Letters, April 16

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 16/04/2025 (347 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Right move by premier

Re: Delight, dismay over Kinew’s Lemay Forest peace plan (April 14)

Congratulations to Premier Wab Kinew for having the foresight to stand up to those who would destroy every green space and forest in Manitoba if they can make a buck from it.

There are acres and acres of empty land without forests on it that they could develop. Mature forests in urban areas are very rare and should be protected because once they’re gone they’re never coming back.

Not all, but most developers, could care less about doing what’s right when there’s money to be made.

Ken McLean

Starbuck

The way of compassion

Re: “No need to expand MAID” (Letters, April 15)

The closing comment of Daniel Zekveld’s letter overlooks the fact that too many people do take death as a “solution” to suffering. It is called suicide.

Offering treatment to offset pain and suffering, whether it be physical or emotional, may be the best option, but when that fails, isn’t MAID a more compassionate path than suicide?

Ellen Karr

Winnipeg

Don’t dawdle on defence

Mark Carney is bloviating about how the Liberals will revamp the defence procurement system. News flash! The problem is not the process, it is the players.

The defence procurement system is driven by politicians. Politicians who won’t commit to investing money on defence when there is no global crisis to hide behind. It is this lack of courage that’s the reason Canada’s fighter force is a flying aviation history exhibit. It is the reason there are no operational fixed-wing search-and-rescue planes in the country. It is the endless delays in decision making to proactively replace military systems when they are well beyond their best-before date.

The need to replace the aging Buffalo was identified back in the ’90s, the CF-18s were supposed to be replaced in the early 2000s. The government would not make the tough decisions; thus our military was forced to employ using outdated aircraft in the vital role of search and rescue and send fighter aircraft that belonged in museums, not on an international deployment. So yes, blame the process, Mr. Carney, but when you do so, please be standing in front of a mirror so you can see where the problem lies.

The latest boondoggle surrounding inept decision-making is replacing Canada’s ancient, more than 40-year-old CF-18s with the F-35. Trudeau put a stick in the spokes on the F-35 program back in 2015, saying they needed to review the process. After seven years of process (read: waffling), they came to the same decision made by the Conservatives in 2010, that the F-35 is the best option. The seven-year delay is not a process problem, it is flagrant incompetence. Now with all the trade and tariff issues created by Trump, the Liberals are once again saying they need to review the F-35 purchase. Déja vu?

What will they find, you ask? On the surface will be the childish playground taunt of “taking their ball home” and not playing just to spite the Americans, and cancel the remaining F-35 purchase. Despite the fact that Canada has already realized over $4 billion in offset programs directly tied to the F-35 purchase. Despite the fact that over 20 nations, including all of our major allies that we would operate with on the international stage in a coalition, have chosen the F-35.

The inane talk of getting the Swedish Gripen fighter has resurfaced. And why is that inane? What are the consequences of such a decision? Massive! For example, the Gripen is powered by the American designed General Electric F414 engine, many of its weapon-systems and weapons are American designed and built; thus, Sweden cannot sell the Gripen without American approval. Does anyone for a moment think that Trump would allow that to happen, i.e. giving permission for Sweden to sell the Gripen to Canada after we cancel buying the F-35?

With more than four decades of service, as a fighter pilot in the Air Force, I’ve witnessed this political dance far too many times. Canada wants to be a player on the world stage. We want to sit at the G-7 table and feel like we belong, that we have something that we can contribute.

As a nation I believe our future on the world stage will always entail contributing to military coalitions. Such is the world we live in. The reality is that fact comes with a cost. That cost is an investment, not an expense. Politicians need to understand and accept this and be willing to make the tough, proactive decisions on defence procurement. Decisions that will set up our military professionals for success. Elbows up!

Gary Hook

Winnipeg

Spreading a message

Re: A knee-jerk reaction (Think Tank, April 14)

My mom died of breast cancer so cut me a little slack if you’re offended by my language as I express my outrage over government censorship of breast cancer posters.

Because sometimes, when politicians pander to thin-skinners, families suffer and people die. Disallowing use of common breast terms such as tits, boobies, hooters, etc. are knee-jerk reactions that favour outdated anti-sexual or sexually discomforted mind sets over lives, health and happiness. All ad campaigns have objectives. I imaging the objective here is to increase breast checks — to the point where breast checks are way up and deaths are way down.

As a retired marketer, I can think of 10 campaigns that would help move the needle. But I can’t think of one that would be improved by vote-protective government meddling, or misguided public criticism that puts outdated proprieties over heath, happiness and survival.

How’s this for a start: ‘This government is hiring a hands-off ad agency that we will trust to handle certain public-awareness health messaging initiatives. The goal of our breast cancer breast check campaign will be a 10 per cent increase in breast exams and breast cancer detection for each of the next five years, and a 90 per cent reduction in breast cancer related breast removal, and death by 2030. And we’ll let the chosen agency say whatever they think will help to get all Manitobans on side with that.”

Dan O’Dell

Winnipeg

Cannabis complications

Re: Anyone can smell the problem: weed and driving (Editorial, April 14)

You opined that “a staggering 50 per cent of the drivers” driving to and from cannabis stores “tested positive for recent cannabis use,” and that “smoking weed and driving is also impaired driving.”

Alas, the problem is not so simple. Drivers may test positive for cannabis metabolites in oral fluid for up to 72 hours after consumption, long after the effects have worn off, depending in part on and how often the consumer partakes.

Further, studies have found that even accurate measurements of active THC in blood samples are not indicative of impairment, which depends in part on the consumer’s “tolerance” to cannabis and their driving experience.

Obviously the smell of cannabis does not indicate impairment either.

Of course, driving while impaired by any drug is dangerous and rightfully illegal, but the good news is that an average dose of cannabis is less impairing than a street-legal .05 BAC dose of alcohol. Cannabis consumers tend to overestimate their impairment and either refrain from driving, or attempt to compensate by driving more defensively. The exact opposite is true of alcohol.

Matthew M. Elrod

Victoria, B.C.