Alberta Premier Danielle Smith speaks at the 2025 U.S.-Canada Summit in Toronto on Oct. 8.Sammy Kogan/The Globe and Mail
Cause commotion
Re “If nothing else, Danielle Smith is a disruptor” (Opinion, Nov. 29): So Danielle Smith “tried to make the strategic case for a more co-operative conciliatory approach” than the elbows up strategy of the Liberals for confronting Donald Trump.
I may be getting older, but my recollection is very different: A previous headline said "Danielle Smith tells U.S. podcast she asked Trump administration to pause tariffs to bolster Conservatives" (March 24) before the last election. Claims of a “conciliatory approach” seem to bear no semblance to what actually occurred.
Such a manoeuvre is generally referred to as political interference, not “disruption.”
Robert McManus Hamilton
I think we can agree that Danielle Smith is a disrupter. Whether that is a benefit to society is more debatable, as evidenced by a one-word qualifying aside: “(usually!)”
In this case, I think Ms. Smith’s disruption of “social and cultural orthodoxy” regarding transgender youth is not of benefit to anyone except herself as she plays to her political base. And it is not social and cultural norms she is disrupting, but rather medical norms regarding decisions between one and one’s doctor without undue government interference.
I also suggest that a new norm of overriding Charter rights and freedoms for political purposes is not one we want to establish.
Mark Holland Stratford, PEI
Hard place
Re “Priced out of housing, younger Canadians turn to the stock market” (Report on Business, Nov. 29): Younger Canadians are turning to the stock market, including bitcoin, to find “refuge.”
Refuge is a place that gives protection or shelter from danger, trouble, etc. As long-term investors are aware, the stock market is no place to find refuge given it is considered to be “priced for perfection.”
While the wisdom goes that one cannot time the market, unexpected bad news may trigger investors exiting the market en masse and, like the proverbial lemming, prices would fall off a cliff, possibly remaining that way for many years.
If the worst happens, young people may be left with a balance sheet showing a huge spread between their book value and current market value, thus leaving little money available to buy real estate, should that asset class become more affordable.
Cassandra King Stratford, Ont.
School of thought
Re “Violence in Canadian schools is reaching a tipping point. What needs to change?” (Opinion, Nov. 29): Schools are becoming more violent. Who is responsible? Well, everyone.
But it does start with parents who fail, often by example, to teach their children values such as empathy, compassion and respect for others. And it ends with parents, too.
As a former school trustee, here’s how I see that working: Teachers are unable to enforce discipline because they cannot rely on principals to back them up; principals in turn cannot count on support from administrators, who in turn cannot count on boards of trustees; elected trustees can be soft on discipline because of ideology or because they are terrified of voters, a great many of whom are parents.
This downward spiral will likely persist until those within the system get a grip and stop letting the buck be passed around. Instead, say “no” and hand it back.
Tom Masters Former Victoria school trustee; North Cowichan, B.C.
Before I retired, I taught in a school with a police officer stationed there on a daily basis (a school resource officer). He happened to be Black.
I witnessed the benefits as he broke down preconceived notions about the police, as well as prejudiced views about Black people. The students loved him and would often turn to him with their personal problems; he was like a big brother to them. There was no violence.
I witnessed the same interactions in a school where I did a stint as a supply teacher after retiring. That officer also happened to be Black. In both cases, the benefits were obvious.
I knew it was a big mistake when political groups insisted on terminating the program because of misguided concerns. The presence of these officers served not only to protect, but also offered fine role models for students.
Sheryl Danilowitz Toronto
Self-determination
Re “Public problems” (Letters, Nov. 29): A letter-writer suggests it is our collective responsibility to end homelessness. At the risk of voicing a divisive rant, I disagree.
I got off an airplane in Calgary in July, 1980, and began my own personal crusade to cure homelessness – my own. As an alcoholic and stockbroker, I came perilously close to losing it all more times than I could count. I always dodged homelessness on the down cycles by taking on weird and wonderful jobs flipping burgers, parking cars or working the door at a hotel.
I eventually sobered up and got serious about my career (the main one) and hopefully I will be sleeping indoors for the rest of my life – alcoholics cannot make long-term promises. The point is, putting a roof over my head was my responsibility.
I almost dropped the ball several times, but I was always ready to do whatever it took to carry on.
Ken Johnston Ottawa
Priceless
Re “Vancouver must go wild – for the good of us all" (Opinion, Nov. 29): A healthy mature tree is by far the most valuable part of a flourishing urban forest. The idea that a couple of saplings can compensate for its removal is absurd.
The problem described is not unique to Vancouver. Every municipality I know of is starting to recognize that we need to address the loss of mature trees. What is needed is for the price of removal to reflect the true value of these trees.
If the permit to remove a 300-year-old red oak has a price tag of, say, $120,000, then I’m betting we’ll see some creative thinking about building design that works around these invaluable green assets.
Toni Ellis Director, Tree Trust; Centre Wellington, Ont.
Turning point
Re “Canada’s memorials reveal who we are as a country” (Opinion, Nov. 29): With the current threat to our country’s independence, economic health and values, there is a seminal monument and statue in Niagara-on-the-Lake, Ont., that celebrates our forebears’ defence at arms of our land.
It should be considered one of our most important national memorials, for failure to repulse American attacks in the War of 1812 would have meant Canada never existing and growing to be the sovereign nation of which we are now so proud.
Yet that memorial is more than the impressive monument. The column stands in a natural setting of lawns and trees, in a large park of quiet beauty. It turns out to be the typical Canadian paradox: a proud monument to firm patriotic pride, yet contemplative and quietly affirming.
Steven Bark Otonabee-South Monaghan, 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: letters@globeandmail.com