British Prime Minister Theresa May speaks during a confidence vote debate on Jan. 16, 2019, after Parliament rejected her Brexit deal.HANDOUT/Reuters
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com
..................................................................................................................................
The disUnited Kingdom
Re The Brexit Farce Just Got Turned Up To 11 (Jan. 16): Reading your latest editorial on Brexit reminded me of the ending to Thelma and Louise, where the principals are in a convertible at the edge of a cliff. They have to make a choice between giving themselves up (common sense) or driving off the edge (crazy).
A spoiler alert for those who haven’t seen the movie: They chose the second option. Joined hands and hit the accelerator.
Andrew Baker, Burlington, Ont.
............................
Theresa May has my utmost sympathy. The British PM is stuck in an impossible situation, caught between irreconcilable forces, facing wave after wave of criticism, little of it constructive.
Brexit is too important for the future of the British people to be resolved by politicians more interested in their own careers (Boris Johnson is a prime example) than in the welfare of their fellow citizens. Jobs, lives, futures are hanging on this.
Leave or Remain, the decision has to reflect the will of at least 60 per cent of the people or the disUnited Kingdom will continue to tear itself apart. A second referendum – this time, with the people actually knowing what is at stake – is the only way to resolve this, one way or the other.
Anna Richards, Edmonton
............................
With the defeat of Theresa May’s Brexit plan, I wonder if Canadians should also be prepping for a hard Brexit. I am going to start by stockpiling my favourite U.K. marmalade.
Duncan Bury, Ottawa
Anyone Ford wants
Re Ford Calls OPP Top Job A ‘Political Appointment’ And Says He Can Choose Anyone He Wants (Jan. 15): The Progressive Conservative Ontario government of William Davis established an Office of Senior Appointments in what was then the Civil Service Commission. Its mandate was to ensure that senior public service positions were filled by the best qualified individuals available. The jobs were vetted by a committee of senior deputy ministers, advertised, and senior officials participated in the hiring process.
At one point, I was acting for my supervisor. Reviewing one hiring process, I encountered an application from an individual engaged by the PC Party federally. He said in his cover letter that he looked forward to enjoying the job in question, “as discussed.”
Since the hiring had not begun, and since he seemed to lack most if not all of the listed qualifications for the position, I contacted him to find out what he meant. He was blunt: He understood the party wanted him to get the job.
I had understood the whole process existed to prevent this – but was I quite sure? I got off the phone PDQ and called the Premier’s office, where a very senior civil servant told me bluntly to tell the applicant to (as closely as I can recall): “Forget it. The whole reason this process exists is to prevent exactly that kind of appointment. And if that’s his attitude, he isn’t qualified, whoever he is!”
I am greatly saddened by the apparent change in Ontario, and the move away from a merit-based system to one based on … what exactly? The sheer greed of the power to decide?
Mary C. Corbett, Picton, Ont.
............................
The good news for Ontario is that there is absolutely no evidence its Premier is a puppet of the Kremlin. The bad news is that Doug Ford nevertheless appears increasingly willing to follow the U.S. President’s approach to leadership.
Naming a family friend as OPP Commissioner is straight out of Donald Trump’s playbook. Fortunately for Ontario, whereas Mr. Trump’s presidency depends on the support of Republicans willing to put their party ahead of their country, we have every reason to believe that our Progressive Conservatives, in due course, will acknowledge their mistake and honourably correct it.
Scott Gardiner, Toronto
Distracted walkers
Re Cellphone Jail (letters, Jan. 16): A letter writer suggests confiscating cellphones from distracted drivers. A better idea would be to take them away from any pedestrian using one while crossing the street. People need to remember they are responsible for their own safety when crossing, and do it as quickly as possible – not be (as they so often are in Ottawa) slow, rude and self-absorbed when crossing. I was taught to look left and right, and then cross if it is safe to do so. People just step off curbs assuming someone else is responsible for their safety.
Karen Genge, Ottawa
Not impressed
Re Justice, Indigenous Affairs And Veterans All Set For New Leadership (Jan. 15): Seamus O’Regan – known more for being a friend of the PM and vacationing with him on the Aga Khan’s island than for effective leadership – served as minister of Veterans Affairs for 17 months with little distinction. He is now moving to the onerous task of Minister of Indigenous Services. The national chief of the Assembly of First Nations was not impressed, nor should he be, after the effective leadership of Jane Philpott, who has been moved to Treasury Board, where her people skills will be wasted.
Dick Dodds, Napanee, Ont.
Money on the sidelines
Re Do Charities And Foundations Have Too Much Money On The Sidelines? (Report on Business, Jan. 16): In suggesting that charities and foundations with endowments are leaving money on the sidelines, John Hallward is telling us the short term is more important than the long term, that spending matters more than saving. This is not what most of us experience in our own lives.
Isn’t it as valuable to have a savings account as it is a chequing account? Endowments generate interest and are used for investments and expenses that you can’t risk your daily earnings for. Endowed charities in Canada are giving more than $3-billion a year from their endowments toward these needs, which can’t be met from everyday spending.
The value of a long-term investment is just that: It’s for the long term. A donor who gives $10-million once is giving to buy for today. A donor who gives 4 per cent of that, or $400,000 annually over multiple years, is giving to invest for tomorrow. Surely we all benefit from both?
Hilary Pearson, president, Philanthropic Foundations Canada
Hmm …
Re Adjustment Leaves Shaw’s Executive Pension Fund Nearly Funded (Report on Business, Jan. 16): Your article about Shaw Communication Inc.’s improved pension funding quoted the footnote to Shaw’s annual report, explaining the reason for the increase: “Remeasurement … to reflect the decrease in the accrued benefit obligation due to demographic experience in the quarter.”
Biz-speak translation: The pensioner died so we don’t have to worry about paying him any more.
Henry Van Drunen, Stratford, Ont.