Letters to the editor, Sept. 15: ‘Through travel to the United States and respectful conversations with Americans, I have come to realize … voting for Donald Trump was the lesser of two poor options’

Open this photo in gallery:

State of the union

Re “Snowbirds, for the love of country, resist the siren call of U.S. travel” (Report on Business, Sept. 9): While I appreciate the passion to stand up for Canada, I believe an alternate view to banning U.S. visits would be beneficial.

Through travel to the United States and respectful conversations with Americans, I have come to realize many voted for Donald Trump because they felt the Democrat alternative was a worse outcome for their families from a social perspective. We can disagree with their choices, but we should not ignore or reject their feelings and views. In many of their minds, it seems that voting for him was the lesser of two poor options.

Only by engaging with Americans can we gain this understanding and remain true to our Canadian roots so bravely described on the 25th anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001, by Jean Chrétien: open, generous and strong.

Let’s all work in both Canada and the U.S. to ensure we have candidates with strong character-based, seasoned leadership.

Brad Vollmershausen Norfolk County, Ont.

Re “Trump calls for Irish reunification during visit to his Doonbeg golf course” (Online, Sept. 12): In the spirit of meddling in other nations’ affairs, may I respectfully suggest that Donald Trump start with the reunification of his own sadly divided country.

Steven Diener Toronto

House repairs

Re “The Prime Minister should make the House his home” (Editorial, Sept. 12): It is refreshing to read that “certainly, Question Period is no model of Athenian debate. Showboating, grandstanding, heckling and (on the government side) bloviating, prevaricating and deflecting: all are unlovely features of QP.”

Why should this be? Those of us who participated in Model Parliament in high school or university took our political roles seriously and debated important issues of the time.

Surely Canadians can expect their elected representatives to consider it their duty to use Question Period as an opportunity to be open with voters, discuss critical issues with intelligence and offer viable solutions.

We deserve better.

Heather MacFadyen Canmore, Alta.

During my decades of observing the successes and failures of our federal governments, I cannot recall a single Question Period that helped get the job done through constructive discussion.

Once upon a time, Question Period played an important role when there were few other mechanisms to communicate to the public and hold government to account. Now the sources of timely information are almost limitless, although we should be careful to validate sources and authenticity.

I look forward to viewing Mark Carney’s YouTube addresses and his presentation at the European Parliament in Strasbourg, France. I suspect the discussion amongst his European Union peers will be far more informative, constructive and impactful than what we would hear during Question Period.

Let us recognize Question Period for what it is: a quaint democratic practice that no longer serves the purpose originally intended.

Stuart Brindley Hamilton

The Prime Minister could waste his valuable time answering lame questions (repeated in English and French) in the House, or he could compromise by following British tradition: Attend on Wednesdays for a version of Prime Minister’s Questions.

Thirty minutes of non-stop questions from all sides, friend and foe alike. Now that’s democracy – and answers – in action.

Christopher Causton Victoria

The question is one of balance: time participating in the inanities of Question Period versus getting on with business.

Polling would suggest many Canadians think Mark Carney is getting it about right.

Ian Bryden Calgary

Can’t afford it

Re “A fix for the foreign buyer ban” (Editorial, Sept. 10): Governments should consider that if this ban’s underlying aim was to protect “affordability” for Canadians, then when has there ever been profit in prohibiting wealthy foreigners from purchasing residences in the luxury segment? For example, multimillion-dollar homes in Greater Victoria are wildly beyond the means of the vast majority of Canadians.

Over the past several years, the foreign buyer ban has made the sale of such luxury homes difficult to nearly impossible, punishing sellers who are challenged to liquidate these valuable assets at the best price. It also foolishly starved governments of much-needed revenue. This includes the spinoff benefits that naturally occur when wealthy individuals buy luxury properties and renovate them, or otherwise choose to spend discretionary income making other purchases in local economies.

If Canada is to achieve its economic and social potential, thinking big requires a broader mindset. That should include the thoughtful throttling of yesterday’s protectionist policies.

Randall Mang Sidney, B.C.

What works

Re “Leading mental health hospital cuts wait times by condensing programs, hiring and tracking data” (Sept. 14): The Royal’s dramatic reduction in psychiatric wait times is encouraging, but attributing it to the consolidation of specialized programs may be premature.

The Ottawa hospital simultaneously hired 12 psychiatrists and introduced centralized tracking of patient demand. Greater clinical capacity, simpler referral pathways and better information may all have been necessary to achieve the reported improvement.

Health care services are interconnected systems. Changing one component can remove one bottleneck while creating another, and measures such as throughput and waiting time may not capture effects on specialized expertise, staff retention, quality of care, teaching or research.

The lesson may therefore be broader than fewer programs work better. Successful redesign requires understanding which parts of a care pathway depend on one another and measuring what happens to the whole system when they are changed.

Russell Schachar MD, FRCPC, FCAHS; Research Institute and department of psychiatry, The Hospital for Sick Children; Toronto

Creative destruction

Re “Ontario announces 40,000 new seats at universities and colleges, with focus on practical job training” (Sept. 11): In welcoming Ontario’s funding mostly for technical subjects, the words of McMaster University’s president confirmed to me its disregard of much else, as shown by actions such as the recent suspending of some longstanding creative arts programs.

The Ontario government has made clear it shares the opinion that the arts have little value. It continually ignores their large economic benefits and human importance.

Even if technical subjects share some of what the arts can do, to underfund them ignores what work and life entail and makes a society ill-suited to handle the challenges posed by technology itself.

Paul Rapoport Professor emeritus, McMaster University; Hamilton

Naturally

Re “Menopause symptoms aren’t just disruptive, they’re costly” (Sept. 11): Since menopause is not a disease, might we try to find a better word than “symptoms” when we talk about the experiences associated with it?

Judy Segal Vancouver

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

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