Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre speaks during a news conference on Parliament Hill on Dec. 20, 2024 in Ottawa.DAVE CHAN/AFP/Getty Images
Trade-offs
Re “Trump’s threats against Canada not the words of a ‘friend, a partner and an ally,’ former PM Stephen Harper says” (Jan. 14): As a former Canadian MP working in Washington, this has been a bizarre time hearing Donald Trump troll our nation on everything from applying tariffs to being absorbed as a 51st state.
How can we counter this nonsense? Increase our deployment of planes, firefighters and equipment to assist our friends in California to neutralize the wildfires devastating their state.
Not only is this the right thing to do, saving lives and property, but it would be a powerful counterpoint to the nonsense being spewed by the president-elect. Then flood U.S. airwaves with videos of our brave pilots and firefighters saving lives, so that every American can see how a true friend of the United States acts during a crisis.
Keith Martin MD, PC; executive director, Consortium of Universities for Global Health; Washington
Re “Well, who wouldn’t want to be a part of that?” (Editorial Cartoon, Jan. 10): I was dismayed by your cartoon depicting a Canadian beaver under a boot, a typical portrayal of Canada-U.S. economic relations.
As Canada is considering tariff retaliation, would it not have been more appropriate to have depicted the trampled beaver about to chew a wildfire-damaged American boot? The tariff crisis may be an opportunity to make a striking difference in the pace of the climate change fight, through heavy export tariffs on Canadian oil and gas to the United States.
Sonia Granzer Ottawa
Re “Alberta opposes Ottawa’s proposal to cut off energy exports to U.S., Danielle Smith says after Trump visit” (Jan. 14): Danielle Smith went on a mission to visit Donald Trump.
Yes, she said all tariffs should not happen, but I think that was just lip service to the rest of Canada. She then comes home and states that she opposes cutting off U.S. energy exports. I believe her true mission is to protect Alberta’s oil and gas.
The country needs to be more united than ever with this bully, yet Ms. Smith seems to have fallen headlong into the Trump trap of sowing division. Premiers going off with their own agenda can be damaging and not in the country’s interest.
Hans Verbeek Qualicum Beach, B.C.
Re “Against the threat of Trump tariffs, Canada has some powerful cards to play” (Jan. 14): The accompanying photo features a line that has always made me smile: “children of a common mother.” Yes, both we and the United States come from a mom who’s no better than she should be.
Bill Atkinson Edmonton
Push back
Re “It’s time for Canada to tell Donald Trump that enough is enough” (Jan. 14): Yes, the Liberals have created a less than fully functioning government to negotiate with the president-elect. But had they not prorogued parliament, the NDP and Conservatives would have had a vote of non-confidence, leaving us with no functioning federal government for a month-plus; better something than nothing.
If all federal parties want to put Canada first, we should avoid another election until after tariff negotiations are over, so as to present a united front. If the negotiations persist into the fall, then it won’t matter if there’s a governmental gap for an election.
Better a gap later in the middle of the process than at the start.
David Thomas Devine Aurora, Ont.
In light of Donald Trump’s threats, Pierre Poilievre holds the simplest solution but likely won’t use it.
He could be the better man and put the country first by telling Canadians he will not attempt a non-confidence vote, and instead wait until an October election. He could agree with the Liberals to use the time to get up to speed on foreign affairs.
What’s the difference? Four, five months. Canada would be much better off for it.
Jim Houston Oakville, Ont.
Members only
Re “Liberal leadership hopeful Christy Clark considers a bid, while Transport Minister Anita Anand bows out” (Jan. 13): In the last Liberal leadership race, about 104,000 people voted. In the last Conservative race, about 412,000 people voted.
Christy Clark only did what many of us should do: Participate in the process. Otherwise, we would be continuously left to the dictates of party insiders and special interest groups.
God forbid we adopt the endless U.S. primary system, but at least Americans have broader public participation in the choosing of their leaders.
Join the Liberal party (it is free) and vote for a leader. It doesn’t mean having to vote for them in an election.
Robert Koby Mayook, B.C.
Since it is going to come up again and again, we should ask how many other Canadians joined the Conservative Party once to vote against Pierre Poilievre or for Jean Charest.
I have never joined any other party; I vote Liberal or NDP depending on the local candidate. But I and a number of people I know joined the Conservatives for a limited time to vote against Mr. Poilievre.
Why? Because I support the arts, education, reconciliation and the CBC; because climate change is real and getting desperately important; because I am tired of the attack mentality and the lack of clear and detailed policy; because as a senior, I fear the state of medical care now and how much worse it can get.
Instead of asking Christy Clark, ask other Canadians. I hope you would find many who did join the Conservatives to vote against Mr. Poilievre – unfortunately not enough.
Jennifer Taylor Former educator and arts executive, Toronto
Historical precedent
Re “Liberal data guru Pitfield steps back from Carney campaign and commits to staying neutral” (Jan. 14): Mark Carney is likely to be the next prime minister. If he wishes to continue on after an electoral loss, he should look at the path forged by Lester B. Pearson, who in 1958 suffered a devastating loss to John Diefenbaker.
The Tories won 53 per cent of the popular vote and gained 78 per cent of the total seats. It was an unprecedented and historic defeat.
But five years later, Mr. Pearson was prime minister. He rebuilt the party by making humility and competence his cornerstones. He relied on brilliant thinkers such as Tom Kent to convene policy meetings during which the next Liberal platform, progressive and popular, was built.
Mr. Pearson took his time, considered substantive policy options and allowed the populist Tory government to wear on the public and accumulate grievances. Mr. Carney, if he wins the leadership race, should follow the Pearson precedent.
Stephen Dame Toronto
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