Britain's King Charles III visits Cartwright Hall in Bradford, U.K., on May 15.Chris Jackson/The Associated Press
RSVP
Re “Carney criticizes Starmer’s invitation to Trump for a second state visit” (May 15): During the Oval Office meeting with Keir Starmer, bearing an invitation from King Charles III to the U.S. President for a state visit, my reaction was that this was indeed a shrewd move on the part of Mr. Starmer.
The gesture would surely be effective as Donald Trump trips over himself with delight at all things royal, and it did look like Mr. Starmer subsequently had Mr. Trump eating out of his hand.
I visualize the future state visit being a win for Canada, because during what will be a meeting behind closed doors between Mr. Trump and the King, Charles would stand up for Canada in no uncertain terms, making it clear that our sovereignty under his reign is sacrosanct – however obliquely he might express it.
Sydney Sharpe West Vancouver
Good government?
Re “Ballot-box question” (Letters, May 11): A letter-writer is concerned about proportional representation being anti-democratic, including the risk of balkanization.
Proportional representation does allow more individual interests to be represented than first-past-the-post. FPTP can make a country seem more cohesive, since there are often only a few choices instead of a variety. Right now, Canadians seem united under the Liberals.
But within both major parties are divisions and rifts. Then there is the geographical polarization that occurs when parties can afford to ignore entire regions due to not having “enough” voters there, or when a region is a “sure thing.”
Under proportional representation, as with any robust democracy, there would still be challenges to unity and cohesion, but with far more transparency as well as more capacity for individuals to feel represented.
Proportional representation should be the solution, one needed in Canada if we are to avoid going the way of our neighbours to the south.
Charlotte Hancock Kitchener, Ont.
The problem with both first-past-the-post minority governments and proportional representation is that they encourage the tiniest of party support to dictate policy.
Why is it a better solution for the party with 5 per cent of the vote to combine with the party with 45 per cent, rather than getting together the party with 45 per cent of the vote and the party with 40 per cent?
Maybe electoral reform should be needing supermajorities to form government. If a party fails to get it, the government should be comprised of the largest vote-getting parties.
This would force government to get consensus from parties with the highest vote shares. Surely that is better “representation” than giving power to smaller parties.
If Canadians do not like that government, they could then vote for smaller parties, raising them to a higher proportion of votes to help form a new government.
Jason New Foothills County, Alta.
A winner-take-all ranked ballot would not be any better than our current voting system. But there is a type of proportional representation that uses a ranked-choice ballot.
Proportional ranked choice is used in Scotland and Ireland. Instead of electing just one MP in each single-member riding, voters elect a small team of MPs in a multimember local district.
It is a candidate-centred system, which allows voters to rank candidates based on what characteristics are most important to them. Using proportional ranked choice is simple: Rank candidates, as few or as many as a voter wants, in any order. They can even be ranked across party lines.
This would better reflect the political diversity that exists in every area.
Deb Taylor Queens, N.S.
A letter-writer believes that ranked ballots “would remove the need to vote strategically. But election results would still be wildly off from the popular vote.”
Ranked ballots are still susceptible to strategic voting, though not of the same type or to the same extent as in first-past-the-post voting. The same is true of proportional representation; it is demonstrable that no electoral systems (other than those that are dictatorial or involve random chance) are immune from strategic voting.
The results of a ranked ballot election would never be wildly off from the popular vote, for the simple reason that there is no such thing as the popular vote in such a system. One doesn’t vote for a single candidate; one ranks candidates according to preference.
The notion of a popular vote is feature of systems where one votes for a single candidate.
Bernard Katz Toronto
Philosopher Karl Popper wrote persuasively, in my view, about the value of dismissing government by majority.
Proportional representation may sound appealing to voters who feel alienated by the two dominant parties. But it’s worth asking what a many-party system would look like in practice. I don’t think it would be too different from the coalition we are preparing for again, with the governing party installed by a relatively powerful smaller one, neither of them fully responsible for their actions.
Sounds more like disproportional representation to me.
Juzar Pirbhai Oakville, Ont.
Recharge
Re “Canada’s electric vehicle strategy has failed, and there are lessons to learn” (Report on Business, May 12): The depressing spectacle of the government investing into batteries and electric vehicles, when clearly we cannot compete against China’s massive subsidies, raises the question of what the government should invest into instead.
Given sunk costs, maybe battery backups for green power or electric long-distance trucks could give some market to these subsidized ventures. But investing in soon-to-be-commodity manufacturing is clearly not the best way to promote Canada’s future.
If those investments had been made, instead, on infrastructure (high-speed trains, mass transit, charging stations) and research and development (supporting universities, backing intellectual property and protecting it from foreign competitors), then those would perhaps give fewer photo ops, but be much more productive investments.
I hope Mark Carney will take note.
Pierre Mihok Ajax, Ont.
Food delivery
Re “Trans Mountain CEO Mark Maki sees new pipelines on the horizon” (Report on Business, May 13): Much of the debate around energy infrastructure in Canada focuses on pipelines and politics. But maybe it’s time to start with food.
Alberta produces roughly one-quarter of Canada’s grain (wheat, barley, canola and pulses) and most of it travels west to ports in Vancouver or Prince Rupert. Yet there is no modern, high-efficiency corridor built to move this essential freight.
We should build a grain-and-energy corridor across the country: a multiuse right-of-way that carries not just grain, but clean electricity, hydrogen, carbon fibre precursors and, yes, oil. Not for oil’s sake, but for the nation’s sake.
If Alberta oil can quietly hitch a ride on a corridor designed for food and clean fuels, we gain time, reduce friction and lower the stakes in federal–provincial fights. We give the West export access. We give Ottawa infrastructure for the next economy.
And we stop pretending we can move forward by tearing ourselves apart.
Keith Thompson Toronto
Living memory
Re “This V-E Day, reflect not only on Canada’s valour in past battles. There is a new aggressor at our gate” (May 8): In her inspiring opinion, contributor Sally Armstrong shared so beautifully the words of John McCrae. Her writing brought to life extraordinary scenes of Canadians, on many occasions and far from home, courageously bringing peace and freedom so that we, several generations later, could enjoy the lives we live today.
The coverage of V-E Day memorials and celebrations also marked the opening of a superb exhibit, Last Voices of the Second World War, at the Canadian War Museum. Here, unforgettable stories and powerful first-person testimonies from some of that war’s last surviving veterans give attendees much to ponder in our world today.
Hally Siddons Ottawa
Posthumous pop
Re “Rock Around the Clock released” (Moment in Time, May 10): Although the guitar solo by Danny Cedrone is considered a classic, sadly he never lived to see its popularity as he died in June of 1954.
Philip Woods Cambridge, 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