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
...................................................................................................................................................
Energy disunity
While it may not be apparent yet to all Canadians, the death of Energy East will go down as a dark day in our country's history.
Why?
Because it represents another significant chapter in the gradual hijacking of this country's need for continued economic and infrastructure development, by "NIMBY-ists" and special interest groups, and by a federal government that seems bent on placating such groups by imposing increasingly burdensome regulatory hurdles.
Had such attitudes existed 150 years ago, we would not have a country today.
As one who has lived in three different provinces, I have always considered myself a Canadian first. Sadly, I fear I may be in the minority as parochial interests have gradually been allowed to become pre-eminent.
Bruce Healy, Parksville, B.C.
.................................................
Energy East would have supplied Eastern Canadian refineries with Western Canadian oil, displacing foreign oil imports – a major national economic benefit. Was this in the political equation?
Gordon Rogers, Toronto
.................................................
The TransCanada announcement that it is abandoning the Energy East pipeline should come as no surprise. When the National Energy Board decided that it should consider climate impact (upstream and downstream) in its deliberations, it became obvious that the project would never meet that test.
Why the sudden change this summer in the NEB's mandate?
Could it be because Energy East runs past Justin Trudeau's back door, and because he relies heavily on Quebec votes to hold on to power? It's clear that Mr. Trudeau has no problem with one set of rules for one part of the country and another set for British Columbia. That is no way to promote national unity.
Shirley McBride, Victoria
.................................................
Voter attitudes
Re What Do Canadians Think Of Jagmeet Singh? (Oct. 6): I was surprised and disappointed to see a new Angus Reid poll showing one-third of respondents wouldn't vote for a party led by a turbaned Sikh man who carries a kirpan.
In my view, as long as the leader is a Canadian, the person's cultural background is not a factor in a decision to support him or her. Being a lawyer would be a more likely reason to look elsewhere!
Peter D. Hambly, Hanover, Ont.
.................................................
Caisse as 'authority'
Re Caisse Readies For Fight Over Bombardier Trade Decision (Report on Business, Oct. 4): The U.S. Department of Commerce's preliminary finding in the Boeing-Bombardier dispute that the Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec is an "authority" of the Quebec government has substantial merit.
In 2000, I was chairman of Rogers Communications when Ted Rogers agreed with André Chagnon, Vidéotron's controlling shareholder, to merge the companies. Mr. Chagnon believed the path forward for his Quebec business was to form a national communications company to compete against Bell and other telcos.
Once the deal was announced, the Caisse intervened and met with the premier of Quebec. In negotiations to seek an accommodation, the Caisse demanded representation on the Rogers board of directors, and a right of first refusal on the controlling shares of Rogers Communications held by the Rogers family.
The latter point was non-negotiable, and I did not need confirmation from the family to reject it. Printer and publisher Pierre Karl Péladeau was then selected by the Quebec authorities to acquire the cable asset.
Financed by the Caisse, Vidéotron's Quebec services were protected from Toronto control. Rogers Communications was paid a $241-million fee for the forced termination of its Vidéotron agreement.
Garfield Emerson, Toronto
.................................................
Principle? Politics
Re Want To Get Ahead? Think Like A Liberal (editorial, Oct. 5): You make some very reasonable points about criticizing the Liberals for blocking Conservative MP Rachael Harder's appointment as chair of the House of Commons status of women committee.
But I have only to look back to then-Ontario premier Mike Harris's appointment of a high-school dropout to the post of education minister to conclude that Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer is not so concerned with reason, or with what you refer to as "principle," as he is with similar belligerent and obstructive mischief-making in choosing the anti-abortion MP for the post.
Aside from that, Mr. Scheer is clearly attempting to play to his base – buoyed, no doubt, by recent evidence, in the United States and elsewhere, of the success of such skulduggery.
Andrew Milner, Peterborough, Ont.
.................................................
High on pot tax
Justin Trudeau's proposal to charge GST in addition to an excise tax on the sale of legal marijuana only adds to my cynicism of the motives of our Liberal government (Plan To Add GST, Excise Tax On Cannabis Stokes Black Market Worries, Oct. 5).
In his election platform, was Mr. Trudeau pandering for votes on the legalization of marijuana, or did he have his eyes focused on a potential tax windfall? It's taken two years to have "no concrete legislation," but I suppose it's no surprise he has managed a concrete plan to impose more taxes.
Although the initial tax is relatively modest, who thinks it won't be raised? Look at cigarettes, alcohol and gasoline. It won't be long before people turn to the black market to buy their marijuana.
There will be much political debate, not on the merits of this tax grab, but on what proportion of the revenue should go to the provinces. Premiers are likely already "high" on the prospect of adding money to their coffers.
Glynis Gilman, Toronto
.................................................
3 deadly seconds
Re There's More At Stake For Distracted Driving Than Just Fines (Oct. 4): This issue is about saving lives. It's bigger than insurance premiums and fines. With distracted driving as one of the main – if not the main – cause of road accidents in jurisdictions like Ontario and B.C., it is troubling to observe the problem spreading. Indeed, more people are victims of someone or themselves using a phone at the wheel than speeding or impaired driving.
Here is some quick math on the matter: Checking a phone's status takes about three seconds. That is 75 metres of blind driving while moving at 90 km/h. How many of us would walk, let alone drive, for 75 metres while blindfolded?
Yet the texting driver risks everything while doing just this.
Besides the completely avoidable tragedy, the economics of distracted driving is astonishing: The cost of health care and lost productivity from traffic collisions is some $10-billion per year, as measured by the Canadian Automobile Association. It's time we all pledged to put that thing down and arrive home in safety.
There is so much at stake.
Lucian Vinatoriu, Luxembourg