Letters to the editor, July 26: ‘It would diminish all of us if we restrict immigration to the 'right people,' those whose previous advantages allow easy assimilation'

Globe and Mail

26-07-2025

Re 'Alberta Premier Danielle Smith dismisses, demands apology for Jasper wildfire report' and 'Trump sues Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch for Epstein birthday letter coverage' (July 19): Two of three headlines on Page A3 feature democratically elected politicians complaining about or suing over reports which disagree with their particular narratives.
Apparently the art of the deal and its followers do not abide any type of disagreement whatsoever. Interesting times.
Vicki Nash-Moore Collingwood, Ont.
Re 'A shrinking population is hardly what this country needs right now' (Opinion, July 19): Reducing immigration would not be walling ourselves off from the rest of humanity. I believe the root problem is declining birth rates, which is an affordability problem that should be fixed first.
Using immigration to supplement declining population can create a never-ending cycle. New Canadians face the same economic issues such as access to homeownership, timely health care etc.
Instead we should utilize a planned and selective approach to complement economic growth, fill gaps and ensure positive impacts for both existing and new Canadians.
Joanne O'Hara Oakville, Ont.
An ugly underlying aspect to the immigration discussion: It is clear to me that Pierre Poilievre's 'right people in the right numbers' is a Trump-like signal to his base for more white Christian immigrants and fewer refugees.
We celebrate athletes such as Shai Gilgeous-Alexander, whose family comes from Antigua and Barbuda, and authors such as Esi Edugyan, whose parents are from Ghana. Yet both countries were threatened with a U.S. travel ban; not the right people in the view of the Trump administration.
Most immigrants are not famous, nor are their children. The vast majority are hardworking, law-abiding citizens who love Canada because it was a refuge from hardship elsewhere. In that way, they are similar to those of us whose white forebears left Europe for better lives.
It would diminish all of us if we restrict immigration to the 'right people,' those whose previous advantages allow easy assimilation.
David Steele Saskatoon
Re 'Follow through' (Letters, July 19): Lurking behind a letter-writer's comments about housing refugees only after all Canadians have homes first – 'cold is just as deadly as bombs' – is a surprising rationale, and a troubling one for me in the extreme.
We thankfully live in a war-free country. Almost everyone knows where they will rest their heads at night, comparatively speaking.
I am not unaware of our own homeless populations, a great tragedy. But remedies are sought and often found because we care.
For refugees, trying to survive in a world that seeks to destroy their homes, their lives and their hopes of surviving with peace and optimism is a hell on Earth. As human beings – and Canadians – we have always been our brother's and sister's keepers, no matter where they live.
Indifference to their needs and survival would diminish us all. Surely compassion is borderless.
Joan McNamee Kamloops
My group sponsored Syrian Kurd refugee families that arrived in 2016. When a young couple arrived, joining those already there, I shed tears as I saw 12 family members greeting the newcomers, hugging and kissing.
I cried to myself thinking of my grandparents, who arrived by ship before the First World War, one or two at a time. They all fled the Czarist Russian Empire and built lives for themselves and their families in Montreal.
Earlier this summer, my 'Syrians' invited us to celebrate the arrival of a newly arrived bride with about 30 other at a picnic in the park. It included youngsters born in Toronto. Like my Jewish grandparents, they had been most vulnerable and are now settled Canadians.
Today, Palestinian Gazans are the most susceptible group. Canada recognized that, but gave a cynical invitation.
It's never too late to do better.
Allan Fox O. Ont, Toronto
Re 'The Giller Prize was a rare CanLit success story. Now it might become a casualty of a foreign war' (Opinion, July 19): Giller Prize executive director Elana Rabinovitch has worked tirelessly to promote Canadian literature, for which we should all be grateful. It is suggested that authors such as Omar El Akkad and Madeleine Thien have 'betrayed' Ms. Rabinovich.
How so? They won the Giller in 2021 and 2016, respectively. They could not have predicted Israel's ramped-up war efforts after Oct. 7, 2023.
I find it an absurd notion that Giller winners who speak out against Israel should return their prize money. A literary prize is not hush money.
Anne Hansen Victoria
I would like to ask all the Giller winners who have been boycotting the prize because of its association with Scotiabank: Why, if the bank's money is so tainted, they have not returned their own prize money?
I would also like to know how they justify depriving other Canadian writers of the chance to earn the same large amount of money and get the same boost in sales? The war in Gaza is still going on, so I don't know what this boycott has achieved except to defund the Giller and make all future sponsors think twice about funding a literary prize.
It's a complete shame.
Goldie Morgentaler Professor emerita, department of English, University of Lethbridge
It would indeed be sad if the Giller Prize were to end. But any award that is heavily associated with and financed by a single corporation or wealthy individual is by definition going to be fraught.
If an artist who has benefitted from this prize later finds that the entity behind it has been involved in activities they find morally repulsive, must they muzzle themselves? Why?
I think the real lesson is that important events benefitting the arts cannot be sustainably supported by the private sector. In light of how much benefit comes to Canada from artistic endeavours such as strong Canadian literature, I think this is a clear case where Canada should step up to the plate to support the continuation of the Giller.
Paul Rasmussen Victoria
Re 'I'm not offended when people praise my spoken English' (Opinion, July 19): I also believe in having 'a bit more faith in the better side of human nature' when it comes to clearing up potential cultural misunderstandings. That being said, context is everything.
In 2018, Donald Trump's infamous and profane remarks on nations in the African continent provides background to his remarks on Liberian President Joseph Boakai's 'good English.' This was not an innocent remark; instead, it was offensive and disrespectful, as made clear in his previous comment on Africa and therefore Africans in general.
Pointe finale.
Veena Dwivedi St. Catharines, Ont.
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: [e-mail]