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
………………………………………………………………………………….
‘Misleading, if not deceptive’
I have just attempted the Liberal government’s survey on electoral reform at MyDemocracy.ca. Many questions conclude with “even if,” followed by some worst-case scenario: misleading, if not deceptive.
The survey asks if we agree or disagree that the ballot must be “simple and easy to understand” with an “even if” clause that implies Canadians might be faced under a new system with ballots that aren’t easy to understand and that limit their options.
Our current system has ballots that are simple and easy to understand, but they do not produce in the House of Commons a fair representation of how voters expressed themselves. We have had “majority” governments, including the current one, which controlled more than half the seats in Parliament with less than half the popular vote (sometimes less than 40 per cent).
How fair is that?
If the survey designers had wanted to offer an honest choice, their “even if” clause added to “ballots that are simple and easy to understand” should have been: “even if the resulting representation in Parliament is unfair.” That would have been an honest question.
Donna Stewart, North Vancouver
……………………………………………..
The constant repetition of how the options for electoral reform are either proportional reform or ranked/preferential ballots is extremely unhelpful (How Trudeau Set Up Election Reform To Fail – Dec. 8). It is quite possible to combine the two in a way that is user-friendly for the voter and results in a more full-bodied representation of the voters’ likes and dislikes than is currently the case. In such a hybrid model, existing riding boundaries can also be preserved and won or lost on the current first-past-the-post basis.
It may sound too good to be true but it is within reach if only our political parties could see past their noses and beyond their preconceived notions. The current impasse reminds one of the elephant in the room that everybody is determined to ignore.
Simon Rosenblum, Toronto
……………………………………………..
Conservatives seem to be most prominent among those opposed to changing our first-past-the-post electoral system. Yet they will choose their next leader by a “ranked ballot,” with each candidate receiving support based on the “proportion” of votes he or she won at the constituency level.
Inconsistent? Surely what is “best” for the nation should be “good enough” for the Conservative Party. I suppose they don’t want to elect a leader with less than majority support but seem to think it is all right to elect our governments this way.
Patrick Kyba, Guelph, Ont.
……………………………………………..
Commercializing pot is the issue
Re Panel To Tell Ottawa To Monitor Legal Pot (Dec. 8): The problems with marijuana will not result from its legalization but from the commercialization of this drug. A recent study of Grade 6 to 8 students (a high risk population) in southern California showed that students who were exposed to medical marijuana ads were twice as likely to intend to use cannabis than those who were not.
I hope we will not repeat the tragic mistake that occurred with cigarettes in the 1950s when only the “healthy” effects of its use was promoted by Big Tobacco to increase consumption.
James G. Wigmore, forensic toxicologist, Toronto
……………………………………………..
Sound bites can sell carbon tax
Re Trump Vs. Manning: Whose Plan Will The Tories Adopt? (Dec. 8): Sadly, Tony Keller’s argument that it is more difficult to be pro-carbon tax rather than against it in today’s sound-bite political environment rings true. But perhaps Conservatives who realize the importance of tackling carbon emissions for Canada’s future prosperity just need some creative help with their slogans.
I’m pretty sure Canadians would be for “Taxing pollution” and would even get excited about receiving their steadily increasing “Climate bonus cheques” under a revenue-neutral carbon pricing regime. With a little creativity and courage, pricing carbon and returning the money to Canadians may be an easier sell than nervous politicians imagine.
Christine Penner Polle, Red Lake, Ont.
……………………………………………..
Heads-up for kids’ soccer safety
Re Taking Headshots To Heart (Dec. 7): The general conclusion from the “We Can Do Better” concussion conference seems to be that the focus should be on youths rather than professionals in sports.
The Toronto Soccer Association is doing just that.
For more than two years, we have been monitoring, with positive results, our trials of a smaller, lighter Danish soccer ball that is designed to reduce both concussions and knee and ankle injuries. For this we have chosen our Under 13 Competitive Girls Division, since that is the age they traditionally graduate to an adult-size soccer ball, and unfortunately girls suffer more injuries in soccer than boys.
We have a successful collaboration agreement with the world class Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, which, through us, provides our 25,000 soccer players and their parents and guardians, from 24 different clubs, with concussion information, base-line testing, seminars, injury treatment and follow-up, as well as attending our tournament-type events with education staffs.
And we also provide authoritative concussion presentations for our mandatory annual coach’s kick-off meetings, as part of our effort to address the issue of concussion in youth soccer with both education and equipment.
Jacques Konig, vice-president, Toronto Soccer Association
Follow us on Twitter: @GlobeDebate
powered by sue.ng a legal search engine