Skip to main content
letters
Open this photo in gallery:

People waited in line to attend the bail hearing of Huawei Technologies chief financial officer Meng Wanzhou in Vancouver on Dec. 7, 2018.Jeff Vinnick/Getty Images

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

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

Huawei imbroglio

The Huawei imbroglio is generating predictable reactions. The Chinese are incensed and exhibiting feelings of hurt nationalistic pride while resorting to soundbites they expect will resonate with the West (calling the arrest a violation of human rights).

At home in Canada, we are feeling smug, having pleased an ally while touting a rock-solid excuse to appease the other trading partner (“How could we not meet our extradition obligations?”).

We stood out as the Five Eyes member doing nothing in response to the espionage threat posed by Huawei, but have now managed to show our allies that we are doing “our bit.” All this while stopping short of blocking Huawei outright. It’s a bit of a dance – and a risky one at that.

This raises the question: What really is Canada’s foreign policy? We are calling this a situation where we are caught in a crossfire, a stance which suggests we don’t have a preference who we want to see prevail in the end. Really!?

This escalating trade war is going to need countries to take sides, and Canada will have to get off the fence and take one, too.

Amar Kumar, Burlington, Ont.

Big, messy eco problems

I would like to congratulate Ted Morton, one-time Alberta Minister of Energy and professor emeritus at the University of Calgary’s School of Public Policy, on an extraordinary accomplishment (Alberta’s Oil-Production Cuts Hide Canada’s Real Problems – Dec. 5). It’s usually easy to differentiate a screed (“a long monotonous harangue”) from a jeremiad (“a righteous prophecy of doom”). But he achieved the near-impossible, an entertaining mule of the highest order.

He lashes out about “amputating a badly infected leg to save the rest of the body,” “macro issues that are slowly strangling our oil and gas sector,” Justin Trudeau’s plans to “kill Energy East,” the “federal Court of Appeal’s veto,” “true believers,” “struggling” middle class families having to “sacrifice their jobs for expensive renewable-energy policies.”

For 20 years, I taught an undergrad course at the University of Waterloo designed to engage students in understanding the complexity of big, messy environmental problems and how and why those engaged in such disputes develop their characteristic positions. Sadly, the biggest problem with the energy/oil sands/climate change debate is that so many of us either don’t know how to talk to one another, or try to stifle knowledge of the facts and suppress opportunities for reasoned discussion. So we often had guests from relevant real-life entities, such as politicians, public administration, business, or NGOs. Their input was extremely valuable and appreciated by the students.

Only once did we get a refusal to participate: the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers.

Greg Michalenko, Waterloo, Ont.

Follow the money

Re Sidewalk Labs’ Toronto Project Needs More Oversight, Auditor-General Warns (Dec. 6): Most of the problems encountered in the Sidewalk Labs project stem from an inverted development process. Engaging consultants and the public in planning and designing the site before setting definitive terms of a contract between the city and Sidewalk put the cart before the horse. Ownership and the monetization of data, privacy, responsibility for providing infrastructure, financing, a performance schedule and management of the completed development over a specified period should have been settled before planning and design work began.

The process followed raises doubts about the intent of the sequence. Was it to gain public support in order to underpin Sidewalk’s negotiating position? Or an instance in which the developer generously allows the public to choose the colours of the façade in exchange for leaving the height and density to the developer?

It seems there is also another tactic at play: The promise of elsewhere-available or untested technology to improve the quality of life of users of the Quayside Plan, such as delivering freight packages via tunnels (a system used by Chicago in the 19th century). None of the suggested technologies is earth-shattering innovation. Sidewalk’s involvement in this aspect is certainly insufficient to accede to its conditions.

Google affiliate Sidewalk Labs’ interest is in the data collected or sold to others. The rest is window dressing. Canadian expertise in urban planning, design and development doesn’t need Sidewalk Labs to achieve the best results.

A.J. Diamond, Toronto

In the law’s eyes

My wife was fatally injured recently in a road traffic accident. A pedestrian, she was hit by a vehicle while crossing at a marked intersection. The driver was charged under the provincial Highway Traffic Act with careless driving causing bodily harm or death. While this case is still before the court, it is a charge that, if a driver is found guilty, typically sees a penalty of loss of license. Jail time is a sentencing option, but the justice system seems very reluctant to issue a jail sentence except in circumstances where the accused is a repeat offender or extreme carelessness is proven. Moreover, a careless driving conviction – even causing death – is only a Highway Traffic offence and does not result in a criminal record.

Three seconds of inattention has changed our lives forever. I’ve lost my wife and soulmate, my boys have lost their mother and an extended family has lost a sister, daughter, and aunt. The accused, if convicted, temporarily loses driving privileges but the penalties are guaranteed to be less than an impaired driving charge (Two Ontario Police Forces To Publicly Name Those Charged With Impaired Driving As Deterrent – Dec. 5). Why do we make a distinction between impaired driving and careless driving when a fatality is the end result?

Peter Ridgen, Stratford, Ont.

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

Four more pedestrian deaths within 24 hours in Toronto last week. Are statistics being collected regarding weather, times of day when pedestrians are being struck, lighting, and the clothing being worn? Valuable conclusions could be drawn from this kind of information.

Black or dark coats render pedestrians barely visible after dark. If France can legislate that drivers must keep yellow vests in their vehicles for visibility in case of breakdowns – a simple, practical measure – we could be asked to wear at the very least reflective arm bands, stripes, or vests.

All levels of government, charities, public service organizations, clothing manufacturers, and celebrities can play a part in promoting public awareness of the importance of pedestrian visibility. Safety is smart. We also should make it trendy.

Karen Quinton, Toronto

Hmm ...

Re Figuring Out How To Use Safety Tech (Dec. 7): Claire from Calgary asking if parents in their 70s are too old to learn how to drive a new car offends me and I’ll bet every senior reader.

But it does remind me of an old question: What does the old man do when he can no longer drive his big Cadillac? He tows it behind his motor home.

John Harder, Priceville, Ont.

Follow related authors and topics

Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Interact with The Globe