Today's letters: American flag doesn't make our hearts flutter
Article content
When Prime Minister Mark Carney said 'It's over' after yet another batch of tariff and trade tantrums by the erratic Donald Trump, he spoke for all Canadians and their institutions.
Article content
The good old days of Canada-U.S. relations are over, gone, gone, gone and we must take full charge of our destiny by embracing the challenges and opportunities that come with this new day in the unfolding of Canada's geo-political, economic, financial, social, cultural, military and other stories.
Article content
Article content
And then Ottawa City Hall caved in to 'protocol.'
Article content
While polls reveal that most Canadians are on board with Carney, Mayor Mark Sutcliffe and others at city hall slavishly followed a nonsensical protocol procedure and decided to fly the U.S. flag on July 4 in celebration of that country's independence, and all the while U.S. President Donald Trump is hell-bent on stripping sovereign Canada of its independence.
Article content
The bizarre flag decision by Ottawa City Hall is more than just a head-shaker; it is a betrayal of public trust.
Article content
The mayor's excuse to fly the American flag was because we do it every year as part of a protocol on national holidays of countries with which we have diplomatic relations. That is beyond dumbfounding to me.
Article content
What diplomatic relations do we have with the U.S.? Doesn't diplomacy imply negotiating in good faith? Being true to your word and not threatening to annex you? Boo to you, Mayor Sutcliffe. Bad decision.
Article content
Article content
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
National Post
a minute ago
- National Post
Letters: Mark Carney 'on wrong side of history' with Palestine declaration
This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Readers fume over the PM's Palestine statement, have more to say about the hockey trial, and wish for less news about Justin Trudeau Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand listens as Prime Minister Mark Carney announces that Canada will recognize a State of Palestine in September, providing the Palestinian Authority makes significant reforms and holds an election in 2026. Photo by Dave Chan / AFP THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE ARTICLES Enjoy the latest local, national and international news. Exclusive articles by Conrad Black, Barbara Kay and others. Plus, special edition NP Platformed and First Reading newsletters and virtual events. Unlimited online access to National Post. National Post ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition to view on any device, share and comment on. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. Support local journalism. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Prime Minister Mark Carney's recognizing a Palestinian state has nothing to do with supporting the people of Gaza. It has everything to do with destroying Canada's relationship with Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and a long-time ally. His overriding bias against Israel seems to determine all his decisions regarding the war initiated by Hamas. Carney claiming that he will recognize a Palestinian state is simply shameful posturing for political gain. It is a gesture without real meaning since there has been no discussion re borders or leadership or governance. Without any structure in place, what is there to recognize? This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays) By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again Carney may think the world will view his posturing in front of the UN as a demonstration of strong leadership. He is mistaken. To abandon an ally that is fighting the threat of total destruction is not leadership, it is cowardice. To ignore the horrors perpetuated by Hamas and its followers is unforgivable. To blame all the suffering in Gaza on Israel is immoral and irresponsible. Future Canadians will judge Carney as being 'on the wrong side of history.' Mark Carney and his illiberal liberal government are displaying an appalling lack of understanding of history in their rush to recognize Palestinian statehood, and in so doing are destroying the values that have served Canada well throughout much of our history. The reality is that the Palestinians have been offered a two-state solution on multiple occasions, and on each and every occasion, they have declined the offer. This is because Hamas and their predecessors have no interest in peace. They seek the total eradication of Israel. Thousands of Canadian soldiers paid the ultimate price in two world wars, the Korean War and Afghanistan to protect democracy from totalitarianism. They must be spinning in their graves with a Canadian government destroying our values of peace, order, good government and respect by kowtowing to murderers and terrorists. There is no indication that Canada's willingness to reward terrorists with statehood will bring peace in our time. Gordon S. Clarry, Etobicoke, Ont. The criminal justice system employed in Canada has evolved rules and principles over centuries. The process has been tested countless times by educated and specialized individuals. The result is the most just system in the world for generating the truth of a situation or circumstances. Is it perfect? No, but within the confines of the human experience it is as close to being perfect as we can achieve. It is trusted by millions of people in western democracies around the world. This advertisement has not loaded yet. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. Why then do NHL Commissioner Gary Bettman and the league take the position that they will now conduct their own review of the case and the players' acquittals? These five hockey players, like others in the professional ranks, likely became serious about being athletes at a young age. They will have put in more than a decade of discipline and dedication to rigorous physical conditioning and good nutritional habits, and most of all they will have forgone the fun of growing up unfettered with their non-athlete friends. The NHL does not deserve to play by its own rules in this case and should accept the exoneration by the justice system as final, and allow these young men to continue to compete for inclusion on NHL hockey teams. Robert Garrett, Chemainus, B.C. What can't be ignored by any analysis of this case, is that the five men accused and then acquitted, all admitted to participating in the degradation of another human being, regardless of whether that person was a willing participant or not. By admitting their participation to this obscenity, they've debased themselves to the point where any redemption must be hard earned. In my opinion, resuming a multimillion-dollar career doesn't count. Paul Baumberg, Dead Man's Flats, Alta. Writing about the unusual rules for the Battle River-Crowfoot byelection — where instead of marking an 'X' beside a candidate's name, the elector must write the candidate's name — Chris Selley may have inadvertently left the incorrect impression that some sort of literacy test has been introduced when he wrote, 'If you can read the candidate's name, you ought to be able to write it down as well.' In fact, if you can't read the name, or you can't write the name, you can bring along somebody who can to help you with either task, who will be sworn to secrecy to assist you, or a sworn elections official can assist you, confidentially. Justice was done In the case of the man sentenced to 60 days house arrest for threatening 'to kill as many Jews as possible' to a car salesman in private. What your article did not say about Waisuddin Akbari's sentence is that Justice Edward Prutschi, a devoted Jew, supporter of Israel and respected judge, also sentenced Akbari to the maximum of three years probation allowed for a summary offence. Akbari, moreover, must undertake antisemitism counselling; he is not to go within 200 metres of a place where Jews knowingly congregate; he is prohibited from possessing any weapons; and he is now in a DNA data bank. Akbari, furthermore, now has a criminal record that will mark him for years to come, not to mention the internet trail of his crime. Justice Prutschi, in his decision, quoted from community impact statements submitted by Jewish community organizations writing eloquently regarding the scourge of Jew-hatred in Canada. Is Akbari's sentence justice? Justice isn't decided by those aggrieved of the crime. That is vengeance. Would I, as a Jew, have liked to see the proverbial book thrown at Akbari? Yes. But it wasn't my decision. If the Crown thinks Justice Prutschi was too soft, then the sentence can be appealed. But the Crown won't because the sentence, in all the circumstances, was just. Justin Trudeau's dating life and vacations are newsworthy? The clownish and vacuous Trudeau resigned from politics after wearing out his welcome with pretty well everyone. Despite his craving for attention, he merits taking a quiet retirement. So do we. Charles Mackay, Saint Eustache, Que. For what it's worth, I have absolutely no desire to be kept up to date regarding what pop star our former prime minister has been seen with or where he chose to vacation with his children. I have even less desire to be confronted with his sanctimonious, grinning visage leering back at me from my newspaper first thing in the morning. Ten years of being regularly subjected to this vacuous idiot was more than enough! Canada — including all its political parties — has made a golden calf to worship out of dairy cows. In his column, Andrew Richter points out that approximately 10,000 dairy farmers with relatively high incomes are the sole beneficiaries of dairy supply management at significant cost to all Canadian families of about $600 per year — which hits disadvantaged families the hardest. This bizarre pampering of a farming elite concentrated in Quebec and Ontario seems like wilful ignorance. Leftist voters suddenly prioritize wealthy dairy farmers over those with much lower incomes? Conservative voters suddenly find government control of an essential foodstuff, which hikes prices, a good thing? 'Elbows up' Canadians show hypocrisy and shortsightedness bewailing threatened tariffs while supporting barring competition from America and Europe that would lower dairy prices for consumers (and maybe get us less waxy butter). Indeed, our supply management for dairy is a heavy anchor presently hampering Canada's negotiators for fair trade agreements. Continued favouritism to a farming elite in central Canada should not be a hill to die on, unlike what our unthinking Parliament has just signed into law. Jamie Sarkonak demands adult punishment for a minor to protect society, appealing to tough-on-crime sensibilities. Punishing the guilty feels like a clear fix to serve and protect society from bad people. But this narrow focus on heinous youth crimes misses the law's spirit: safeguarding everyone's rights. Public outrage shouldn't dictate sentences. The law's brilliance lies in its remarkable fact-checker — reasonable doubt. Historically, treating youth differently in criminal justice marks moral progress. Those who call to bend the rule of law to public anger or politicians' whims risk regressing to mob justice. If legislators swayed by outrage prevailed, Canada might still have capital punishment. It doesn't. The Canadian Paediatric Society (2016) confirms youth are more likely to be rehabilitated than adults, supporting distinct sentencing. Remember that the rule of law serves your self-interest when it treats everyone fairly. Protecting the rights of others — especially young offenders whose minds are still forming —protects you. One sentencing error, fixable through parole, is better than sweeping injustice condemning all youth. Revenge isn't justice. In 1988, our first son was born, and I returned to university. He had severe asthma. No daycare would accept him. No Canadians wanted this nanny job. We hired a fantastic Filipina Temporary Foreign Worker (TFW). She has held steady employment ever since and is now a Canadian citizen. Our next child had asthma and required a colostomy at age Day 1. No daycare would accept her. So another TFW was hired as no Canadian carers could be found. Children of elderly parents often choose to have a carer in their parents' home rather than placement in a long-term care (LTC) facility. They are familiar with their own home and can keep a companion animal. This also avoids contact with other sick residents at an LTC home. Hiring a licensed carer from an agency (as opposed to a TFW) is expensive, the staff often change, and in my 95-year-old mother-in-law's home, someone stole her silverware set. As you know, caring for small children, the sick or infirm is not an easy job. Most Canadians don't want this kind of work. TFWs provide necessary manpower for jobs no Canadians want. We would also add that we have never exploited our much-needed helpers, nor would we ever do so. Carol and Keith Hult, Sherwood Park, Alta. Donald Savoie was right on when, in his interview with Amna Ahmad, he said we need more front-line government workers and they need to be given priority over behind-the-scenes bureaucrats dealing with policy and such. Example: the difficulty in contacting Canada Revenue Agency representatives by phone. One encounters full phone queues ('hang up and call again') or, if lucky enough to get in the queue, there is a long wait. Accountants report that contacting CRA is frustrating and greatly reduces their productivity. It's a national disgrace. Don Graham, Chemainus, B.C. Re: 'Mass immigration simply unsustainable' — Letters to the editor, July 27 Do we have a shortage of old people in Canada? Is that why the Liberals are trying to bring in 10,000 parents and grandparents of new Canadians into this country? Do we have a surplus of unused, under-utilized medical services or seniors' facilities that are sitting empty, to justify importing thousands of old people, who are likely never going to contribute in any meaningful way to the tax base, but whom that tax base will have to pay for? Can someone explain the logic here? Damian Kanarek, Whitby, Ont. National Post and Financial Post welcome letters to the editor (250 words or fewer). Please include your name, address and daytime phone number. Email letters@ Letters may be edited for length or clarity.
CTV News
31 minutes ago
- CTV News
A judge struck down the Ford government's bike lane removals in Toronto. What comes next?
This week an Ontario court struck down a provincial law that required three bike lanes to be removed in Toronto and which also limited the installation of new bike lanes by municipalities. The decision handed a big win to advocacy group Cycle Toronto and two individual cyclists who challenged the law in court. Here's what you need to know about case and what might come next: What was the law meant to do Bill 212, titled the 'Reducing Gridlock, Saving You Time Act' was introduced in the legislature in October and passed the following month. Among other things, it called for the removal of bike lanes along Bloor Street, Yonge Street and University Avenue in Toronto. Why did the judge strike it down? Ultimately, the judge agreed with the evidence that removal of the bike lanes would put people at increased risk of harm and death, violating the right to life and security of the person under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms enshrined in the constitution. But perhaps more importantly, the judge found that the government had not presented any evidence to support its claims. 'It's a spectacular failure on the part of the Ontario government to defend its decision to remove bike lanes,' David Schneiderman told A professor of constitutional law at the University of Toronto, Schneiderman said the government's case had little chance of success, even if the judge had been sympathetic, because of the lack of evidence to back up the province's claims. 'It's hard to predict many of these kinds of charter claims. It depends on how deferential a judge wants to be,' Schneiderman said. 'But it wasn't available to judge Schabas to be deferential because there was no evidence, and the Ontario government's own experts failed to show that there was any correlation between removing bike lanes and improving congestion in the City of Toronto.' Ontario bike lanes A cyclist rides in a bike lane on University Avenue in Toronto on Friday, December 13, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Laura Proctor (Laura Proctor/The Canadian Press) What message does the ruling send? 'It should send a message to this province and others that when they're providing services of whatever sort, when they act in ways that endanger lives, physical security, or generally make the situation worse for the people who are receiving those services without some evidence to support that decision, then it might very well be that it'll give rise to a charter claim,' Schneiderman said. What happens next? The government has already said that it plans to appeal the ruling, however Schneiderman said it will likely face an uphill battle because there is so little evidence the government presented in the original case. 'When cases go on appeal, the facts that are on the record are not contested. They can't be,' Schneiderman said. 'The hearing established certain facts, and the fact is that there was no evidence offered by the government to support the decision to remove bike lanes. So without facts to support their decision, it's a real uphill climb.' Why is government bothering with case if it's weak? While the government may have lost in court, they scored a win in another way, one political observer pointed out. 'They believe that the public is on their side. They particularly believe that their voter coalition is heavily opposed to bike lanes,' CTV News Political Analyst Scott Reid pointed out. 'So they think that the visibility of this sue, the volume with which they pursued it, and the conflict that's produced by a court challenge and even a court loss helps amplify their championing of this issue and therefore cements their political position. 'Arguably, they believe they are bigger winners by being losers, because it catapults this issue back to the front of the news cycle and reignites coverage and conversation, and they are positive that they're the overwhelming beneficiaries of that.' Biking A cyclist rides in a bike lane on University Avenue in Toronto on Friday, December 13, 2024. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Laura Proctor But in addition to being seen as champions against gridlock, Reid said, the issue gives the government an enemy to fight against. 'This issue forces their preferred opponents to come out and vocally support bike lanes, which the Ford government believes not only puts those stakeholders at odds with the general public, but they think it even puts them at odds with traditional downtown voting coalitions,' Reid said. 'They think this is an orphan issue that has relatively few champions, but for hardcore urbanists and so they see this as pure political charm.' But while the cycling advocates win in court and the government scores a political win, it's the voters who are ultimately the losers, Reid said, if they end up paying for infrastructure to be built and then ripped up, as well as for a court battle to be fought over the issue. What about the notwithstanding clause? If the government were to appeal the case and lose, it could still use the notwithstanding clause to override the charter. But would it? The Ford government has shown a willingness to do so before. It used the notwithstanding clause to push through a law limiting third party election advertising in 2021. It also threatened to use the clause when it unilaterally shrunk the size of Toronto City Council just ahead of a municipal election in 2018, and moved to block a teacher's strike in 2022. Schneiderman agrees the government could decide to make use of the clause if it loses an appeal in court, but he added that whether it does so could come down to a matter of public opinion over the issue. 'In my view, the notwithstanding clause is there to protect the citizens from rogue courts that make decisions that are against the public interest,' Schneiderman said. 'It's not just for provinces or the federal government to use in the case of a popularity contest. It's not about that. It shouldn't be.' In this case the question could be 'how popular are cyclists' in Toronto, Schneiderman said. He explains that while the notwithstanding clause is available to the government to override charter rights, voters could punish governments that curtail them. 'It's not a really popular thing. People like their rights. People like the fact that they have rights, and they don't like governments to be seen to be trampling on them.' Reid said there's another reason the government might be hesitant to invoking the notwithstanding clause. 'I would be surprised if they reached for the notwithstanding clause, for no other reason than they might fear that it actually pollutes this issue, and instead of allowing them to repeat their arguments around bike lanes and enjoy the cut and thrust of the usual suspects who oppose the Ford government on bike lanes, that it might transform the issue, sort of alchemize it into something else that's got less public appeal and might cut more against their grain,' Reid said. He added that they've 'been burned' by using it in the past since its use itself becomes a polarizing issue that may invite questions about other rights being curbed.
CBC
an hour ago
- CBC
Will Marine Atlantic's commercial rate not being cut impact people in N.L.? Not much, says this trucker
While passengers riding the Marine Atlantic ferry will see a 50 per cent reduction in the cost of their ticket, commercial passengers and truckers won't see that same benefit. And while Newfoundland and Labrador's Minister of Jobs says it puts the province at a severe trade disadvantage, one trucker says it likely won't make much of a difference. "It was no big surprise, really. And it ain't going to impact the everyday lives of people here very much anyway, even if they're reduced," Tony Power, owner of operator of Power Trucking in Holyrood, told CBC News of the decision to not cut commercial rates for Marine Atlantic ferries. He pays $735 for a one way trip for his 75-foot truck. "If I reduce the rate to [merchants] for the ferry, they ain't going to take it off for the province anyway. There's just corporate greed across the board." Other ferries in Atlantic Canada and Quebec saw both commercial and passenger rates slashed in a decision by Prime Minister Mark Carney. Asked by CBC News why the change didn't apply to Marine Atlantic, St. John's East MP Joanne Thompson said rates needed to be frozen to protect other merchants in the industry. "Marine Atlantic is part of a broader chain of suppliers that bring commercial product in and out of the province. And we need to protect all players in the field, because we rely on the transfer of products from multiple sources," Thompson said. In response, Newfoundland and Labrador Jobs Minister Gerry Byrne said not lowering commercial rates goes against the announcement being a way to improve interprovincial trade efforts. "[Other Atlantic provinces] now have a very, very large competitive advantage over Newfoundland and Labrador in exports, in free trade, in competitiveness. Our economy now just took a blow," Byrne told CBC Radio Thursday. More passengers, delayed shipments? Power said he sided with Thompson's comments. He noted that if rates were to drop for travel on Marine Atlantic, other transporters would have to get the same cut and disrupt the overall market. But although he believes rates not being cut won't affect the price of food on the shelves, it could affect when it gets there — as a likely increase in passenger traffic could lead to less space being available for commercial trucks. "You're going to have less trucks per vessel," he said. "Those trucks that were there Tuesday for the [dangerous goods] crossing got to sit there 'till Wednesday. So, like, they got an extra two days on the wharf, which is delaying their products. It all got to come to the island, we got very few options to get to Newfoundland … that traffic got to come across that water." Power also expressed concerns with loosening interprovincial trade barriers, saying he believes it would impact the ability for local companies to prosper with business coming in from elsewhere.
