, I do not believe that the possession of Indigenous artifacts by the Vatican, museums and private collectors logically follows the same repugnant path.
Many of these artifacts were acquired by barter in the same manner as furs and other trade goods. Some were gifted, as there were many decent Canadians who established warm relationships with Indigenous people. Marriage was not rare. Lamentably, a minority would have been obtained unfairly.
Importantly, most of these artifacts may not have been recognized as valuable art. These beautiful clothes, leatherworks and kayaks were a part of life. If it were not for museums and private collectors, likely none of these treasures would now exist.
Robert Richards Toronto
Instead of offering carefully chosen words of apology or asking for the comfort of forgiveness, the Catholic Church should fund the establishment of a museum for Indigenous artifacts in Canada. It would, of course, house everything currently in Anima Mundi, including what are said to have been gifts.
William Lambermont Toronto
Culture change
Re Vance Pleads Guilty To Obstructing Justice (March 31): How much did the military system’s style contribute to Jonathan Vance’s behaviour and denial of same? Does he truly feel guilt and remorse? Will he enter counselling in an attempt to understand the causes of his behaviour (toxic masculinity?) and prevent it from happening in future?
Without these in place, it is unlikely that any real change will happen.
Bruce Hutchison Clinical psychologist (retired), Ottawa
In practice
Re Not A Perfect Plan, But Not Terrible Either (Editorial, March 31): I am not a climate-change skeptic and support the steps that must be taken on a global scale to affect carbon emissions reduction. But I am skeptical that the ambitious steps proposed by the Liberals will accomplish any meaningful change to global warming.
Canada produces 1.6 per cent of global carbon emissions; a 40-per-cent reduction in the country would result in a global reduction of only 0.64 per cent, but at huge costs to the economy. China, which accounts for more than 30 per cent of the world’s carbon emissions, intends to increase its carbon output during the same period.
I would like to see the scientific data that the Liberals are relying upon to prove there will be any real benefit to the Canadian climate by the ambitious policies they intend to enact.
Morris Sosnovitch Toronto
Despite being historically ambitious, the government’s new climate plan has been criticized by advocacy groups such as Climate Action Network Canada and Environmental Defence. But before writing off these organizations as unrealistic dreamers, readers should cut them some slack.
As a policy advocate once explained to me, getting government to act is like moving a football down the field: Success often depends on how hard one kicks it – repeatedly.
Eric LeGresley Ottawa
On the defensive
Re Long-delayed Arctic Naval Facility Postponed Again (March 30): What a continuing, disappointing story about a government and bureaucracy that can’t decide nor act. Poor us, the Arctic is cold and tough to build in.
Tell that to the Russians who seem able to manage. Tell that to various Canadian mining interests that have operated in the high Arctic without much help from government. They successfully deal with seasonal shipping and sealift constraints, air-strip maintenance, crews shuttling in and out and some of the worst weather conditions on the planet.
Our national defence apparently cannot cope, abetted by successive governments that talk a good game but seem to lack interest when it counts.
John Murphy Coquitlam, B.C.
Re Canada’s F-35 Fiasco Comes Full Circle (Editorial, March 30): The F-35 hatched as a turkey, supposedly able to fulfill many different roles. Now we have fighter jets that are likely unfit to operate in our country’s vast northern territory.
Why is this announcement made now? Oh, the Ukrainian disaster brought to attention the ignoring of our military responsibilities. This sudden expenditure enables the Trudeau government to say, “Look, we are meeting our NATO commitment to spend 2 per cent of GDP on defence.”
Are we great or what?
Ron Newton St. Catharines, Ont.
Don’t fall into the trap of evaluating military procurement in terms of its lifetime cost, an approach that scares decision makers into paralysis.
The lifetime cost of a national daycare program is, quite literally, infinity, but it doesn’t mean it is bad policy. Whether it be social programs or F-35s, the questions should be: Is the expense best suited to the needs of Canadians? Can we carry the annualized cost?
Lyle Clarke Whitby, Ont.
Justice served?
Re McLachlin Defends Seat On Hong Kong Court After Two Judges Resign (March 31): Beverley McLachlin, an anchor to swing to in turbulent waters. Long may she shine.
Sandra J. Ross Dixon Victoria
I am a retired lawyer who also served as a judge in a British Overseas Territory, as well as a lecturer at the University of Hong Kong (1989-1996). I applaud the decision of two British judges to resign from Hong Kong’s Court of Final Appeal.
Beverley McLachlin believes that foreign judges on the court will help guarantee judicial independence. If she thinks any foreign judge will ever again be assigned an important case that can affect the governmental affairs of Hong Kong, she is, with my greatest respect, in dreamland.
J. David Murphy Barrie, Ont.
Book review
Re HarperCollins, Author Rosemary Sullivan Stand By The Betrayal Of Anne Frank (March 30): It may be that the author and publisher held the best of intentions, but 85-per-cent certainty (reduced from 95 per cent – will it be 70 per cent next month?) should hardly be the foundation of a definitive conclusion.
While it’s one thing to explore the question of who revealed the Frank family’s hiding place, it feels another thing entirely to create a major publishing event using Anne Frank’s name to pin the betrayal on one particular individual. Indeed, as reporter Marsha Lederman points out, backlash to the book justifiably warrants another publication.
It could easily be titled: “The Betrayal of Arnold van den Bergh: How a Major Publishing House Exploited Anne Frank in Pursuit of Headlines and Book Sales.”
Rachel Hershfield Cornwall, PEI
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