Prime Minister Mark Carney delivers a speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland on Jan. 20.Sean Kilpatrick/The Associated Press
Leadership review
Re “A warmer Poilievre, but frozen in time” (Feb. 2): It’s hard not be amazed at the political maneuverings of the Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre.
A year ago, they were polling high and successful in creating conditions such that Justin Trudeau stepped down as Liberal Leader. But now they have kept on the man who lost the election for them. This will likely assure that they remain in opposition for a long time, as it appears a majority of Canadians do not regard Mr. Poilievre as prime ministerial material.
It’s probably not wise to run the same person and expect a different result. At least with this being a decisive win for Pierre Poilievre, if the Conservatives lose the next election, they will have only themselves to blame.
Linda Holmes Ottawa
Re “The PM’s speech” (Letters, Jan. 31): I share the patriotic pride in Mark Carney’s Davos speech that letters have been expressing. However, now I’m wondering about the strategy.
Does the speech improve Canada’s position in the coming USMCA negotiations, arguably priority No. 1? Does it bolster Canada’s global brand and strengthen other relationships, at the cost of peeving Donald Trump? If so, what benefits may be expected, and how soon?
Was it an opening bid for moral leadership of the world’s mid-sized countries? That could make us feel important, but how exactly would it serve Canada’s interests?
I truly hope the speech was not a reprise of 2015’s “Canada is back” slogan in more impressive language. We don’t need to be “back” again.
Jack Stilborn Ottawa
Come together
Re “Harper, Chrétien call for national unity to confront Trump” (Feb. 3): The comity and sense of meaningful partnership displayed by Jean Chrétien and Stephen Harper is somewhat reminiscent of the alliance and true friendship formed between Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter, difficult election campaigns and different parties all the same.
Mr. Ford and Mr. Carter always wanted more significant involvement on many levels from future former U.S. presidents. One imagines Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Harper might hope to succeed in Canada where they could not in the United States.
Mary Stanik Tucson, Ariz.
Out of line
Re “Carney won’t say whether Canada would align trade policy with U.S. as part of USMCA revision” (Jan. 30): U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer has suggested that the current review of our North American free trade agreement result in a closer integration and alignment of our external trade policies. Make no mistake, such “alignment” would mean requiring us to adopt current and future U.S. policies, misguided as they may be.
It’s time, as our Prime Minister has said, to take the sign down and proceed full steam with forming trade, investment and security agreements with other middle-sized economies that, collectively, would have the clout to resist extortion by the United States and other world powers.
Andrew Vanderwal Toronto
Multiple choice
Re “Trump and Ottawa’s take on TACO will determine Canada’s fighter-jet strategy” (Report on Business, Jan. 31): So Donald Trump would fly into a rage if Canada cancelled the remainder of its F-35 order and purchased Swedish Gripens instead. He also wants to make an example of Canada, so we should be prepared to endure whatever he throws at us. What to do?
Mark Carney provided the answer in his excellent speech at Davos: To withstand domination by the world’s great powers, smaller nations should stand together and form new trade alliances, rather than having our trade dependence on them used as a weapon to subordinate us.
Mr. Carney’s speech was just words. He needs to change words into actions, and one of the best ways is to cancel the F-35 order and buy Swedish planes instead. Yes, Mr. Trump would get mad, but no amount of praise, flattery or appeasement would change his policy on Canada.
The Swedish proposal is a good one. I hope our government has the courage to proceed with it.
T.S. Ramsay Guelph, Ont.
NORAD is probably even more important to Canada’s defence than NATO.
NORAD integrates U.S. and Canadian resources and control. When a potential threat to our continent is perceived, the nearest available U.S. or Canadian aircraft are sent to investigate and, if necessary, engage.
Canada’s contribution in fighter aircraft barely matches our share of the task. If we buy fewer F-35s than planned and substitute a less capable aircraft, more U.S. aircraft would be required to patrol over both U.S. and Canadian airspace.
The United States may no longer be a good trade partner, but it will inevitably be a partner – and need Canada – in continental defence. The fighter choice should be about Canadian security, not jobs nor the fleeting satisfaction of sticking a thumb in Donald Trump’s eye.
I believe the F-35 can best defend Canada, the Gripen cannot. If tested, the Gripen would lose the battle.
Philip Bury Edwardsburgh/Cardinal, Ont.
At the source
Re “Why are Canadian arms fuelling foreign conflicts?” (Feb. 3): I hear that Mark Carney is an avid reader. I hope this includes opinions from his wise elders.
Contributors Lloyd Axworthy and Allan Rock make the case clearly: Canada must live up to its idea of itself and its international reputation as a trustworthy middle power by joining all other countries in ensuring our U.S. arms exports are subject to the same rigour as arms exports elsewhere. Too many Canadian-made “components” find their way into the hands of rogue militaries via the United States.
This can be stopped by Bill C-233. I expect the government to support it.
Valerie Endicott Toronto
Tough sell
Re “The good, the bad and the puzzling of Carney’s new GST rebate” (Report on Business, Jan. 30): While any tax credit removal would be unpopular even in five years, there are mitigating factors this time that should make it possible.
The GST credit increase was announced to compensate for the cost and price increases of food and essentials since the pandemic. Inflation has abated now to more reasonable levels, so hopefully future wage gains will increase prosperity and affordability.
It would be no bargain to remove the GST credit increase, but maybe it can be explained as meeting a crisis that has passed.
Ed Dunnett Qualicum Beach, B.C.
Fashion show
Re “Grammys 2026: The best red carpet looks of the night” (Online, Feb. 1): After seeing (seeing through?) Chappell Roan’s garb at the Grammy Awards, may I humbly suggest she make a shopping visit to Mark’s before moving to Saskatchewan this time of year?
Kevin Tibbles Les Éboulements, Que.
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