Skip to main content

The Globe and Mail

March 16: Woeful, McGill. Plus other letters to the editor

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

.................................................................................................................................

Woeful, McGill

Story continues below advertisement

Re Hazing-Free Promise Not Upheld, McGill Admits As Report Released (March 15): Given that McGill University's "initial inquiry," which was conducted by the athletics department, concluded that what happened at the party was "very minimal," I ask:

1) If the investigation was objective fact-finding, does this mean that the alleged behaviours occurred – i.e. a student was forced to drink multiple shots of liquor with a pillow case over his head, ordered to strip to his underwear, etc. – or that they did not occur? What is "minimal"?

2) If the investigation concluded that some (or any) of this occurred, did the initial and subsequent university investigation conduct a legal and policy analysis to determine whether McGill's anti-hazing policy and other student-conduct and administrative-leadership policies were contravened?

3) Does any of this behaviour raise potential criminal issues, and if so, did the university contact the police?

As an experienced (40-plus years) investigator of workplace discrimination, harassment, bullying and violence, I find the university's investigation woefully deficient and not credible.

And don't get me started about the delays, or the inherent bias and conflict of interest in having the athletics department investigate itself, the lack of remedies and accountability …Catherine Burr, London, Ont.

...........................................

Story continues below advertisement

Why don't the complainants in the hazing incidents stop attacking McGill and expecting the university to handle it? It won't. They should pursue having criminal charges brought instead.

Bruce Hutchison, Ottawa

...........................................

I find the lack of leadership at the university incredulous, and the punishment meted out to be self-serving to the athletic aspirations of the school, rather than the victims of the abuse.

Someone needs to call for the vice-chancellor's resignation.

A replacement should brought in to swiftly enforce what the school had committed to, which is zero tolerance. That may mean making the tough decision to suspend the program, suspend athletes, and remove coaching staff.

Story continues below advertisement

The victims are not the school, its staff or its athletic program.

Stan Gray, Burlington, Ont.

...........................................

Divided enough

Twenty-eight parties are vying for 150 seats in the Netherland's House of Representatives (The Election At A Glance, March 15). And some Canadians are upset because Justin Trudeau doesn't want to open up our electoral system to bring us this kind of splintering? Thanks, but we already have as much division as we can handle in our country.

Matt Scholtz, Tillsonburg, Ont.

...........................................

Unfounded's voices

The Globe and Mail's Unfounded series has brought unrelenting attention to the issue of how our police and judiciary handle – or fail to handle – the complaints of sexual assault victims (B.D., 36, March 15; E., 26, March 13; T.R., 39, March 11 …) Every few days, there is another heart-wrenching story that highlights Canada's failure, and most importantly, provides a constant reminder of the need to act on this issue. Do not stop publishing these stories. They are voices that need to be heard.

Jennifer Cruickshank, Toronto

...........................................

Cash-cowed culture

Re Got A Bank Complaint? Join The Queue (Report on Business, March 15): The recent revelations that staff at TD and other banks have been pushed and bullied by managers into selling unwanted financial products to their clients speaks of a corporate culture that is more committed to profits than to ethical practices.

Customers aren't the only victims here: Front-line staff – the lowest-paid employees in the corporate food chain – are paying the price in terms of emotional and physical stress for doing the dirty work that benefits only senior management and the bank's shareholders. The people responsible for this unethical culture, and for the unfair pressures being put on staff, are at the top.

Heads should roll.

Murray Angus, Ottawa

...........................................

Omar Khadr, today

Re Khadr In Intensive Care Following Surgery For War Wounds (March 14): Even now, after being released from Guantanamo Bay and later from a Canadian prison, Omar Khadr remains a human litmus test. How we see him says more about what kind of people we are, than who he is.

Do we recognize that he would never have been in Afghanistan if his father, a jihadist, had not brought him there? Or do we, nevertheless, blame him for what he did under his father's influence? Were the torture and isolation for years in the Guantanamo Bay prison by the United States, with the Canadian government's complicity, justified punishment for a boy who was 15 when he was captured in Afghanistan – or were they a violation of his rights under the Charter as determined by the Canadian Supreme Court?

That Omar Khadar, now 30, has been able to endure (not least the 19-hour operation on his shoulder) despite his suffering, is remarkable, and it would appear that some credit must be given to the kindness of Dennis Edney, his lawyer. On behalf of those of us who recognize the injustice he has suffered, I wish him a quick recovery and hope he is able to repair his life.

James McCall, Toronto

...........................................

Taxing, by design

Re Trump Wrote Off $100-Million In Business Losses In 2005, Tax Forms Show (March 14): The article discussing President Donald Trump's tax returns refers to his "continued benefit from his use of a tax loophole … which allowed him to deduct previous losses in future years."

A loophole is defined as "an ambiguity or inadequacy in the law or a set of rules." The claiming of previous losses as a deduction in future years is a fundamental feature of the way we tax business income. You might disagree about whether the system should allow such deductions; we would disagree, but that would be fine. However, this is not an ambiguity being used to game the tax system. It is intended and designed to function this way.

Brian Young, CPA, CA, Calgary

...........................................

Another referendum

Perhaps asking for another Scottish referendum constitutes, as you classify it, "crass political opportunism" (More Referendum Madness In The U.K. – editorial, March 14). But circumstances have not merely changed, they have changed beyond recognition. As the British government takes steps to drag the Scots out of Europe against their will, they can quite understandably ask themselves whether they would prefer to remain united with Greater Europe, or with Lesser England. With their national pride at stake, economics won't be the only consideration.

The Brexit government should recognize a bit of themselves in that logic – but evidently don't.

Stan Rosenbaum, Ottawa

Report an error
Comments

The Globe invites you to share your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful to everyone. For more information on our commenting policies and how our community-based moderation works, please read our Community Guidelines and our Terms and Conditions.

We’ve made some technical updates to our commenting software. If you are experiencing any issues posting comments, simply log out and log back in.

Discussion loading… ✨

Combined Shape Created with Sketch.

Combined Shape Created with Sketch.

Thank you!

You are now subscribed to the newsletter at

You can unsubscribe from this newsletter or Globe promotions at any time by clicking the link at the bottom of the newsletter, or by emailing us at privacy@globeandmail.com.