Prime Minister Mark Carney, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump during a summit in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt, earlier this month.Evan Vucci/The Associated Press
Bets off
Re “Is Doug Ford’s TV ad to blame for Donald Trump’s tariff tantrum? Be serious” (Report on Business, Oct. 27): There is no doubt substantial, and entirely justified, criticism of the Ontario advertising campaign which supposedly caused the termination of U.S. trade negotiations.
That said, the end of negotiations, combined with the Prime Minister’s sparse words in recent days, make it clear to me: The thousands of hours devoted by government officials to this issue have achieved nothing and are going nowhere. While Donald Trump apparently has greater respect for Mark Carney than Justin Trudeau, his respect for our country seems the same as for all the others in the world: none.
Canadians should accept that five years from now, most likely our automotive industry will be dead and gone, any trade agreement remotely similar to CUSMA will be but a distant memory and our relationship with the United States will be distant, harsh and purely transactional.
We are a resilient people with vast natural resources. We’ll be okay.
Michael Royce Toronto
Mark Carney is correct when he talks about only being able to control one side of negotiations. But while the United States may be knee-jerky, we cannot deny that Donald Trump knows exactly what he wants and consistently voices it.
As for Mark Carney, he chummed up to our provincial and territorial leaders to develop Canada’s united front. The end result: Mr. Carney being mandated with a list of what Canada cannot do (e.g., end supply management). On top of that, we witness self-serving provincial leaders undermining a united voice.
The reason Canada cannot make a deal with the U.S. is because we do not seem to have a clear mandate or united voice. Mr. Carney, then, is not in control of his side of the table.
Ward Jones Richmond Hill, Ont.
Energy-dependent
Re “Ottawa, Ontario pledge combined $3-billion for new nuclear reactors” (Oct. 24): Purchase of these four small modular reactors will not only make Canada dependent on U.S. nuclear technology largely untested at scale: I predict it will also lock us into long-term contracts for enriched uranium purchased from U.S. processing facilities.
Canada never needed enriched uranium refineries, since Candu reactors rely on conventional uranium pellets for their operation. Now, the result will likely be massive long-term outflow of capital to the United States for the purchase and operation of the SMRs.
This flies in the face of our federal government’s declared intention to reduce its dependence on our southern neighbours by diversifying trade relationships worldwide. Ontario and other provinces have cancelled wind and solar projects that would have delivered the required electricity at a vastly cheaper cost to consumers.
James Heller Toronto
Partners wanted
Re “Doubling non-U.S. exports is hard. Does Carney really have the courage for it?” (Report on Business, Oct. 24): Moving away from the United States as our No. 1 trading partner isn’t going to be easy, and this article underscores some of the poor data leading to key strategic mistakes.
China and India represent the two largest consumer markets in the world with more than 2.5 billion people who need food and energy, both of which we are blessed with. So why aren’t they at the top of our trade list?
Because sometimes those governments do things we don’t like? Cry me a river. Last time I checked, we still trade with them, just not at the levels we should be. Who is guiding our strategy?
Our biggest sources of new Canadians these days are India and China. As a result, we have millions of individual connections to these huge markets, with unlimited trade opportunities just waiting to be leveraged. Forget about Europe and all its complicated regulations.
Graham Farrell Toronto
Re “Carney says he will meet Chinese President Xi at APEC summit” (Online, Oct. 27): Why is this effort being pushed now by the Liberal government?
It was only recently that this country established a commission to review China’s interference in our elections and recognized it sent Chinese agents and operated “police” stations in several municipalities.
It now seems that this government prioritizes trade, investment and growth over national security concerns. Surely national security always come first – or should.
J.G. Gilmour Calgary
Re “Bridge the gap” (Letters, Oct. 27): History has proven many times, especially during the Cold War, that the enemy of my enemy is not necessarily my friend.
Iain McInnes Ottawa
Borderline
Re “Britain’s new wave of flag fervour linked to tension over immigration” (Oct. 25): A significant proportion of British critics are not against immigration, per se. They are, instead, against refugee claimants being allowed to enter the country without prior permission.
Canada faces the same problem, but as yet nowhere near to the same degree as in Britain, thanks largely to geography. But the pressures leading to large-scale undocumented migration to other developed countries will likely grow here, too.
The solution is two-fold: First, be pro-active in identifying and vetting good candidates among refugees in other countries who want to come to Canada. That is what we have done, with widespread public support, for tens of thousands of Syrian refugees since 2015.
Second, implement effective border control policies to prevent refugee claimants from entering the country without such prior permission, and to promptly remove any who don’t follow the rules. That is how I would avoid the problems now witnessed in Britain.
Peter Love Toronto
Bench warmers
Re “Canadians say too many people are getting out on bail. The data paint a complex picture” (Oct. 23): A key point: We should have more judges.
Why are persons charged held so long without trial, even a year or two? That half the people in prison have not been convicted should make clear the shortage of judges to deal with the backlog and keep up with incoming cases.
With extreme waits, charges have to be dropped and possibly dangerous accused are set free.
Lynn McDonald Former MP, Toronto
Lesson plan
Re “Alberta expected to bring in back-to-work legislation for striking teachers” (Oct. 27): If it is safe to assume that back-to-work legislation will become the norm in this era of rising Charter violations, then, beyond outright civil disobedience, union tactics should change.
If teachers are sent back to work, they should leverage their lawful pedagogical discretion to tie all subject matter back to civics (e.g. freedom of assembly under the Charter, among other rights). At least then, the next generation would have an educated appreciation for the freedoms for which some governments now seem to care so little.
Mitchel Fleming 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