Letters to the editor, May 21: ‘As predictable as the sunrise: an early elimination of the Leafs … and the election of another Liberal government'
Re 'Separate out' (Letters, May 16): So now we have Preston Manning, still with matches in hand, suggesting that the forest fire he's tried to light can best be contained with Danielle Smith's referendum backfire strategy.
Here's hoping that strategy backfires.
Steve Pedretti Toronto
I was pleased to read the sensible comments regarding Alberta separation by Jason Kenney and ATCO CEO Nancy Southern; much less so those of Preston Manning, who attempts a firefighting metaphor to justify Danielle Smith's words and actions.
But firefighters would never deliberately make it easier for a fire to start in the first place. They would have no hesitation in saying that, after all, their goal is to put it out.
Jamie Syer Mountain View County, Alta.
A letter-writer from Saskatchewan asks if he is an 'owner' of Alberta. I say yes, and so is every other Canadian.
Canada financed Alberta's development and connected it to the rest of the world, importing people and exporting its bountiful resources. All Canadians, through their elected representatives, would have to agree to any change to Alberta's status as a province within the federation.
Until then, nobody's going anywhere.
Jeremy Klein Ottawa
Re 'Canada Post receives strike notice, workers set to walk out on Friday' (Report on Business, May 20): Here we go again, another strike that seems to ignore the seriousness and causes of the situation Canada Post faces going forward.
Times, technologies and business models change all the time, and neither Canada Post nor the Canadian Union of Postal Workers have dealt with the problem in a timely fashion. I think the reality is that we do not need home delivery, and we probably don't need deliveries more than twice a week.
Shift and work flexibility are likely required, along with a timeline to either adapt successfully or wind up the business. We cannot afford the current system.
Richard Dean Sidney, B.C.
Re 'Mark Carney's bulky and performative cabinet' (May 14): What is considered 'performative' seems to be the 'identity politics' of 'reinstituted ministers responsible for women and gender equality, seniors, children and youth.'
As the term 'performative' is defined as something 'not sincere but intended to impress someone, prove something is true,' might the trade- and commerce-heavy cabinet also demonstrate the current desperate desire to exhibit a new concept of 'economy-signalling?'
Chester Fedoruk Toronto
Re 'The new math – the Carney math – of the new government" (Report on Business, May 16): The new cabinet is referred to as 'bloated' because there are 28 ministers and 10 junior ministers.
Does it matter what we call them? If there weren't 'junior ministers,' would there not have to be 'senior associate assistants' or some such?
If Mark Carney had named only 20 ministers, would that be 'lean?' Doesn't the same work still have to get done?
This debate reminds me of the old story about the guy buying a pizza: When the cook asks if he wants it cut into eight pieces, the fellow says, 'Oh, I'm not that hungry. Better cut it in four.'
Bob Rafuse Beaconsfield, Que.
Yes, it looks like the old Ford Model T, same as before. But let's give Canadians an opportunity to open up the hood for themselves: There is a brand new engine inside.
Let newly elected Mark Carney, with experience in crisis management, select the people he feels he needs.
Robert Marcucci Toronto
I recall some years ago visiting the British cabinet war rooms under Whitehall in London.
The war cabinet had five chairs at the table. Just saying.
A.S. Brown Kingston
As predictable as the sunrise: An early elimination of the Leafs from playoff contention, with solemn promises of big changes to come, and the election of another Liberal government – with solemn promises of big changes to come.
Even with a change of 'coaches' and the optimistic prospect of renewal, many of us pretend it will be different. But I can see it coming a mile away: the myopic focus on individual stats, or the convening of a comically wonky cabinet.
I am now inured to the idea of such predictable mediocrity deriving from two groups who never seem to manage to equal the sum of their component parts. We might be fooled yet again, but I think the certainty of knowing the ultimate inadequacy of both teams makes the eventual failure oddly reassuring.
Dave McClurg Calgary
Re 'After another Leafs playoff failure, let The Core Four era end' (Sports, May 20): I am not upset that the Leafs lost Game 7, it's that I am disappointed at how they played.
Laurie Kochen Toronto
I don't pretend to be a hockey mastermind, but I have wondered for several years why the Leafs haven't gotten rid of one or more of the Core Four. In spite of the brilliance of each player separately, their collective radiance hasn't jelled.
I was around the last time the Leafs won the Stanley Cup in 1967. It was a disappointing moment for a young Habs fan to watch the great George Armstrong hoist the vessel and parade it around the arena.
Things have changed hundreds of times since then, but the definition of failure remains doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. The Leafs should jettison that 'wisdom' and trade or buy out a couple of the Core Four.
A move like that would cause the entire bench to give its collective head a hard wake-up shake.
Nancy Marley-Clarke Cochrane, Alta.
My late dad George adored the Buds. Family first, the Leafs a close second.
Growing up in the 1950s, George's father was an academic type who couldn't understand the infatuation with the Leafs. So, logically, his father thought it would be good to take him to a game to see for himself it wasn't anything special.
I'm glad my Dad didn't see fans throwing jerseys at Game 7. Frustration sure, but that's just disrespectful to all involved. Shame on them.
Squeezing the sticks, melting under pressure: Yes, but that is a common thing and only the eventual champion can say they overcame these natural tendencies. I believe the Leafs will get there sometime soon, and it will be sweet.
Can't wait. Love to the Leafs, love to Dad.
Roger Wright Tokyo
With the Leafs eliminated yet again, have they announced the date that ticket prices will be hiked for next season?
Ian Campbell 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
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBC
19 minutes ago
- CBC
'We are very nimble': Calgary mayor keeps door open to G7 white hatting
With a little more than a week to go before world leaders arrive in Kananaskis, Alta., for the G7 summit, Calgary Mayor Jyoti Gondek said she is ready to continue the city's white hat ceremony tradition if logistics allow. "We are happy to white hat any of the dignitaries that are coming to town," Gondek said in an interview Friday. "We have been patient as the government has been figuring out their plans, and as dignitaries are determining how they will be traveling in and through our city." On Wednesday, a Tourism Calgary spokesperson said that "given the complexity around security and the event, at this time, there are no plans for our team to conduct a white hat ceremony for G7." Alberta's ministry of tourism and sport also said it's not planning a ceremony for the G7. Federal organizers with the G7 haven't responded to requests for comment. The Smithbilt cowboy hat has long been presented to visitors as a symbol of the city's hospitality. In 2002, then-Calgary mayor Dave Bronconnier greeted G8 leaders on the Calgary airport tarmac, including former U.S. president George W. Bush and former French president Jacques Chirac. Gondek emphasized the significance of the gesture. "We are known for our hospitality and our volunteerism and our ability to make people feel so welcome when they visit our city," Gondek said. "It's a really good symbol of who we are." Unclear which leaders will travel through Calgary While there's currently no ceremony planned, Gondek confirmed she is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Mark Carney and said she's awaiting further guidance from officials. "We are very nimble and responsive to whatever the situation may be. And if there's an opportunity to do something bigger and more formal, obviously we will be engaging with any partners that we can," she said. Asked if she would be open to white hatting all G7 leaders, including U.S. President Donald Trump amid ongoing trade tensions, Gondek said any such plans would depend on travel logistics and who actually passes through Calgary. "I can't deal in hypotheticals, but as opportunities come up, we'll definitely evaluate them," she said. The G7 summit in Kananaskis is set to run from June 15 to 17 and has been referred to by officials as one of the most complex domestic security operations a country can undertake, with thousands of personnel deployed across the region. Gondek said the city has been working closely with the Calgary Police Service to ensure any traffic detours that need to be put into place are being done as quickly as possible. She also noted the airport tunnel's closure from June 15 to 18. "We are advising all employees, all travelers, anyone going to businesses in that vicinity that you won't have access to the tunnel," she said. "There's [also] a lot of motorcade drills that are happening in the city right now. So it's best to give yourself a little bit of extra time." Officials from the United States, France, Germany, Japan, the United Kingdom, Italy and Canada, as well as the European Union, are scheduled to attend this year's summit.
Globe and Mail
37 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
The party is over. It's time to embrace a postparty system of governance
David Berlin is an author, the former editor of the Literary Review of Canada and the founding editor of The Walrus magazine. He led The Bridge Party of Canada, which ran in the 2016 federal election. With uncanny prescience, as though peering into a crystal ball, America's first president, George Washington, anticipated and warned against the rise of the 45th and 47th U.S. president, Donald Trump. In his Farewell Address to the Nation, published in 1796, Washington predicted that 'sooner or later the chief of some prevailing faction, more able or more fortunate than his competitors, turns this disposition to the purposes of his own elevation on the ruins of public liberty.' Such a chief will not have attained power illegitimately – by coup d'état or secession – but by the usual shenanigans which pave a political party's path to glory. But Washington is very clear about where the fault lies: It lies not with the chief but with the 'spirit of party' which inevitably produces such a leader. The villain is the party system which 'agitates the community with ill founded jealousies and false alarms, kindles the animosity of one part against another, foments occasional riots and insurrection and opens the door to foreign influence and corruption.' The only way to avoid the rise of a leader inclined in the direction of a 'frightful despotism' is to prevent the 'spirit of party' from ever taking hold. Had he been around these days, America's founding father would have undoubtedly railed against the facile notion that parties and party leaders do no more than mirror, reflect and represent underlying societal tensions and differences. They do no such thing. Parties exacerbate and exploit such differences. Unlike virtually all other institutions, the party system thrives by dividing. It is polarizing by design. It should perhaps be noted that the invidious 'spirit of party' does not necessarily apply equally to every party system, at least not with the same force. The augmented Westminster model which Canadians have proffered, and the rise of a multiparty system, inoculated Canada from the full impact of a crazy-making polarization which is now bringing America close to a constitutional crisis. In Canada, throughout history, the two major parties differed very little on crucial questions. Their conception of power was almost identical. Both parties treated patronage as the lifeblood of the party, both traded favours for votes. For a long time, both parties respected one another's accomplishments. But such mutual respect is no longer the case. Canada, today, is far more vulnerable to the poison of partisan politics than many Canadians suspect. Consider that in the past election, the difference between Mark Carney's Liberals, who received 8,564,200 votes, and Pierre Poilievre's Conservative Party, which clocked in at 8,086,051 was 2.4 per cent. And it is not at all clear that the relations between the Liberals and the Conservatives are all that much better than the relations between Democrats and Republicans in the United States. Editorial board: Democracy is messy, and that's a good thing But even if Canada manages to resist the full force of what Quebec City mayor Joseph Cauchon, in 1865, called the 'miserable spirit of party,' and even if we manage to work around Mr. Trump's tariffs and threats and somehow survive the new world disorder which the current American administration is disseminating, there is still a good argument to be made for undertaking efforts to get us over political parties – to get us to a postparty system of governance. Many young Canadian activists are designing and experimenting with sophisticated and scalable manners of reviving versions of direct democracy. Vancouver-based Ethelo, for example, is developing a consensus-building platform which invites users to vote on granulated issues, challenge one another and review unexplored assumptions. Users are given ample opportunity to consider issues which are flagged by one party or another and those which are summarily ignored or buried by campaigns. Votes on the platform are 'weighted' as a display of each voter's priorities. The results are tabulated to produce 'the people's platform,' which is not a poll or survey but the highest attainable level of consensus at a particular time. The published platform may serve as a far better indication of where our 'centre' resides than the amorphous and unanchored centre currently in use. In 2016, I registered a new federal political party called The Bridge Party of Canada which was intended to introduce the 'People's Platform' as a first step toward a richer form of democracy. Though a federal party, The Bridge sought to attain official standing for a consensus-building stage in advance of federal, provincial and local elections. On the hustings, I spoke with many young Canadians who raged against a party's treatment of voters as numbers. Young people said they were weary of manipulative party campaigns that dumb down the electorate and reduce a rich inventory of issues to one or two wedges. Both young and older electors expressed disgust with the reductions of the public to consumers who care about nothing but the price of eggs. To many voters, it seems that far more serious engagement and participation in the decision-making process would be inspiring – a rising tide that would lift all boats. There are literally hundreds, if not thousands, of democracy-enhancing initiatives. Some are non-profits. Many are housed in universities in Canada, the U.S., the U.K., Belgium, Germany and elsewhere. None with which I am familiar are ready for prime time. But it makes a lot of sense for Canada to establish, participate and support ongoing experimentation. Would a centre that funds, integrates and co-ordinates disparate efforts to decrease party dominance not be a thoughtful way of responding to Donald Trump's taunts, threats and tariffs? And given the state of liberal democracy in the West, are we not right to assume that the world is awaiting a new model and that this model could be Canada's gift to posterity? Democracy is not about nation-building. It is first of all a process by which settlers and Indigenous populations living under autocratic rule become voters, voters become citizens who, by resisting the centrifugal force which tears them apart, become a people. Parties may have a place in the process, but they cannot be permitted to monopolize the field.
CBC
41 minutes ago
- CBC
Birth records will be key in Alberta's new ban on female trans athletes, regulations show
Alberta has revealed how its new ban, prohibiting transgender athletes from competing in amateur female sports divisions, will be enforced. The supporting regulations for the Fairness and Safety in Sport Act, released this week, signal a major shift in how gender in sport will be governed in Alberta when the legislation comes into force this September. The regulations detail how an athlete's gender will be proven, documented and potentially challenged. It also establishes a formal complaints process that would allow Albertans to question who has the right to compete as a female. Under the new policy, schools, universities and sports clubs will be required to bar transgender women and girls from competition, and — in the event of a complaint — investigate an athlete's sex by examining their birth records. The regulations will also require schools and sporting organizations to report any eligibility complaints — and the results of each challenge — to the government. From baseball and boxing to ringette and gymnastics, the act deems transgender women ineligible to compete in nearly 90 sports organizations in Alberta. The act — which applies to athletes 12 years and older — also supports the expansion and creation of "mixed gender" divisions, where numbers warrant. Alberta's United Conservative Party government says the changes will protect the integrity of female athletic competitions by ensuring women and girls have the opportunity to compete in "biological female-only divisions." The rules "will level the playing field," and prevent athletes who were born female from harm, Andrew Boitchenko, Minister of Tourism and Sport, said in a statement. Critics have described the pending ban as a discriminatory attack on transgender competitors. A question of quitting Mark Kosak, CEO of Alberta Colleges Athletic Conference, said the legislation will end up pushing athletes out of Alberta. The ACAC is one of the close to 90 organizations impacted by the changes. "I think they'll leave, they'll go to another conference or another province, they'll go somewhere where this restriction doesn't apply and they don't have this concern and that's unfortunate," he said. "What I can almost predict is that a transgender athlete will feel somewhat threatened to stay in Alberta." The province has suggested leagues create co-ed divisions, but Kosak said that would be too costly and require more facilities, coaches and officials. Alberta sports organizations will need to create and implement eligibility policies by Sept. 1. Leagues and educational institutions will be required to track each athlete's gender at birth. Linda Blade, a coach and former president of Athletics Alberta, has been a vocal supporter of the new ban. She said the legislation will provide much-needed clarity to sport administrators across the province. She hopes other jurisdictions will follow suit and adopt regulations that keep female-born athletes in a league of their own. She said the policy is not meant as an attack on trans people, but is designed to protect women and girls and their right to compete. "It's not anti trans, it's not anti-anything. It's pro-women." Gender challenges At the time of registration, an athlete or their guardian will be required to confirm in writing that the athlete qualifies under the law to play in a female league, according to the regulations. If that claim is not believed, a formal challenge can be made in writing to the board for the sports division. The athlete, or their guardian, will then be asked to provide the board with a birth registration document detailing their assigned sex at birth. A birth registration document includes the person's sex at birth. Unlike a birth certificate, the sex listed on a birth registration document cannot be changed. Under the rules, boards of those nearly impacted organizations are required to report any challenges regarding eligibility to the Minister of Tourism and Sport within three business days. Boards must also report the results of the challenge within 30 days. It is expected that challenges will be resolved within a 30 business-day period, the province said. Athletes can continue to compete while an investigation is ongoing. If their birth records show they are not eligible, they will be immediately prohibited from competition. The province says boards will be empowered to impose "reasonable sanctions" against anyone who launches a challenge in "bad faith." Such sanctions may include written warnings or code of conduct violations, according to the province. Debate over the inclusion of transgender athletes in female sports has been a highly charged issue in recent years. Florence Ashley, an assistant professor in the Faculty of Law at the University of Alberta, said the regulations are purposefully vague. Ashley said the lack of details on how challenges will be managed opens the door for changes to be made quietly and "on the fly." The new rules demonstrate a dangerous shortsightedness, Ashley said. Ashley said the government has relied on the "politics of fear" to engineer a "moral panic" over fairness in sport and a false premise that trans women have a competitive advantage. Transgender women will be "harmed immensely" by the policy, along with female athletes who are not trans, Ashley said. Instead of fairness in athletics, the ban will foster discrimination, harassment, fear and false challenges, Ashley said. "Even if that's not the intent, that will be the effect." Allison Hadley, a trans woman who competes as an amateur athlete, said the ban will be harmful to people in a broad range of demographics, including children and youth. Hadley, born and raised in Edmonton, played rugby for nine years before competing in cross-country skiing. She stopped competing last year due to the pending ban. She fears she will never return to the sport. "There's a lot of extra steps for trans people in everyday life as-is, so this is just another one that's designed to get us to quit," she said.
