The Globe and Mail (BC Edition) - - EDITORIAL -


Re Trudeau Bat­tles Prov­inces, Se­nate For Right Of Cana­di­ans To Grow Cannabis (June 14): It’s le­gal to make beer and wine at home. If these “drugs” can be made in lim­ited quan­ti­ties at home, then Cana­di­ans should also be al­lowed to grow a lim­ited amount of mar­i­juana at home.

If Que­bec and Man­i­toba fear that they will not be able to po­lice or con­trol how much mar­i­juana is grown in a home, they need only look to hy­dro bills. In On­tario, I get an e-mail each month com­par­ing my us­age to the average us­age of like homes. Big spikes in us­age linked with large, il­le­gal grow­ing oper­a­tions will show up.

The Se­nate should let the bill pass. Peter Fedirchuk Kanata, Ont.


We were near­ing the end of a long day of fast­ing. As I cruised the pro­duce sec­tion on a mis­sion, I found my tar­get: onions.

Sweet onions were on sale, and sounded tastier than plain onions. As I reached for the three­p­ound bag, some­thing stopped me in my tracks. Pro­duce of USA?!

I was im­me­di­ately re­minded of the in­sults our Prime Min­is­ter had just suf­fered. On­tario onions weren’t on sale. They weren’t sweet ei­ther. Hmm. USA ver­sus On­tario.

Onions have lay­ers and so did my dilemma. I was re­minded of a spir­i­tual re­al­iza­tion Mal­com X had. “I don’t eat pork,” he an­nounced when it was of­fered while he was learn­ing about his new faith. He was never the same man af­ter that. As he later de­scribed it, a sim­ple de­ci­sion to re­sist some­thing changed his whole life. He even­tu­ally led a rev­o­lu­tion­ary move­ment. I was hav­ing a cri­sis over a few dimes on onions.

It was Ra­madan af­ter all, and I felt I needed to show some re­silience with my spend­ing power. I re­turned the sweet U.S. onions and kept the On­tario onions, with a sort of dis­ap­point­ment com­bined with self-re­spect.

In the spirit of Robert De Niro, “Fff… or give me, Amer­i­cans. I truly wanted to buy your prod­uct. It’s not per­sonal, it’s busi­ness.” In fact, for­give­ness was not the first Robert De Niro-in­spired F-word that came to my mind.

For Mal­colm X it was pork. For me and many oth­ers, I’m sure it’s go­ing to be onions or an­other prod­uct. The Boy­cott Amer­ica Move­ment has al­ready started. Muhammed Hamou Lon­don, Ont.

I com­mend this week’s let­ter writ­ers who have de­cided to boy­cott U.S. prod­ucts and va­ca­tions. My wife and I made that com­mit­ment right af­ter Don­ald Trump’s elec­tion when Cana­dian cit­i­zens started be­ing has­sled at the bor­der. Mr. Trump’s de­ri­sive rhetoric to­ward im­mi­grants and vis­i­tors from other coun­tries was of­fen­sive. In­stead of va­ca­tions to our favourite spots of Cape Cod or Maui, we opted to spend our money in Canada. We ex­pected that more Cana­di­ans would fol­low suit, as did U.S. tourism agen­cies, but in early 2017, Stats Can re­ported that travel to the U.S. was higher than it had been for sev­eral years. SAD! David Gelder Mis­sis­sauga

To para­phrase:

Way down South where or­anges grow,

A beaver stepped on an ele­phant’s toe,

The ele­phant said with tears in its eyes,

“Why don’t you pick on some­one your own size?” Robin Higham Ottawa


Re You’re Wel­come, FIFA (June 14): A let­ter writer signs off with “You’re wel­come, FIFA,” af­ter mak­ing some sug­ges­tions at the start of the World Cup to “open up” the game, cre­ate more “break­aways” and pre­vent those 0-0 scores, which the writer pre­sum­ably finds bor­ing. I look for­ward to his sug­ges­tions for get­ting rid of those “ac­tion­less” no-hit­ters in base­ball – per­haps hit­ters should be al­lowed four or five strikes, or pitch­ers should be lim­ited to a max­i­mum pitch speed of 30 mph.

There is a sport where scor­ing oc­curs vir­tu­ally ev­ery 24 sec­onds, where break­aways are com­mon, and where the player on the break­away can place the ball in the un­de­fended net with ease. I rec­om­mend basketball to those who do not ap­pre­ci­ate the beau­ti­ful game and who need con­stant scor­ing to stay en­gaged.

You’re wel­come. Rudy Buller Toronto


Re Vancouver De­tails 10-Year Plan For Af­ford­able Hous­ing (June 14): City plan­ners helped get Vancouver into this hous­ing mess. The Lib­er­als and Mayor Gre­gor Robert­son al­lowed for­eign money, de­vel­op­ers and real­tors to trade homes like com­modi­ties. Now we have a hous­ing cri­sis.

City coun­cil is act­ing act­ing like would-be saviours, wanting to push through (quickly) a $2-bil­lion-plus hous­ing plan.

Coun­cil should be con­sult­ing with res­i­dents be­fore push­ing such a dra­matic plan. And how will this shot­gun plan af­fect traf­fic con­ges­tion, which is al­ready a huge prob­lem in Vancouver?

As long as the de­vel­op­ers and real­tors are happy, so it would ap­pear, is city coun­cil. Elis­a­beth Ross Vancouver


Re How On­tario Be­came Ford Na­tion (Fo­cus, June 9): The Lib­er­als won a laugh­able seven seats in the elec­tion, not be­cause they dis­cred­ited them­selves (as Jef­frey Simp­son sug­gests) but be­cause the vot­ing sys­tem is a po­lit­i­cal lot­tery. If the Lib­er­als’ 20 per cent sup­port were trans­lated into elected mem­bers, they would have won 24 seats (the Tories would have won only 50).

The Lib­er­als lost of­fi­cial party sta­tus be­cause they lacked the po­lit­i­cal will to make the nec­es­sary changes to the vot­ing sys­tem, be­ing ad­dicted to the sound of that screech­ing voice we all hear at the check­out counter, “Win­ner! Gag­nant!” Les Bowser Omemee, Ont.

As a res­i­dent of On­tario, I re­sent see­ing the prov­ince re­ferred to in the me­dia by that im­be­cilic “Ford Na­tion” moniker. Even though I was one of many who voted the Lib­er­als out, that does not mean we in any way sup­port the likes of the new premier.

The fam­ily, friends and lim­ited sup­port­ers who ac­tu­ally make up “Ford Na­tion” are not rep­re­sen­ta­tive of the ma­jor­ity of On­tar­i­ans, even those who voted for the Pro­gres­sive Con­ser­va­tives. Den­nis Win­ters Toronto

As a friend of mine said af­ter last week’s pro­vin­cial elec­tion: Cheap beer and no sex education. What could go wrong? Ron Le­pro­hon Toronto


My wife and I were just be­gin­ning to plan a trip for our sum­mer va­ca­tion when we came across Set­ting Sail (Pur­suits, June 9). The Globe and Mail may be right on top of things in terms of how to dress, but we’re now very dis­ap­pointed. Once we get my wife’s $655 loafers, her $380 bikini, her $440 sun­glasses, and my $240 swim “shorts,” the only “trip” we’ll be able to af­ford is a pic­nic lunch at a lo­cal park! Peter A. Lewis-Watts Bar­rie, Ont.

Let­ters to the Editor should be ex­clu­sive to The Globe and Mail. In­clude name, ad­dress and daytime phone num­ber. Keep let­ters un­der 150 words. Let­ters may be edited for length and clar­ity. E-mail: let­ters@globeandmail.com

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada

© PressReader. All rights reserved.