Deputy Whip of the NDP, Heather McPherson, looks on as NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh speaks to reporters in the Foyer of the House of Commons on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, on March 18.Spencer Colby/The Canadian Press
What you pay for
Re “The Liberals’ dithering on defence is indefensible” (Editorial, March 27): No one likes to pay for insurance until they need it, then they are glad to have done so. The same should be true of our defence.
If we don’t think we need this “insurance,” then we have not been paying attention to various global crises. Our northern border is perhaps most at risk. Dithering by government makes us the laughing stock of NATO and indeed of Canadians who serve in our military, whose gift to us is their service.
Funding levels of 2 per cent of GDP would take some sacrifice. Means testing Old Age Security is one place to start. Reducing the vast bureaucracy in Ottawa might be another.
Stew Valcour Halifax
Re “To the point” (Letters, March 22): A letter-writer offers a brief and sensible solution to finance Canadian defence: Reverse the two-point GST cut.
A GST increase to 7 per cent would raise more than $20-billion per year. Allotting 20 per cent of that to rebate relief for lower-income Canadians would still inject $15-billion into defence.
If Canadians are not willing to make this sacrifice to protect ourselves and fulfill NATO commitments, we should be ashamed of ourselves. Make this sacrifice and we can hold our heads high in the international community, regain our “soft power” and enjoy a non-inflationary, multibillion-dollar economic injection.
Lyle Clarke Whitby, Ont.
Critics of Canada’s NATO spending ignore the arbitrary nature of 2 per cent of GDP.
The global arms race has now reached US$2.2-trillion annually, twice what it was in 2001. Dollar-wise, Canada’s defence is seventh among NATO members and 14th worldwide. The United States, at 40.5 per cent of global military spending, is the worst culprit. Russia, at 4.8 per cent, is far behind.
Guns and boots don’t in themselves satisfy security needs. The expressed goal of competitive weaponizing is to achieve power superiority over a rival. We need to outspend them and, logically, they us. The classic “security dilemma.” On it goes, forever, until somebody calls a halt.
This horror show also depletes resources to address the climate crisis, energy transitions, pandemics, refugees and conflict resolution. Fewer weapons everywhere would help sustain our common security and the planet.
Not naive – practical.
Robin Collins Ottawa
Budget crunch
Re “Ontario budget 2024: Billions for health care, rising deficits, car insurance changes and other highlights” (March 27): I am fuming that this budget will triple annual deficits, recklessly regress Ontario back to levels we saw with previous Liberal and NDP governments and unconscionably spiral debt-servicing costs onto future generations.
With Doug Ford at the helm, at least the pocketbooks of Ontarians aren’t being hit to the painful extent of Justin Trudeau and his carbon tax. It looks like any talk of prudence was thrown out the window, betraying many Progressive Conservative voters.
David Searle Toronto
Re “Ontario to extend gas tax cut to end of year as part of Tuesday’s budget” (March 26): The Ford government is crowing about affordability, but its gas-tax cut has, by its own admission, diminished government revenues by $2.1-billion over the past 2.5 years.
Might not all that money have been more helpful providing affordable housing, supporting public transit and fixing our overburdened health care system?
Kenneth Oppel Toronto
Easy wins
Re “Bank of Canada warns of low productivity ‘emergency,’ making it harder to control inflation” (Report on Business, March 27): Want to alter the dire outlook on economic growth and productivity? There are a number of small and medium projects that, if successful, would reap immediate rewards.
For example, open up interprovincial trade to trigger more investment and alleviate labour market pressures.
Stop wasting taxpayer money by seeking lower expenditures at all levels of government. Pry open regional economies even further through the cheaper provision of goods and services.
Get provincial labour certifications better aligned and harmonized. A certified teacher should be immediately employable in all provinces.
These are only a few suggestions. There are tons more just like it lying low on the tree, looking to be plucked.
Let’s not waste time studying the problem. Let’s do something tangible.
It must be serious if the Bank of Canada is raising the alarm.
Rod Forsey Paradise, Nfld.
The gap
Re “Worth it” (Letters, March 26): A letter writer believes we should not be “carping about pay levels” at Canadian banks because they are “world beaters.” If so, they should pay employees better.
In 2023, the reported average annual salary of a customer service representative at the Royal Bank of Canada was $43,753; the CEO made $15.22-million, a salary ratio of more than 1:300. In the 1950s at big corporations, it was about 1:20.
The salary inflation of top executives is part of a larger picture of increasing wealth inequality in Canada.
Reiner Jaakson Oakville, Ont.
Presumably, if top CEOs weren’t offered obscenely high remuneration, they would go elsewhere. I think this is one of the biggest scams in society.
If these corporations and institutions all agreed to cap after-tax compensation at, say, $2-million per year, there would be lineups of highly competent candidates around the block seeking these jobs. It boils down to the usual matter of the foxes setting the rules for the henhouse.
Frank Foulkes Toronto
Fair share
Re “Single parents struggle as Canada’s policies stay stuck in the age of nuclear families” (March 23): Provincial agencies could encourage or assist single parents in pursuing the absent parent for child support payments.
Some may refuse to seek payments, because they do not want the absent parent to have any role in raising the child or children. This may be part of a dispute over parental access, which may involve the courts.
But before that happens, and before any agency offers additional financial support, single parents should use all the tools available to them including, for example, placing a garnishee on the absent parent’s income or even seizing assets.
Robert McCandless Delta, B.C.
Dramatic purposes
Re “What is not a bare trust for tax purposes?” (Online, March 27): If only the Canada Revenue Agency’s oppressive bare-trust rules had applied to King Lear, he might have thought twice before “sharing” his properties with Goneril and Regan – and Cordelia might have lived to inherit it all!
Lise Hendlisz Toronto
Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Keep letters to 150 words or fewer. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com