Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks to troops at Fort York Armoury, June 9.Arlyn McAdorey/Reuters
ROI
Re “‘Nation-building’ projects should also reflect Canadian values” (June 10): As a registered nurse who has practiced in both the United States and Canada, I would never trade our imperfect but equitable universal health care for the ragged patchwork quilt of American health care that leaves many with no coverage whatsoever. We should act to strengthen the health care system that sustains us all.
As a health care worker with a deep concern for planetary health, I also echo the concern that nation-building must be undertaken by investing in programs that make people healthier. Building more pipelines would add to our carbon emissions and worsen climate change, darkening our chances for overall well-being and a healthy future.
Agnes Black RN; New Westminster, B.C.
Canada accounts for less than 2 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. While we should do our part to reduce emissions, I do not believe halting pipeline projects will prevent wildfires or significantly change global outcomes, especially while countries such as China and India continue expanding coal use.
Pipelines are the safest and most efficient way to transport the oil and gas our society still depends on. Until a reliable, affordable, large-scale alternative to fossil fuels exists – and we are nowhere close – oil and gas will remain essential. Cutting off pipeline infrastructure wouldn’t stop demand, just shift transportation to rail or truck, which are riskier and more carbon-intensive.
Wildfires are caused by a combination of factors: lightning, human carelessness, forest mismanagement and climate trends. Suggesting that pipelines “bring fires” seems to ignore the complexity of the issue and undermines serious conversations about adaptation, fire prevention and energy transition.
Kevin Kobes Lloydminster, Alta.
Columnist André Picard advocates selection of nation-building projects to strengthen medicare and extinguish HIV-AIDS, in accordance with the Canadian values described in Mark Carney’s 2021 book Value(s).
I agree, but first we should have major projects that contribute to national prosperity and economic resiliency, while respecting Indigenous reconciliation and climate change. Bottom line: There is a price attached to solidarity, fairness, responsibility, resilience, sustainability, dynamism, humility and even compassion. Virtue-signalling is morally vacuous and valueless until we enable ourselves to put our money where our mouth is.
As Mr. Carney also says, we can’t redistribute what we don’t have.
Ellen Anderson Summerside, PEI
Help!
Re “Carney lays out defence boost, says era of U.S. dominance over” (June 10): The obsession with NATO’s 2-per-cent defence spending target ignores another global responsibility: foreign aid as a share of national income.
If we want to build a safer, more stable world, we should prioritize lifting people out of poverty, not just boosting defence budgets. Countries such as Sweden, Luxembourg and Norway routinely exceed the United Nations’ target of 0.7 per cent of gross national income for aid. Canada, though still falling short at between 0.34 and 0.38 per cent, gives a much higher share than the United States, which contributes less than 0.24 per cent, and that number is set to fall even further under the Trump administration.
If NATO members matched defence rhetoric with real investment in global development, they would be far more effective in addressing and reducing the root causes of conflict and creating lasting security.
I thought that was the end goal anyway. Am I wrong?
Timothy Kwiatkowski London, Ont.
Come on over
Re “Carney should know it’s way too soon to invite Modi to Canada” (June 7): I thought Mark Carney was a Blue Liberal in the tradition of Paul Martin, but he is doing what Stephen Harper recommended recently regarding India.
Narendra Modi’s attitude toward Sikhs is part of his vision of Hindu chauvinism, which targets minorities. His repression in Muslim-majority Kashmir flows from the same vision.
Mr. Modi must be mighty pleased that Canada seems to be disregarding not just his interference in Canada, but also his repressive policies and actions, including toward the press.
Masud Sheikh Oakville, Ont.
Canada’s G7 invitation to Narendra Modi has understandably generated debate, given the allegations linking Indian agents to violence on Canadian soil. These accusations must be taken seriously, but it is important to remember the facts have yet to be determined in court.
As host, Canada faces the challenge of balancing bilateral concerns with India and broader international responsibilities. The G7 is a forum for the world’s largest economies and leading democracies to address global issues. India, as the world’s largest democracy and fifth-largest economy, is an important partner in this context.
By inviting Mr. Modi, I believe Canada is not ignoring unresolved bilateral issues, but rather recognizing they should not overshadow the G7’s multilateral purpose. Canada is a strong supporter of multilateral dialogue and a rules-based international order.
Engaging India at the G7 is consistent with these values and ensures the summit remains relevant and effective in today’s interconnected world.
Stewart Beck Former Canadian high commissioner to India; North Vancouver
Ask for more
Re “Industry Minister Joly signals action on steel dumping into Canada coming” (Report on Business, June 7): Please forgive my failing memory, but aren’t these now foreign-owned steel companies – presently criticizing the government over the lack of tariffs on steel dumping to support the floor on domestic prices – the same group that, a few decades ago, admonished the government of the day for interfering with the global market by restricting foreign ownership of critical infrastructure industries?
Stephen Halman Toronto
Easy AI
Re “Some university professors say AI is here to stay, so students should learn how to use it”(June 4): I thought the point of going to school and receiving an education was so students would be able to understand complex language, by looking up the meaning of words so they can converse in the terminology of their chosen discipline of study.
In the future, are people going to walk around asking artificial intelligence to translate everything for them, because they are too lazy to learn the meaning of words, concepts and issues?
Kim Patrick O’Leary Vancouver
Protest song
Re “For Trump, the L.A. protests are an opportunity to wield power and spread fear” (June 10): It was 55 years ago when the Ohio National Guard was called to Kent State University where, on a U.S. campus peacefully protesting the war in Vietnam, four young people were shot dead by guardsmen.
Soon after, Neil Young wrote: “Tin soldiers and Nixon coming / We’re finally on our own / This summer I hear the drumming; Four dead in Ohio.”
Will the lyrics need to be altered? “Tin soldiers and Trump coming / How many dead in greater L.A.?”
Heather MacAndrew Victoria
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