Who To Choose?

While I and many others consider the possibility of a Mark Carney-led Liberal Party, there are some obvious hurdles. While his appearance on The Daily Show, which I wrote about yesterday, may help, according to Leland Cecco, 76% of Canadians in an Abacus poll could not identify him.

But that may change, if letter writers and pundits are any indication of things political. The Star's Linda McQuaig has this to say about Carney:

Among possible contenders for the Liberal leadership, Carney seems the best bet to take on the menacing Donald Trump. Carney is smart, unflappable and has experience dealing with foolish loudmouths. His international stature as a respected former governor of the Bank of England and Bank of Canada might even intimidate the ignorant American bully. 

Unlike conventional central bankers, Carney used his influence to push hard for climate action, serving as UN Special Envoy for Climate and Finance, and pressuring financial interests to divest from fossil fuels. Carney has also condemned “staggering wealth inequalities,” and criticized Canada’s corporate elite for sitting on “dead money” rather than investing its enormous profits in Canada.

Carney ... has actually stood up to the establishment; in 2019, he enraged then-president Trump by advocating scrapping the US dollar as the world’s reserve currency — a reform that would threaten U.S. global economic and political dominance.

Carney has never held elected office (whereas Poilievre has done nothing but hold elected office). So Carney will be compared to political novice Michael Ignatieff, who was crushed in the 2011 federal election. But Ignatieff was a pompous lightweight (he publicly insisted it was George W. Bush’s deep commitment to democracy that motivated him to invade Iraq). Carney is no such fool. 

Letters to the editor reflect some thoughts on Carney after his Daily Show appearance:

When a former central banker walks onto The Daily Show and actually kills it, you’d think we’d celebrate. Instead, critics such as Tonda McCharles dismiss Mark Carney’s viral moment as a low-risk no-show. 

Let’s be clear: comedy is a high-wire act, especially for someone eyeing the Prime Minister’s Office. One awkward pause, one failed joke, and you’re a cringeworthy meme, immortalized on the internet as a loser’s punchline. Given that Carney is a banker fighting the stuffed-suit stereotype, his appearance with Jon Stewart was a revelation. An economist with a spreadsheet mindset stepped into the arena of comedy — and somehow walked away having won the audience’s approval. That’s a big deal.

While Trudeau prorogued and Poilievre complained, Carney showed up with actual substance wrapped in wit. He demonstrated a depth of economic knowledge that went beyond the tax-cut talking points conservatives recycle every election, but without putting everyone to sleep. He framed climate change as a solvable crisis without sounding like a doomsday prophet. And he managed to be progressive without merely parroting a script. That’s leadership without the usual political theatre.

The cynics can sneer all they want. Carney has shown us that maybe, just maybe, the current Canadian political race has been altered. Perhaps Poilievre is no longer a sure thing: progressive Canadian voters now have a real chance to avoid political disaster.

Tony D’Andrea, Toronto

Mark Carney and Jon Stewart appeared to have so much fun sparring about the Canada-U.S. relationship this week on The Daily Show. When asked what he thought about the idea of turning Canada into the 51st state, Carney told Stewart, “You’re attractive, but we’re not moving in with you. It’s not you; it’s us.”

Carney was funny, humble, well-spoken and knowledgeable about Canadian affairs and politics. He displayed his skills as an economist and banker, and I believe he would be the perfect prime minister to deal with President-elect Donald Trump’s massive tariffs. Carney was the governor of the Bank of Canada during the 2008 financial crisis and helped get the United Kingdom through Brexit as governor of the Bank of England from 2013 to 2020.

It was wonderful to see two men so quick on their feet!

Ellie McCaig, Kitchener

Will any of this make a difference in the next federal election? Your guess is as good as mine, but my suspicion is that the predicted decimation of the Liberal Party may be mitigated by a leader who stands in sharp contrast to the shrill, dour, aphoristic and repetitive PP,  a man who seems to take pleasure in cutting down our country, not unlike the shrill schoolmarm who, by accident, receives an invitation to a party and casts a very wet blanket over all the festivities.

Content Warning

You should be advised, even belatedly, that looking upon this picture of Danielle Smith, Don Trump and the always obnoxious Kevin O' Leary can be damaging to the soul. At least it was to mine, surprised as I was to discover that even at my age, I am still capable of darkly imagining the collective fate that should befall them.

O' Leary was there as a kind of amicus curiae of the Trump kangaroo court, offering his 'good offices' to facilitate an American-Canadian economic merger. Smith was there to ostensibly talk up Canada as an energy powerhouse - no need for tariffs on oil and gas.

Moving on from the detritus depicted above, an antidote of sorts to my ravaged psyche arrived in the form of some letters to the editor from real Canadians, a few of which I reproduce below:

Canada must be prepared to shut our doors 

We need to let it be known that we will react immediately if the U.S. Head Fool implements his threats against Canada. The U.S. will be in a nasty position when he does his usual foolish stuff but we need to be ready to immediately shut our doors. This includes our exports of fuel, water, etc … so that Americans realize they made a huge mistake bringing the old, crooked guy back. Stand up Canada, support your governments and make the U.S. understand their mistake.

Chris Andrews, Vaughan, ON

 

Why no comment from Poilievre on Trump’s diatribes?

Threats, insults, and misinformation by Donald Trump towards Canada on a daily basis. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Premier Doug Ford, and Foreign Affairs Minister Melanie Joly have put up a fight for Canada. Meanwhile, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, an insulter and bully to Canadians, curled up cowardly in a corner. Instead of making a meaningful comment, he is busy preparing to go to Trump’s inauguration to suck up to Trump and Elon Musk. I have no doubt whatsoever, that Poilievre, Danielle Smith, and Scott Moe will sell out Canada to Donald Trump. They have the same ideologies as the Republicans — they do not believe in climate change or vaccines; they support religious extremists and conspiracy theories and align themselves with racist groups and personalities like Tucker Carlton. Where are you Poilievre?

Taij Chand, Toronto

And there is this missive from The Globe: 

In the early 1970s, Canada considered diversifying trade relationships away from the United States.

The concern was that the U.S. had undue economic and cultural influence over Canada, which made our great nation vulnerable. The “Third Option” did not materialize and instead free-trade agreements with the U.S., and eventually Mexico, were established. Through these agreements, Canada has become even more reliant on the U.S.

Fast-forward to the present and Donald Trump is threatening significant trade tariffs. We should reconsider the Third Option. We should undertake various actions such as joining the European Union, restarting trade negotiations with Britain, creating a bilateral-trade agreement with Mexico and developing new trade opportunities with other Commonwealth nations and emerging economies in Africa and Asia. If successful, our trade relationships would be diversified.

The best way to insulate the Canadian economy from Donald Trump is to make Canada less reliant on the U.S. for trade.

Lance Alexander Toronto

Oh, I almost forgot to include a picture of yet another rogue at the Trump love fest who, I understand, is a refugee from the woke police in Canada and currently residing in the home of the free and the brave: 

Public Forum Roundup

Over the years, I have been a regular writer of letters to newspapers. My first one, I believe, was when I was about 13, and for the next 50 years or so I had a consistent output. That output has waned in recent years, probably because I no longer have the fire in the belly I had in my younger days, as well as the fact that this blog allows me to exercise my writing muscles on a regular basis.

I still, however, read letters to the editor on a regular basis, and with great interest, sometimes reproducing them here. Many are succinct gems that I hope get people thinking. Today i shall reproduce three of them. The first one especially resonates with me. Although we give happily to a number of charitable causes annually, I have never, to my knowledge, given a penny to hospital fund-raising efforts. The letter encapsulates my reasoning:

Ontario hospitals should not be begging for donations

On Dec 28, there was full page ad in the Star, placed by Lakeridge Health Foundation, soliciting donations towards the purchase of five life-saving devices: Automated External Defibrillators (AED). I pay taxes. Those should be sufficient to equip a hospital in Ontario. That is the bargain between me and the government; tax me and take care of the health and education and general well-being of the citizens of Ontario. If the taxes don’t cover the costs, raise the taxes.

Needed hospital equipment purchases should not require the hospital to put a tin cup on the sidewalk begging for donations.  Perhaps Premier Doug Ford could redirect the $200 vote-buying bribe cheques he has promised us and spend the $3 billion-plus on AEDs. They apparently cost $3,200 each. He could buy a million of them. They could be in every hospital ward, every bus, every subway car, every long-term-care facility, every beer and wine selling grocery store.  Even at the Ontario Place spa, maybe.

Graeme Elliott, Toronto

The ironic tone in the following, dealing with the travails of our current prime minister, especially appealed to me:

Trudeau’s chosen female ministers have failed him

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau must be so disappointed. In 2015, he made international headlines by naming a cabinet that was 50 per cent women. Sadly, every single one turned out to be a dud. After what I can only imagine were heartfelt efforts to position one of them as his successor, they all failed to demonstrate the necessary intelligence, character, and gravitas for the job: Jody Wilson-Raybould, a crown prosecutor who held leadership positions in both Kwak’wala and Canadian governments. Not a team player. Joyce Murray, who made a fortune planting trees. Can’t think outside the box. And Chrystia Freeland, who found common ground with Ontario Premier Doug Ford and defended Liberal trade policies from a Trump attack in 2017, couldn’t see the upside in a few trifling Christmas gifts for all Canadians. The woman simply does not understand politics. Sad. Facing a second Donald Trump presidency, Trudeau and his small circle of like-minded advisers stand alone, grimly shouldering the weight of Canada’s future. On behalf of all Canadian women, I want to apologize for leaving this lonely burden to them.

Catherine Murton Stoehr, North Bay

Finally, a letter about Kevin O'leary, the toad who leaves warts on all he touches:

Kevin O’Leary represents his own interests, not Canada’s

Kevin O’Leary posted on X that he is willing to go to Mar-a-Lago to negotiate on Canada’s behalf to unify Canada and the U.S. O’Leary’s right to negotiate on our behalf exists only in his ego. He is no elected official. In fact, he recently became a citizen of the United Arab Emirates. Not only is there no income tax in the UAE, but there is also no need to file any report on your income. Pack your ego away Mr. O’Leary. You don’t represent anyone’s interest but your own. Remember, we are the true north strong and free.

Bruce Kerr, Toronto

Not a bad cross section of Canadian opinion, eh?

For Love Of Country

 

It seems, at least to me, that this day and age has seen a debasement in the concept of loving and standing by one's country. We see it in the constant derogation of Canada (under Trudeau) by PP, who incessantly insists to us that everything is broken. Indeed, some might be inclined to say that his efforts are in accord with the attempts of the incoming U.S. president to paint Canada in a very negative light. Love of country and grace seem to be singularly absent in PP's makeup.

But of course, PP is a politician, doing everything he can to disaffect Canadians so that he can be our next national 'leader'. More worrisome is those ordinary citizens who seem to see our nationhood as both provisional and transactional. While those people are surely in a minority, my life experience has taught me that bad ideas, if spread and repeated enough times, sometimes become a form of reality.

Take, for example, the following letters that I culled from the National Post, a journal that I almost never read, its extreme right-wing bent an offence to the normal spirit.

‘A small price to pay for the economic benefits’

At his recent meeting with our prime minister, President-elect Donald Trump mused that Canada could become the 51st state. Let’s consider the possible benefits.

Article content

Under the American taxation system, Canadians would get to keep more of their hard-earned cash (no GST holidays needed).

We would finally have a leader who would unwaveringly support the only democracy in the Middle East (and not UNRWA) against the terrorist bullies who battle for Israel’s demise, and a leader who would stand up to the dangerous despots in Russia, China and North Korea and shackle Iran’s nuclear aspirations. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu would be welcomed without fear of being arrested. (The U.S. is not a member of the International Criminal Court.)

Our armed forces would proudly serve with a technologically-advanced and well-funded military.

And our ever-falling loonie would be exchanged for the greenback, which is currently worth Cdn $1.40.

If it means not having cannabis shops on every street corner, that’s a small price to pay for the economic benefits that would accrue to the average Canadian family.

Susan Silverman, Toronto

Canada becoming the 51st U.S. state is a great idea. Given its population of almost 40 million, Canada would have a large block of votes in the electoral college and therefore a large say in picking the president. There would be no worries about tariffs on exports to the U.S., which would allow our economy to flourish. There would be no more worries about the protection of the border, and the costs associated with it. And our military would finally be well-equipped with modern armament.

Article content

It is indeed food for thought, laced with maple syrup.

Roger Cyr, Victoria, B.C.

It is indeed sad to see citizenship reduced to a transactional mentality. I pray that such sentiments will always remain in the minority. 

A Novel Suggestion

In my more fantasy-laden moments, I imagine a response from Canada to Trump's tariff threats that would really get through to the Americans. Since appeasement never works, how about meeting their tactics with some of our own?

Canada needs to review trading relationships

A quick fix to bring Donald Trump’s bullying tactics to heel would be an equivalent export tax on all energy resources and raw materials exported to the United States. [Empahsis mine] Canada is America’s  largest energy source and  number two supplier of nonenergy mineral resources after China. Canada should not cringe in fear of Trump’s tactics of bullying and misinformation or cave in to his demands. We need to use whatever tools we have available to work out a reasonable fair-trade deal that benefits both partners. Without that, it is no longer a trade deal but exploitation and no partnership. Trump will try a workaround to existing agreements and we must be prepared to act in kind.

We also need to review our trading relationships. Expanding our trading relationships with other partners would make us far less susceptible to Trump’s tactics. We must also expand our military capacity. National service and our own military supply chain and sources could create thousands of new jobs across Canada in manufacturing. If we love our country, is it not worth defending it economically and militarily?

Robert Holden, Keswick, ON

Apply Trump’s logic to our illegal gun problem

Countries have been fighting drugs for a very long time. The Opium War was in the 1840s. No one has figured out how to solve the drug problem, including Donald Trump in his first term in office. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau should tell Donald Trump he is putting a 25 per cent tariff on U.S. products until he stops the thousands of guns entering Canada through the United States bringing higher levels of violent crime. Last time I checked, countries are responsible for securing their own borders. This is not something you outsource to another country.

Michael Yaffe, Toronto  

Of course, the above scenarios will never come to pass, but I can dream, can't I?

UPDATED: Vying For The Biggest Santa Hat

Tis the season to be jolly. The question is, who gets to wear the biggest Santa hat, Doug Ford or Justin Trudeau? Since I have already dealt with Doug Ford's attempt at securing the prized possession in a previous post, today I'll look at Justin Trudeau's efforts to reverse-engineer The Grinch and emerge victorious.

Tonda MacCharles writes about the Trudeau Liberals'

....GST two-month “holiday” on so-called essential goods plus a $250 cheque for anyone who earned under $150,000 last year...

 It borrows heavily from the Liberals’ rivals. The Conservatives campaigned on a December sales tax break like this in 2021. (The Liberals opposed it then.) The NDP pitched a similar cut last week. 

One thing is for sure, the 2024 Liberal version carries a hefty price tag of $6.28 billion — according to early calculations — at a time when Canada’s annual deficit, which Justin Trudeau’s government promised would clock in at around $40 billion, is certain to spike.

But after all, this is the season to give, isn't it? However, the Liberal largesse also comes with a big bill:

....the kiddies who get cheaper diapers or Christmas toys for the next two months will be the ones paying the tab plus interest, for years to come.

David Macdonalt, of the Canadian Centre for Policy alternatives, suggests the money could have been put to better use through 'targetted giving':

 Instead of sending $250 to “basically everybody,” Macdonald said the government could have sent $500 or $1,000 to the lowest-earning 30 per cent of workers, or the lower half of workers, and concentrated the help to those most in need of a boost right now.

“Presumably it’s the visibility is what’s important here, more so than necessarily substantially helping folks that are maybe turning to food banks because they can’t afford food.”

Will the Trudeau payout reap the obvious political dividends he is hoping for? Letters to the editor suggest otherwise:

Now the PM is attempting to buy votes

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is taking a page from Premier Doug Ford’s election playbook and attempting to buy votes. A GST tax holiday that will cost $1.6 billion and a working Canadian rebate, for those earning less than $150,000 that is estimated to cost $4.68 billion. Would it not be better to use this money to assist those who cannot afford to eat in restaurants or buy prepared foods and must rely on food banks, and those who are unemployed or retired and financially struggling who are not eligible for the rebate because they are not working Canadians?

Greg Sheehan, Mississauga

 

Debt of Christmas splurge will live on long after its recipients are gone

 The federal Liberal government was projected to incur a whopping $39.8 billion national financial deficit in 2024/25. This was before handing out a Christmas splurge of a $1.6 billion in GST alleviation, plus a $4.68 billion cash handout to most Canadians. To put this in the context of an individual, it is tantamount to someone with enormous credit card debt celebrating the taking out of a cash advance to increase their debt to enable them to go out on a holiday spending spree and whoop it up. There is one significant difference, however. The principle and interest on the credit card debt must be paid off in the near future by the errant borrower. With a national debt already at $1,453 billion our grandchildren will be paying for this largesse many years after we recipients are long gone.

Anthony Moscrop, Willowdale 

Santa is coming, kiddies. As a bonus, all of you get to ultimately decide who deserves to lay claim to his much-coveted head covering.

UPDATE: Seems apt.

H/t Moudakis

Political Leadership Void

In talking to my friend Gary today, I offered the opinion that even though he is the putative next prime minister, PP will not have what it takes to deal with the demented agenda that will in all likelihood be the 'crowning achievement'  of the ape the U.S. chose as their president. Perhaps PP would be well-advised to consider this advice from  Gord Wilson of Port Rowan:

Will Canada’s leadership find the courage to stand up to Trump?

Donald Trump cares little about maintaining good relationships with any country or international organization that opposes his agenda. To be sure, he and his choice of ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra will demand that Canada bow to his trade demands. Our political leadership should remember that their role is to put Canada first, and in response to such demands, advise Trump, for example, that unless he withdraws his trade demands, we will close the Welland Canal to U.S. traffic, cease the export of Quebec Hydro, cease the shipment of oil and gas, cease the shipping of vital Canadian mined minerals, and enforce our 200 mile limit on the East and West Coasts. Canadian water is another commodity that gives Canadian leadership “push back.” The coming months will tell all Canadians if our political leadership can find enough courage to stand up to an elected bully.

"The Evil that Men Do"

While it can be convincingly argued that Justin Trudeau has done many good things during his tenure as prime minister, it is usually the shortcomings of leaders that are remembered. The following letter attests to that fact:

Trudeau has earned his political enemies

.

Current polling indicates Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is nosediving the Liberal party toward a devastating defeat in the coming election, possibly to third party status. Trudeau’s long record of loose promises — his admitted duplicity on proportional representation elections in 2015, his refusal to tax the financial and market assets of the wealthy the way Canadian homes are taxed, his refusal to redirect $18 billion per year in oil and gas subsidies into clean energy, his anemic energy transition support for ordinary Canadians, his willingness to see average Canadians crushed by dizzying interest rate hikes “to fight inflation” rather than regulate the price-gouging corporate executives whose record profits are actually driving the inflation — have all earned him a united front of enemies from across the political spectrum.

It’s telling that Trudeau still refuses the one thing in his power that would prevent a Conservative majority from sweeping in this coming election: enacting Proportional Representation elections (equal representation for every vote, with no vote splitting). Trudeau would rather let Poilievre win absolute control of government with only 40 per cent of the votes, than give up Liberal/Conservative disproportionate control of the political system . It is well past due for the Liberals to call an emergency leadership review and replace Trudeau and his luggage with a progressive team player, like MP Nathaniel Erskine Smith, for 2025. The coming months will tell where the Liberals’ real priorities lie — with the corporate aristocracy, or with the rest of us. 

D’Arcy McLenaghen, Toronto 

For Your Consideration

Okay I confess to being a bit obsessed about certain things:

H/t Moudakis

Meanwhile, Star readers weigh in:

An outrageous, insulting and self-centred waste of our tax dollars

Four ways to mock Doug Ford for trying to buy our fleeting love, Oct. 21

I could feel Heather Mallick’s frustration as I read her article and I agree with everything she said. We taxpayers mustn’t overlook where Ford’s $200 generosity is coming from. It is not coming out of his personal pocket. It is coming out of our tax dollars. So, in effect, he is giving us back our own money. This is an outrageous, insulting and self-centred waste of our tax dollars. We need and deserve to have our taxes spent on necessary services that are designed to help every person in Ontario.

Patricia Steward, East York

We’re donating our pre-election cheques to help the homeless

Doug Ford poised to send out pre-election cheques to 16 million Ontarians, Oct. 16

Premier Doug Ford’s blatant bribe for votes is disgusting, shameless and a very typical of his Progressive Conservative government. Our two-person household will be signing over our two cheques to the Ontario Alliance to End Homelessness. We feel the money will be of more use to those homeless folks Ford tells to “get off your a-s-s and start working like everyone else.” One wonders if homeless folks will even get a cheque, since they don’t have an address. Well done, premier. More than $3 billion spent on bribery, when that money could and should go to health care, education and ending homelessness [emphasis mine]. Priorities, folks!

Nancy Van Kessel, Mississauga

Happy Thanksgiving

To new and long-term readers, the best of the season. 

H/t Greg Perry

And this warning seems appropriate for the times in which we live:

Suddenly, Canadians aren’t so different from Americans

We Canadians have always seen ourselves — rightly or wrongly — as  smarter, kinder, more sensible, more progressive and more forward-thinking than our American neighbours. We watch with a mix of horror and bemusement the three-ring circus American politics has become. Then along came Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre and suddenly we have to ask ourselves “What happened?” His insufferable sloganeering — if I hear “axe the tax” one more time, I think I’ll scream — his aspiration to climb down to the lowest common denominator, and his mean-spirited, schoolyard name calling have somehow appealed to a shockingly large portion of our population. He has increasingly been following the Donald Trump playbook, maybe even trying to “trump” Trump with his outrageous accusations.

Suddenly, we find ourselves not so different from Americans and the social and political mess in which they find themselves. Ironically, we still don’t see ourselves as “them.” We need to open our eyes and search our consciences because at this rate, if things don’t change, it won’t be long.

Michael Bines, Toronto 

Worth Repeating

In my previous post, I wrote about the Ford follies involving luxury spas on Toronto's waterfront. This letter to the editor about the premier's predilection for favouring private interests at the expense of taxpayers is well worth reading.

Public vs. private interests

In 1999, Mike Harris’ Progressive Conservative party sold Ontarians down the river by signing away Highway 407 on a 99-year lease to a private consortium. In the quarter-century since, Ontarians have looked longingly at this asset, which has expanded and runs across an increasingly busy part of the province, as it makes money for foreign shareholders, and costs the people of Ontario dearly in access to transportation options, exorbitant tolls and gridlock.

Last Thursday, Premier Doug Ford’s Conservative government, having sold off Ontario Place for a private, foreign-owned spa on prime public land, watched as the urban forest of mature trees on the site was turned into wood chips to make way for the plans. Earlier this year, Ford paid off another private consortium (The Beer Store) to get out of a contract a year before it was to expire just to get beer into corner stores. Last year, instead of using taxes paid by Ontarians to improve public health care, Ford decided to promote private health care by encouraging use of for-profit clinics in the province.

Is it just me that feels that every time we give the Conservatives the keys to our province they insist on selling it off to private interests and stick it to the taxpayers who should have access to, control over and benefit from these assets?

Brigitte Nowak, Toronto

Tunnel Vision

H/t Moudakis

Continuing with yesterday's theme, Star readers offer their views of Doug Ford's latest scheme:

The idea of a Highway 401 tunnel is ludicrous. It can’t be built quickly enough. It won’t be big enough. The cost-benefit analysis will show it was a bad idea before it started. From an engineering perspective, how will entries and exits be done? How will it be ventilated? A better solution to congestion is to move commercial vehicles to Highway 407, and spend the money on health care and social services.

Grant Baines, Uxbridge, Ont.

How many billions of dollars would a tunnel cost? How many years would a tunnel take to dig? Is there not a better way to spend the money a tunnel would cost, like housing, hospital staff or education? Would the tunnel even help congestion? What about the people who don’t drive or own a car? Do they want their tax dollars spent on more roads? We need to let Premier Doug Ford know we won’t stand for him wasting our tax dollars.

Barbara Eckert, Etobicoke

I remember the Big Dig, when Boston decided to replace a relatively short section of interstate. The effort took 20 years from planning to completion. The cost ballooned to three times the original estimate, and totalled $8.08 billion ($21 billion with inflation today). Traffic was a disaster for over a decade and, as of my most recent visit this summer, traffic is still a disaster. Meanwhile, the tunnels leak. 

John Gavin, Toronto

Ontario should do what most other modern countries with big cities have done and go to high-speed electric rail. Look at Beijing, Tokyo, Paris and London. It would help the entire province, not just the 50 kilometres across the top of Toronto, and it helps to solve our emissions problem at the same time. 

Hugh Holland, Huntsville, Ont.

All of the above letters employ both reason and judgement. As such, expect their sentiments to be completely ignored by our current provincial government.

The Erosion Of Local Democracy

The dog days of summer often offer opportunities for unscrupulous governments to slip something by the people. With the focus more on partying than politics, unpopular measures can be enacted with minimal consequences, at least that was likely the thought of Doug Ford and his cronies here in Ontario.

After his retreat from the Greenbelt incursions he had promised to his developer friends, the premier has to find ways to atone for his betrayal. One part of his penance is to remove impediments to their schemes.

A provincial law change that curtailed third-party groups’ ability to appeal development decisions has left environmental and ratepayer groups saying they’ve been silenced in a move that puts developer interests ahead of citizen concerns.

Ontario residents can no longer appeal development decisions at the Ontario Land Tribunal — a quasi-judicial body designed to adjudicate planning and other land disputes — after the Doug Ford government introduced legislation that removes the ability of third-parties such as ratepayer groups or environmental groups to do so.

The province says the changes to the third-party appeal rights in the Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act (Bill 185), which passed in June, will “help communities get quicker planning approvals for housing projects.”

But this arrack on citizens' rights, contrary to the plan, has not gone unnoticed, as evidenced by these letters from concerned residents of this province. 

With my community, I was part of an Ontario Joint Board hearing (now known as the Ontario Land Tribunal) that successfully protected source water and endangered species from a gravel mining proposal on Mount Nemo in Burlington, Ont. We hired independent experts to make our case, and the evidence we presented was instrumental in the board’s decision to deny the quarry. As citizens, we had real stake in the outcome. Our well water, air quality and surrounding environment were at risk. Removing a community’s right to participate threatens to remove decision maker’s access to the on-the-ground knowledge and concerns of locals. Developers have the right to appeal local government decisions to the OLT. Taking away citizen’s equal rights encourages poorer planning and riskier development. The Cutting Red Tape to Build More Homes Act (Bill 185) bolsters corporate dominance, and renders the democratic voice of the people mute.

Sarah Harmer, Burlington

Reporter Noor Javed’s excellent article about new rules barring OLT third party appeals illustrates how our democratic rights are being trampled. The anger is growing daily in this region about Premier Doug Ford’s hypocritical statements about “governing for the people” as precious farmland and natural spaces are being squandered and lost. Our community of Ball’s Bridge and Little Lakes Road in southwestern Ontario has invested years of time and thousands of dollars to try to protect a natural area well loved by the public. We have been abandoned by our local council and have now been abandoned by the provincial government.

Rebecca Garrett, Goderich, Ont.

Bill 185 denies citizens groups from speaking up to protect our precious places. Is this this fair? Is this democratic? Absolutely not. We must fight for our right to be heard!

Wendy Hoernig, Goderich, Ont.

Since the enactment of Bill 185, the right of citizen groups to influence, challenge or contest planning decisions pushed by developers has been stripped away. This egregious action continues to erode our civil society and our democratic process. This seems to be the unspoken Tory agenda. We are “Open for Business” but only for those who are developers. This is hardly “a government for the people.” The worst kind of hypocrisy is to claim citizens are holding up development through appeals when the data shows that many of the appeals recorded over the past decade are by the developers themselves. Shame on the Ontario Conservatives for the their attack on democracy. Shame on MPP Jill Dunlop for supporting this. Bill 185 must be repealed.

David Jeffery, Tiny, Ont.

A somnolent citizenry is something that governments who are "for the people" in name only count on. One hopes that those who refuse to sleep are able to get some much needed traction here.

 

Which Angel Will It Be?

I awoke from a dream this morning in which it seemed I was being registered in a concentration camp, filled with forms and regulations that had to be filled out and followed. As unpleasant as it was, the dream was mercifully short.

With the dream in mind, I began thinking about how easy it is to debase and dehumanize people. History and contemporary events readily bear that out. But what about the opposite? How difficult is it to ennoble people, raise their hopes for a better day, and, in general, appeal to the better angels of their nature?

At times it seems easy. I recall a day in 2015 where I felt inspiration and hope after the long dark night of Stephen Harper's rule. It was the day that Trudeau and his team walked to Rideau Hall to be sworn in with the promise of different and better things ahead.. But subsequent events, beginning with the Prime Minister breaking his vow on electoral reform and the reappearance of traditional Liberal arrogance, frayed those strands of hope over subsequent years.

Americans, it seems to me, are now at a similar juncture. After years of relentless denigration, debasement and violent incitements engineered by Don Trump, they now have an opportunity to embrace a new path which, one hopes, will prove less illusionary than the Trudeau one. That path is the one being laid out by Kamala Harris and Tim Walz.

And judging by reports, there is a real hunger for their message.

Kamala Harris and her running mate, Minnesota’s governor, Tim Walz, continued their swing-state tour with rallies in rural Wisconsin and Detroit, Michigan, on Wednesday, that the campaign said brought out more than 10,000 people each.

 In Eau Claire, a north-western Wisconsin city less than two hours from Minneapolis and St Paul, Minnesota, the rally drew attendees from both states – and 12,000 people in total, the campaign said. The Detroit rally on Wednesday night drew 15,000 supporters in another crucial swing state, the Harris campaign told reporters. Walz called it “the largest rally of the campaign” so far.

The big Detroit crowd repeatedly chanted: “We’re not going back,” Democrats’ counter to Trump’s anti-abortion politics and “make America great again” slogan.

 Attendees in Wisconsin said they were enthusiastic about seeing a Harris and Walz ticket. “I’m elated,” said Lori Schlecht, a teacher from Minnesota who said she was excited about Walz given his background in public education – Walz was a public school teacher before he was elected to the US House of Representatives in 2006. “Minnesota is blessed to have him, and I’m glad to see him at the national level. He is authentic and real – he’ll get shit done.”

When given the opportunity, I think people crave authenticity, not the faux kind peddled by Trump and his people who rely, not on inspiring people, but provoking the worst angels of their nature. And judging by letters to the editor, Canadians are feeling the same hope:

In a plot twist worthy of a political thriller, Americans have just been given a chance to save themselves by choosing to do what’s right and no longer defaulting to the lesser evil. For the first time in a long time, American democracy appears to be working. Presidential candidate Kamala Harris has chosen Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, a previous social studies teacher, as her Democratic running mate. Consider the symbolism: a woman of colour and a teacher teaming up to challenge the re-election of Donald Trump, the reigning champion of insurrectionist chaos.

Walz brings to the table an educated notion that co-operation, not competition, is humanity’s evolutionary secret. This represents the clash of real humanistic values versus the phoney, weird MAGA values of Trumpist populists. This isn’t just a choice between red and blue. It’s a choice between reality and reality TV.  Let the “first Walz” for re-establishing credibility and decency in American democracy begin.

Tony D’Andrea, Toronto 

... In Walz, Harris has found a real mensch, a man who is as easy to work with as Donald Trump is the opposite. Walz can out-folksy the populism types, and he’s the real deal when it comes to wanting to make life better for working-class and poor families. 

Ron Charach, Toronto

We all await with bated breath which version of human nature the American people will choose.