SrdjanPav/iStockPhoto / Getty Images
Overstay
Re “Washington, we have a serious problem: Your ambassador to Canada” (Oct. 31): The U.S. ambassador holds a privileged position as a Trump supporter, so it seems he’s just following marching orders and won’t go against his boss. Would anyone really expect to have a courteous and diplomatic Trump ambassador?
The only hope is that he’ll put both feet in his mouth too many times, to the point where he’ll have to be recalled and replaced. Will his boss pull back the strings? Probably not.
We’re stuck with the puppeteer in Washington, and the puppet in Ottawa likely for a few more years.
Douglas Cornish Ottawa
Fine balance
Re “Canadian politics enters its era of Illiberals and Unconservatives” (Oct. 24): I disagree with columnist Andrew Coyne’s opinion of the current Liberals that, borrowing from Tolstoy, all plutocrats are alike in their demagogic, platform-seeking posturing and anger; each democratic leader is democratic in their own way.
He is not hankering for the progressive days of the Trudeau government, but it is important to remember how difficult it is to redress balance. That government egregiously neglected Canada’s judicial problems and created immigration distortion counter to long-established principles which once gave us our reputation for fairness and probity.
These are critical times for any democratic government. To say our Prime Minister is “cozy with dictatorships,” when he is trying to thread his way through a world in disorder that demands maturity and gravity, strikes me as the very opposite.
Patricia Hanley Toronto
Chain of command
Re “In preparing for the end of NATO, Canada falls behind Europe” (Opinion, Oct. 25): The article concludes that “the military often charts its own path without elected officials having much knowledge or control.” I disagree: As chief of the defence staff from 2012 to 2015, and confirmed by discussions with current military leaders, I can attest to the robust civilian oversight of the Canadian Armed Forces.
The military provides candid advice to elected officials, as is proper in a democracy, but does not consider political calculus; that must be left to politicians. Hence, the recommendation to acquire F-35 jets reflects their status as the only fifth-generation aircraft to replace our aging CF-18 Hornets. Similarly, support for early U.S. engagement on NORAD modernization, including initiatives such as the Golden Dome, aligns with Canada’s defence commitments.
This article could undermine public confidence in a military that serves under strict government direction. Canadians can trust their Armed Forces to serve within a democratic framework, safeguarding our security.
Tom Lawson General (ret’d), Ottawa
Insecure
Re “Canada needs to rein in spending. How about we stop handing out billions to wealthy seniors?” (Oct. 25): The debate over Old Age Security reform often overlooks the quiet financial realities of many Canadian seniors today.
More of them are increasingly providing financial support to adult children and grandchildren, whether helping to pay for basic living expenses, providing down payments for real estate or paying for furniture and appliances. More are also carrying mortgages and higher levels of debt into retirement. OAS provides a helpful boost that is not openly recognized but helps the economy.
It is also fully taxable. Any “gravy” flowing to more affluent seniors ultimately is returned back to taxpayers.
James Phillips Toronto
Eliminating the excess use of public funds on Old Age Security feels long overdue.
For decades, the Department of Finance has been advising governments that the increasing cost of OAS is not sustainable, but efforts by previous prime ministers were rolled back because they were not popular.
Suggestions to reduce the clawback threshold from $182,000 to $100,000 and raise retirement age from 65 to 67 would provide estimated savings of more than $17-billion annually. Those savings could be put into the defence budget, which would be a better use of taxpayer dollars at this point in time.
In fact, let’s make those savings an even $20-billion annually (my estimate) by also cancelling the unnecessary increase of 10 per cent to OAS when seniors reach age 75.
I am a senior.
Brian Dougall Ottawa
Re “Canada must overhaul its broken tax system” (Report on Business, Oct. 23): We should look at all aspects of an unnecessarily complex taxation structure and examine both government revenue and expenditure. For example, there is strong opposition to a wealth tax and changes to taxation on capital gains.
Looking at Old Age Security alone would be yet another piecemeal approach. The really rich already reimburse OAS while continuing to benefit from capital gains being taxed differently from employment income.
Some use the complexity of our taxation structure to advocate for a flat tax. Someone with a taxable income of $500,000 would currently pay an average rate of about 28 per cent in federal taxation.
A flat tax of anything under 28 per cent would reduce rates for that taxpayer. A flat tax of anything over 14.5 per cent would represent an increase for the lowest income earners.
David Steele Saskatoon
Years ago, I remember telling my dad there should be seniors premiums instead of discounts, since seniors are the ones with all the money. But I’m on a fixed income, he’d reply as he booked yet another Mediterranean cruise.
I’ve been a senior myself for some years. Now my son tells me it makes no sense for the government to send his mom and me $18,000 a year. My family income is higher than his, I have no debts and I can travel anywhere, while he has mortgage and car payments to worry about.
He’s absolutely right. Old Age Security should be reserved for low-income seniors who need the money.
T.S. Ramsay Guelph, Ont.
History at stake
Re “Canada’s national archives act as a ‘memory house’ – and they’re in trouble” (Arts & Books, Oct. 25): Historian Charlotte Gray asked the right questions of Leslie Weir, head of Library and Archives Canada, but I found her answers lacking passion and advocacy.
She laments that the country has not done a good job of mounting exhibitions presenting our prime ministers, yet it was under her leadership when a dedicated website to Canada’s leaders was removed and never replaced. There once was a dedicated site and search engine for William Lyon Mackenzie King’s diary. No more.
Under her leadership, the LAC portal has all the appeal of government websites. The search mechanism has become so cumbersome that it resembles interfaces which existed more than a decade ago.
It’s great that LAC has a new facility, but there is so much more to do. How about leading the way to fix the ridiculous access to information laws that basically make investigating Canadian history an exercise in futility?
J. D. M. Stewart Author, The Prime Ministers: Canada’s Leaders and the Nation They Shaped; 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