Prime Minister Mark Carney signs an MOU with Alberta Premier Danielle Smith in Calgary last Thursday.Jeff McIntosh/The Canadian Press
If you build it…
Re “Carney’s pipeline pivot seizes a hinge moment for Canada” (Editorial, Nov. 28): “It is undoubtedly a risk to assert the national interest over parochial and political concerns.” Using the word “parochial” to describe the potential destruction of B.C. coastline is like saying the burning down of Jasper, Alta., because of climate warming is a “parochial” thing.
There is also the estimated cost of $16.5-billion for Pathways Alliance’s still unproven plan for carbon capture and storage. And we know it wants taxpayers to pick up the majority of this cost.
Who knows how much public money will eventually be poured into supposedly making Canada an energy superpower. All this for an industry that pollutes and has been grossly negligent in cleaning up abandoned wells, a multibillion-dollar liability that the Premier of Alberta wants its citizens to pay for.
Should this new pipeline be completed, whenever, at jaw-dropping cost, foreign consumers will likely still be able to pay less for oil from Saudi Arabia.
Ian Follett Calgary
Re “B.C. Premier calls Alberta’s pipeline proposal a distraction from real projects” (Nov. 28): Is it possible that Mark Carney and Danielle Smith are hailing a deal they know is theatre and highly unlikely ever to be fulfilled?
Mr. Carney could be doing so for reasons of national unity and the popularity of his party, while Ms. Smith could be ensuring re-election before long. It’s the perfect deal: Neither would be blamed for it failing.
Why did Ms. Smith not accept British Columbia’s offer to not oppose twinning Trans Mountain, a pipeline underutilized as it is, which would eliminate headaches over opposition, routes, impacts, costs and lifting tanker bans on a northerly route? Perhaps it’s because it would be too easy and speedy without the same promise of making Ms. Smith out to be a heroine.
It would also remind everyone that no corporation has shown interest in buying the Trans Mountain pipeline, let alone a hypothetical one.
Rob Garrard Victoria
Canadians elected Mark Carney for his focus on protecting our sovereignty, alongside his depth of knowledge and expertise vis-à-vis economics, big business and climate action.
I believe his protracted negotiations with Danielle Smith are a clear success and triumph for Canadian unity. Going forward, I have confidence he will ensure David Eby and Indigenous leaders are shown the consideration and respect they rightly demand as this project develops.
He cannot do everything at once, nor please everyone all of the time, as much as Canadians appear to be demanding this of him. The oil and gas industry is complex, particularly when set against the backdrop of enormous environmental challenges.
Can we not trust that Mr. Carney is the perfect person to delicately balance all of the above, thereby ensuring that, in the big picture, we actually have a country left to protect?
Sydney Sharpe West Vancouver
Hewers of wood, pumpers of water, diggers of tar: Can we not do better than that?
Overreliance on export of raw materials is an economic dead-end and we are falling into that trap. We should instead exploit our resources primarily for our own purposes.
Why is refining bitumen in Canada not being seriously considered? Refined oil would be less environmentally destructive if spilled and we could eliminate the need to import refined product.
What about adding value to our hydrocarbons by producing hydrogen? Hydrogen production plants could be linked to small-scale carbon capture and storage wells to minimize carbon emissions.
Instead of spending billions of taxpayer dollars to support the oil industry on pipelines or the massive Pathways Alliance CCS project, we could develop reliable passenger rail, improve highways and ports, develop transmission corridors, fix crumbling infrastructure or a thousand other things to boost our country’s long-term livability and economy.
Ed Janicki Victoria
Behind enemy lines
Re “Inside a Donbas field hospital, wounded Russian soldiers rest as nations decide the region’s future” (Nov. 28): Now, at the precise moment when Ukraine’s fate hangs precariously; when it’s evident Vladimir Putin, with Donald Trump’s blessing, may slither out of being held accountable for war crimes; when Ukrainians may be forced to live under Russian occupation indefinitely, giving up sovereignty over their land and identity, readers are expected to view images of losses on the Russian side with what? Reassurances that you are “committed to telling the fullest possible story?”
There never has been a moral equivalency in this equation. Ukraine is still David to Russia’s Goliath; Russia is just as brutal as it was four years ago, and undeserved punishment continues to rain down on the heads of Ukrainian men, women and children.
And, yes, when Ukraine fights back to defend itself, Russians will die.
Natalie Hryciuk Surrey, B.C.
End of story?
Re “Penny Oleksiak has become the story long after she’s stopped being the story” (Sports, Nov. 26): A sad story with lots of innuendo going around.
I accept that doping is like a conflict of interest: It’s not that someone did anything wrong, it’s that they didn’t get into a situation where they might have. But Penny Oleksiak seems to know that after accepting a two-year swimming ban.
Sadly, I think things reflect more emotional health than regulatory trouble. She has received hostile and sexist body-shaming social media over the years.
You previously reported that “across multiple different sports, athletes told The Globe it is common to have their bodies policed or inappropriately scrutinized (“A troubling number of Canadian Olympians are bingeing, purging and starving themselves. Inside the eating-disorder problem in elite amateur sports” – Dec. 18, 2021)." Old posts by Ms. Oleksiak said, “I don’t care if I’m not skinny enough or if I’m too muscular for you. I’m not trying to impress you.”
Couple this with her swimming inevitably slowing and being below her expectations, and I think she was almost trying to run away. I hope she’s okay.
Dave Freeman Burlington Ont.
This was like gazing into a crystal ball and foretelling a future for someone I had met only once. I had walked her path and knew the hazards well that would lay in wait ahead.
It is difficult to reach the top of one’s pursuit but even harder to stay there. The pressures of expectation and media scrutiny haunt every move, constantly threatening mental well-being.
I am not judging Penny Oleksiak. It is not up to me to speculate nor, quite honestly, anyone other than herself. Her future lays in her hands, as only she knows the truth and just how much of her heart and soul she has invested into her swimming.
“Let Penny just be Penny” and allow her the freedom to spread her wings and be fearless to write the next chapter of her future – in her own words.
Elaine Tanner OC; triple Olympic medalist, swimming, Mexico 1968; Nanoose Bay, B.C.
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