Letters, May 16

Opinion

Benefits of proportional representation

Re: Despite a polarizing election, poll suggests Canadians don’t want a two-party system (May 13)

The recent poll indicating that many Canadians are wary of a two-party system highlights a crucial conversation about our electoral process. A shift towards proportional representation (PR) could be the key to fostering a more honest and inclusive political landscape.

Under a PR system, strategic voting would become a relic of the past. Voters would no longer feel compelled to choose a candidate solely to prevent an undesired outcome. Instead, they could vote with their true intentions, knowing that their choices would be accurately reflected in the overall election results. This would ensure that every vote truly counts, allowing for fair representation of diverse perspectives across the country.

Moreover, a proportional representation system would help reduce the divisions that currently exist between regions. It is essential to recognize that not everyone in Atlantic Canada aligns with Liberal values, just as not everyone in Western Canada identifies with Conservative ideologies.

This is not to suggest that hardcore ideologues won’t continually try to push their wares (I’m talking to you, Alberta separatists) but extremist views, built on real or imagined grievances, will no longer have the excuse of not having a voice — their true numbers would be reflected in election results. A two-party system oversimplifies our rich political landscape and fails to represent the varied interests of Canadians.

We can do better, Canada! Embracing proportional representation would not only enhance the integrity of our electoral process but also unite us as a nation by acknowledging and valuing the diverse voices that make up our society.

Let us advocate for a system that truly reflects the will of the people.

Bernard Gaudet

Winnipeg

A lesson for everyone

Re: Caribou killers on notice: Kinew (May 14)

Manitoba Wildlife Federation policy analyst Chis Heald asserts the carnage, waste of meat and shooting of cows is beyond words. Yet the MWF’s website has advice on baiting techniques to attract bears, in a state of semi-starvation after hibernation, to sites where very “brave hunters” can shoot down on them from stands in the trees above. This results in untold number of cubs being orphaned when their mothers are inadvertently killed.

The animal nations hold their lives as dear as we do ours. They don’t care who are taking them or why. All they know is that they do and they want it to end. If the province is going to sit down “everybody” for some difficult discussions, they have to invite to the table the non-consumptive enthusiasts of our wild places and include the advocates who amplify the voices of the silenced majority.

Debbie Wall

Winnipeg

South Africa not so dangerous

Re: A look at Trump’s Afrikaner ‘refugees’ (Think Tank, May 14)

Thanks to Gwynne Dyer for exposing misinformation about South Africa. South Africa, “the world in one country” is unmatched for its animals, geography and culture.

My wife and I recently spent six weeks travelling independently in South Africa and Lesotho. We respected security advice, avoided hot spots (downtown big cities), did not travel at night and relied on local knowledge. Overall, South Africa was an amazing and surprisingly affordable adventure.

In fact, the overall U.S. Travel Advisory security rating is the same as Western Europe and much better than most of Mexico.

Daniel Prowse

Winnipeg

Liaison with Ottawa

Re: Political experts, colleagues have confidence in rookie minister (May 13)

I congratulate Rebecca Chartrand on her appointment as the only Manitoba MP to the federal cabinet. However, I wonder if one of the five Winnipeg MPs should have also been appointed to cabinet. Rebecca is a new MP representing a vast northern riding. Most of her riding is not easily accessible to Winnipeg.

I would hope that one out of the five Winnipeg MPs will be the liaison between the Winnipeg City Council and the federal government. This liaison responsibility should not require any increase in the MP’s pay.

Fred Morris

Winnipeg

International example

Re: “Homeless strategy” (Letters, May 12)

Finland, with a population of 5.6 million, 86 per cent of its population living in urban areas, and summer and winter climates similar to Canada, has largely beaten homelessness with all its entailing problems.

Would it not be wise to look at their approaches? It does not take brain surgery.

Bill Schick

Winnipeg

Second verse, same as the first

Prime Minister Mark Carney announced his cabinet and out of the woodwork crawls Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to criticize that the new cabinet is just an extension of Justin Trudeau’s old cabinet.

Doesn’t he realize that Justin Trudeau is gone? All he can do is criticize but never offer any constructive suggestions. He is yesterday’s man and can’t seem to adjust to today. He’s locked in the past with the same old rhetoric.

Ken McLean

Starbuck

The insurer’s perspective

Re: End the industrial carbon tax (Think Tank, May 6)

It is fair to conclude from Gage Haubrich’s op-ed that he thinks the climate crisis can be ignored and separated from the economy.

The scientific community has for decades warned that man-made greenhouse gases will cause our Earth’s temperature to rise dangerously, thus causing a cascade of adverse effects including rising sea levels, the increasing severity of storms, floods, and droughts and other calamities. Well then, if the alarm raised by the scientists is to be ignored, and environmental radicals like Guilbeault and Trudeau are to be tuned out, or driven out, then what about the alarm raised by those in the insurance industry?

For example, a recent article Climate, Risk, Insurance: The Future of Capitalism by Gunther Thallinger, who is a board member of Allianz Group, does deal, as the title indicates, with the future of capitalism. You can find it online. Thallinger notes that Allstate and State Farm have exited the California market because of the wildfire risk. There are growing swathes in the U.S. that cannot get house insurance.

Perhaps those swathes seem small for now, but bear in mind that the Earth’s temperature is increasing and that house insurance is a necessary thing if you want to secure a mortgage on a house.

Thallinger’s point is the following, if Earth’s temperatures continue to rise, more and more assets, public and private, will become uninsurable; banks will not issue loans for uninsurable property (seems obvious); and if capitalists can’t get financing, capitalism has no future.

Think about that.

Ron Gaffray

Winnipeg