Protesters rally outside the Alberta Legislature in Edmonton, in June, 2019.AMBER BRACKEN/The Canadian Press
A word
Re “Okanagan wildfire’s speed could be ‘new normal,’ Eby says” (Aug. 13): Having just driven through smoky, fire-raging British Columbia, I cringe at the term “new normal.”
I think instead we should speak of the “new nightmare.” Somehow “normal” makes it seem that everything is okay.
Everything is not okay.
Cathy Harrop Canmore, Alta.
Political reform
Re “It can happen here: Why an autocrat could rise to power in Canada” (Opinion, Aug. 8): Claims that Trumpian authoritarianism could happen in Canada are convincing. It happened in the United States despite constitutional and institutional barriers more extensive than in Canada.
The Reform Act, for example, theoretically strengthens the hand of party caucuses against a leader, but surely the American example shows how inadequate it is in the face of an authoritarian leader.
Written conventions, extensive public education and engagement are more promising, however they would not address underlying causes. In Canada, like other Western countries, the state is involved in virtually everything, creating a nation of dependents in place of the independent middle class that gave us parliamentary democracy.
The challenge is to preserve the modern array of services while insulating the operations of government from politicians. This could help release public employees, citizens and businesses from the sycophantic behavior so pervasive across America today.
Jack Stilborn Ottawa
We must be careful not to rely on rules and institutions to save us.
The United States has a well-designed constitution, but a bad lot has been called upon to work it recently. Canada’s flawed constitution can serve us well, if we call upon good people to work it.
There are two tried-and-true ways to remove a bad prime minister in Canada. The first draws on our experience as a hockey nation: a bench-clearing brawl. This is how political parties in British Columbia typically dispose of their leaders.
The second mechanism is a vote of non-confidence, which is much easier than impeachment of a U.S. president.
The Reform Act or other measures are unlikely to save us if MPs are unwilling to use them. To avoid the perils of authoritarianism, we should elect people who will put the country ahead of their party and their own ambitions.
That’s on us.
Hamish Telford Associate professor, department of political science, University of the Fraser Valley; Abbotsford, B.C.
While Canada has no midterm elections per se, by-elections provide a degree of accountability. Woe be the prime minister who ignores the results of by-elections and fails to course-correct. (Granted, by-elections are held at the discretion of the prime minister.)
Furthermore, decisions to prorogue Parliament are supposed to be made by the governor-general and not the prime minister. Perhaps most crucially, the prime minister holds the power to name judges to federally appointed courts, including the Supreme Court.
Sadly, I agree that Canada indeed starts at the 30- or 40-metre line of a 100-metre hurdle race to tyranny.
John Reilly Victoria
The odds
Re “The 24 hours that could change Canada’s economic trajectory” (Report on Business, Aug. 8): Mark Carney will be in his element as he gathers global movers and shakers. For an elitist, this must be a dream come true.
Will Canadian taxpayers benefit? Highly unlikely. Will he instead dole out more investments – taxpayer debt – to the wealthy? More likely.
Catharina Summers Kingston, Ont.
Pipe dream
Re “Ottawa announces $34-million to help communities across Canada cope with climate change” (Aug. 13): Does anyone else see the irony?
This $34-million announcement is one-thousandth of the $34-billion Ottawa invested in the Trans Mountain pipeline and a similar fraction of the proposed federal investment in a West Coast pipeline.
So the government is spending just one-thousandth on making communities more resilient to the effects of climate change caused by the oil transported through these pipelines.
Dave Carson Hamilton
Re “With a new oil pipeline, Canadians are being asked to make a bet on the past” (Opinion, Aug. 8): A compelling summary of the climate science, economics and sorry politics of Mark Carney’s commitment to invest $40-billion in a pipeline.
As the fearsome reality of climate change bears down on us all, we are investing in the past instead of investing in a low-carbon future. Why can’t we make future generations our priority by ensuring a climate-friendly world for our kids?
I thought I voted for a Prime Minister who understood the threat of climate change and the economic opportunities emerging from the global energy transition. How wrong I was.
Betty Muise The Blue Mountains, Ont.
How can we make a $40-billion commitment to subsidize a pipeline without considering the alternatives? A cost-benefit analysis is the least we should expect.
At a time when forests in our country and around the world are burning due to the drying effects of rising temperatures, and when heat extremes are causing thousands of deaths, we should have no business increasing the amount of carbon being burned or methane produced in Canada or downstream.
Turn to the economy of the future based on renewables and battery storage. Shift our export industries to match where future demand will be, not expand the fossil fuel industry.
Let’s invest in solar, wind and geothermal energy. Let’s create a mass retrofit program across the country. These are cheap, reliable options that sustainably reduce our emissions.
Lyn Adamson Toronto
One pernicious incentive to resist a renewable energy future is that governments receive royalties from fossil fuel production. These are vastly larger than the tax revenues collected from wind and solar energy.
The economic benefits of wind and solar flow directly to consumers through lower heating and cooling costs, rather than being controlled by governments for their own political ends.
Peter Ladner Vancouver
Lasting image
Re “Colombian rescuers race against the clock to find survivors after devastating earthquake” (Aug. 13): I was living in Colombia from 1966 to 1973 and I experienced several earthquakes.
Once, while having my teeth scaled, a tremor caused the X-ray machine to shake. The two young women attending me said “temblor, temblor” and moved into the doorway.
I looked out of the window and saw trees swaying and water spilling from rooftop tanks. I suddenly realized, yes, temblor, temblor, and joined them in the doorway.
The memory never goes away, and it comes back every time I have my teeth cleaned.
Naomi Stinson Edmonton
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