Letters, Aug. 13

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 13/08/2025 (231 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Bad debt versus good debt

My understanding is that Prime Minister Mark Carney has indicated that Canada will spend over $1 billion to appease an uncertified madman over a 34-kilogram “rounding error” of fentanyl stopped by American border agents on their northern border. Then he will find an additional $9 billion to boost our NATO defence budget to two per cent of GDP by next April.

Plus the Orange Menace that has threatened to take over Canada wants us to spend US$71 billion on his Golden Dome, when nobody can stop forest fire smoke crossing borders, let alone radioactive dust, which will spread worldwide.

To me most of this colossal expenditure would be “bad debt.” We need those funds to deal with man-made climate change, building sewage treatment plants instead of polluting our rivers and lakes, repairing our neglected health care and implementing pharmacare; “good debt” investing in a healthy future. Investing in things to keep us all alive and healthy, as opposed to destroying heaven on Earth.

Andy Maxwell

Winnipeg

A better way

Re: Locked lids key to limiting litter: city (Aug. 8)

There’s a better way, and it’s happening in every other province, many U.S. states and EU countries. Manitoba needs a deposit-return system.

Beverage containers make up a huge amount of litter by volume in every city, and Winnipeg is one of the worst I’ve seen. On a recent 15-minute walk, I counted almost 20 containers along my path — from energy drink cans to liquor bottles to plastic water bottles. What I didn’t see were beer cans, because there’s a cash incentive to return them.

A June report by the international group Reloop looked at developed cities around the world. It found clear evidence that a good deposit return system cut beverage container litter by an average of 54 per cent. It’s especially effective for drinks consumed away from home.

There’s another benefit: gathering recyclables for cash provides easy income. I saw this firsthand living in Saskatoon. Saskatchewan has a great cash-for-returns system and we got to know recyclers in our neighbourhood who worked hard to earn that small income. Did they leave a mess? Rarely — and never after we started putting our beverage containers separate. Plus, I saw far less litter than in Winnipeg. Of course, consumers, sports teams and community groups use the system to benefit, too.

In the 1990s, Manitoba gave producers a choice and only beer/malt producers chose a 10-cent return-for-deposit. Three decades later, it’s past time to revisit this decision. A deposit return system would tackle litter and provide an opportunity for income. Who knows, it might even cut down on the theft of other materials for quick cash.

Leslie Vryenhoek

Winnipeg

Hold students accountable

Re: “Deeper dive into violence” (Letters, Aug. 8)

Is there a magic psychological bullet to solve the issue of violence in schools?

I worked in schools for 35 years. What I observed more often than not was a tendency to make excuses for children rather than hold them accountable for their behaviour. School shooters in the U.S. are not products of abusive homes. Rather, they are kids whose parents have indulged them and given into them. These children control their parents rather than the other way around.

We have forgotten that external controls help children develop internal controls. Why has shoplifting increased dramatically in recent years? It is because shoplifters can get away with shoplifting. What happened to consequences for misbehaviour?

There is no magic bullet here. Roll up your sleeves and start doing the work to hold students accountable for their behaviour. And as a school, don’t count on parents to support you in this challenging work. They are too busy, out of a misguided sense of loyalty, siding with their children against the schools.

Mac Horsburgh

Winnipeg

Taking exception

Re: “Not-so-good neighbour” (Letters, Aug. 9)

I take strong exception to the statement by writer R. J. Moskal that “Real Canadians should abhor any Canadian leaving Canada to visit family, friends or just vacation in the good old U.S.A. because of President Donald Trump’s recent tariff increase…” By any definition of abhor, this letter urges Canadians to regard me with hatred or loathing because I choose to visit children and grandchildren in Minnesota.

It implies, among other things, that my staying home and demonstrating disrespect for the tariffs has a higher Canadian value than my crossing the border to share time with my grandchildren. I find that judgment troubling.

Perhaps there are others who get so much fulfilment when Canadians refrain from visiting family or friends that they truly loathe grandparents like me. Certainly I had not heard from them until the Free Press published Moskal’s letter.

Rocky Pollack

Winnipeg

Providing needed care

Re: Driven by faith, frustrated by funding (Aug. 5)

The article paints a horrific picture of the massive provincial underfunding of daily meals that residents of Manitoba care homes have experienced for many years, and apparently are now expected to appreciate.

It is unconscionable that the provincial government has not increased the amount of funding it provides to care-home residents since 2009.

Current residents are fed food that is mass-produced in off-site commercial kitchens, frozen and then reheated. The very thought of this turns one’s stomach, yet the Manitoba NDP government thinks that this is both salutary, nutritional and appropriate.

Imagine attempting to feed one’s family in 2025 with a 2009 budget. This would be risible if it were not so utterly disrespectful of our sage, elder population, whose contribution to the creation and sustainment of our society is so often ignored. Yet, they are fed reheated slop.

The current NDP government, especially current NDP Health Minister Uzoma Asagwara, is fond of pointing fingers to the former Progressive Conservative government’s shrinking of health-care resources — by former premiers Brian Pallister and Heather Stefanson — for the current catastrophic state of provincial health care. Yes, that is accurate, and Stefanson is responsible for keeping Audrey Gordon as health-care minister despite her utter incompetence.

However, one can certainly ask, two years after the PCs were booted from government: “What has Kinew’s government and his election promises done to improve health care, its delivery? And also, for the health of Manitoba seniors living in long-care facilities?”

Why has the NDP provincial government continued to starve residents of care homes, in keeping with catastrophic Stefanson’s and gibberish-spewing Gordon’s policies?

Cynically, is this the result of a provincial government’s macabre response to the ever-increasing number of seniors?

Demographics show that the numbers of seniors will increase significantly in the years to come.

Some will need significant government support. More and more, each year.

Are Kinew and his government able to respect and provide for seniors, as they deserve?

Kenneth Meadwell

Winnipeg