Let finance minister’s record speak for itself

Re Tale of two tragedies reveals Flaherty’s flaws, April 14

Decorum suggests we be gracious in remembering long-serving parliamentarians such as Jim Flaherty. True, he was a talented politician who impacted many people in his professional life. And as a private citizen, friends and family will greatly feel his loss.

But for myself and legions of other voters, his public persona didn’t match the glowing private tributes. He was a hyper-partisan politician willing to take no prisoners in dealing with the opposition, any opposition. Who can forget his public brow beating of Dalton McGuinty on corporate taxes. And ultimately, what good did lowering these taxes do for the greater good?

The facts are: he served prominently on two of the most meanspirited regimes in living memory — Mike Harris in Ontario and Stephen Harper in Ottawa. Once in Ottawa, he presided over the dismantling of federal government fiscal capacity and has ultimately tied the hands of future governments in instituting programs that will actually help large numbers of people.

He played a large role in radically reshaping this country. This is joy to Conservatives, but not to the progressive majority. Pietro Bertollo, Brampton

Re Former finance minister made sacrifices for public, April 12

Bravo Jim Coyle for a thoughtful and sensible article about the lessons we might draw from Jim Flaherty’s sudden death and the reactions to it. In addition to the personal price people pay when they serve in elected office, Coyle highlights a pervasive problem: members of the public who know little about the day-to-day life and duty of an elected official, yet have no qualms about expressing cynicism and contempt for both the profession and the people in it. One only needs to read the “comment” section following any online news story to understand both the depth of public disdain for politicians and the shallowness of the knowledge behind it.

Of course both of these traits have been nourished by media much more disposed to highlight examples of greed, corruption, and malice than to engage the public in a discussion of what dedicated public service looks like.

Since levels of education are higher than at any time in our history, and since information is more readily available than ever before, there can be only one explanation for such a state of disenchantment: wilful disengagement that has produced bitterness and bile where there should be knowledge and constructive criticism.

Neil Thomlinson, Professor, Politics and Public Administration, Ryerson University

What’s with the state funeral? These guys are very well paid, they get all kinds of “entitlements,” gilt-edged pensions courtesy of the taxpayer and very generous tax-free allowances. Can’t they pay for their own funeral like the rest of us?

Jan Patterson, Amherstview

The fact that Jim Flaherty had a cheerful disposition and a big heart even as he functioned as “an integral part of a government determined to smash or cripple much of what makes Canada a livable country” only makes his perfidy worse. He was on somebody else’s side in this violent Tory crusade to build a Canadian plutocracy laid on the foundation of a silent and malleable proletariat. If he were a warrior, we were and are his slain.

Lee A. McKenna, Toronto