Australian Air Force Lockheed Martin F-35 fighter jet at Ngurah Rai International Airport in Kuta, Bali, Indonesia, on Sept. 18, 2024.Johannes Christo/Reuters
Bad bargain?
Re “Trimming F-35 order could antagonize Trump as security and trade talks get under way: analysts” (May 1): As a signatory, on behalf of Canada, to at least one of the agreements associated with the F-35, the purchase has been of benefit to Canada and the Canadian aerospace industry.
While our relationship with the U.S. has changed with the advent of Donald Trump, it is hard to see how, without the F-35, we can effectively meet our commitments to the defence of North America, leaving aside the question of whether we irritate the U.S. President by cancelling the contract.
Even to decrease the size of the order and to buy a second fighter aircraft, such as the Gripen E, strikes me as questionable.
Operating two very different fighters would be expensive, given that they are very different aircraft.
Doing so would require two separate sets of pilots at a time when the Royal Canadian Air Force is struggling with recruitment and retention issues.
W. P. D. Elcock Ottawa
Canada has committed to the F-35, but the world has changed faster than that contract.
There is a strategic alternative: Canada could transfer its initial F-35 orders to allied countries expanding their fleets and pivot toward a more autonomous air strategy.
The Gripen E offers a viable and sovereign alternative: It is interoperable with NATO, cost-effective and can potentially be co-produced in Canada.
For the same long-term budget, Canada could operate a larger fleet, with lower lifetime costs, stronger industrial returns and reduced foreign dependency.
It is not about rejecting alliances, but about returning to a more balanced, independent posture aligned with our strategic roots.
Franck Fablet Verdun, Que.
Let’s be careful in what we wish for when dealing with the F-35 contract.
Given that it takes us decades longer than it should to replace our aging aircraft when required, should we not get the best and most useful aircraft?
Mr. Trump will only be around for a small piece of the big picture and the life of whatever fighter replacement we get, so let’s put aside that revenge part of the procurement process.
Let’s make the choice based on serious study and not an emotional one.
Chris McCabe Blue Mountains, Ont.
At the very least – as one of the U.S.’s largest customers – we should be able to negotiate a much better deal for the F-35 order.
Critical national issues such as defence recruitment and procurement haven’t gone away and need to be dealt with.
Ritchie Leslie Vernon, B.C.
Bad precedent
Re “Ontario Premier Doug Ford suggests U.S.-style elected judges, calls judicial independence a ‘joke’” (May 1) : Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s petulant response to a judicial decision on bike lanes not only does himself an embarrassing disservice, but also inherently illustrates why electing judges is a bad idea.
Referencing the U.S. system, especially at this time, certainly shows poor judgment by Mr. Ford.
While the Canadian system for appointing judges may not be perfect, it is much preferred to a system where judicial appointments are based on popularity contests.
Harland Harvey Ottawa
By distancing himself from Pierre Poilievre in the recent federal election campaign, Doug Ford may have fooled some into thinking that he has shed his neo-conservative populism.
Mr. Ford’s call to rid the province of “bleeding hearts” in the judiciary is a timely reminder that he has not.
His self-described “rant” may have been exactly that message aimed at his base, but the rest of us should take heed.
Curtis Cole Kemble, Ont.
The Ontario Premier railed against a judge who imposed an injunction halting any work to remove existing bicycle lanes on three Toronto streets.
Mr. Ford must surely understand that the judge, faced with a legal action citing the unconstitutionality of the lane removal, really has little option than to halt any relevant activity while the matter is examined in detail.
I am personally dubious about the unconstitutional argument, but I find his lane-removal initiative and his complaint about the injunction thoroughly unbecoming of a democratically-elected leader.
Glenn Allen Rockingham, Ont.
Tariff talks
Re “Trump praises Carney, says the Prime Minister to visit White House within a week” (May 1): I would suggest that a change of optics is in order.
Change the venue, do not go to the White House. It looks like we are going on bended knee as a supplicant to Donald Trump.
We don’t need to see another meeting with the U.S. President surrounded by his henchmen with the intent of intimidating another nation’s leader.
Why not invite Mr. Trump to Canada for home territorial advantage or even a neutral site?
Stay away from the White House – it is toxic.
Gary Johnson Whitchurch-Stouffville, Ont.
I have a big concern with rushing into any negotiations with Donald Trump.
His tariffs could be subject to legal challenges. It would be foolish to make lasting trade concessions to Mr. Trump and the U.S., only to see in a few months that the tariffs are struck down.
There is a need for short-term progress, but maybe we also need some “out of the box” thinking – such as limiting exports of aluminum, or tearing up treaties with the U.S. that are not in our interests.
Many people in Canada have called for renegotiating the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA) as soon as possible.
But the best defence is a good offence, and Canada should go in with a strategy that makes long-term sense.
Brian Graff Toronto
Speaking of tariffs, I suggest Prime Minister Mark Carney impose a 500-per-cent tariff on American fast food restaurants in Canada.
He could use the money to fund the health care system and it would decrease the cost of Ozempic prescriptions.
In this world order, it probably makes too much sense.
Philip McCabe Stratford, Ont.
Never forgotten
Re “Sam Louie kept Toronto’s venerable Grossman’s Tavern hopping with live music” (Obituaries, April 30): Thank you to Brad Wheeler for his warm tribute to Sam Louie, and his wonderful description of Grossman’s Tavern.
Terrazzo floors in a curious shade of asylum green, rings on the tables from the days when beer was $1.40 a stubby and pickled egg brine that may have outlasted two generations of Trudeau prime ministers.
When I moved to Toronto in the late 1960s, going to Grossman’s was a rite of passage.
They don’t make places like that anymore.
T.M. Dickey 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