The special rapporteur plus other letters, June 6: ‘As much as I dislike Justin Trudeau, I support him getting on with using David Johnston’

Open this photo in gallery:

Follow the lead

Re “Way out” (Letters, June 5): A letter-writer suggests that it’s “irrational” for Ukraine to have continued belief that it will gain anything from this “appalling war.”

Ukrainians are fighting for their very existence. They choose to fight knowing better than anyone all the risks and consequences of so doing.

We are in no place, then, to second-guess their judgment. The moral choice we should be obligated to is fully supporting whatever path Ukraine chooses.

Michael Colborne Toronto

Common good

Re “Saudi Arabia is top export destination for Canadian arms after United States in 2022″ (June 5): It seems the height of hypocrisy for Canada to continue arming Saudi Arabia and re-establishing diplomatic relations “on the basis of mutual respect and common interests.”

Are there improvements in the Saudi record on imprisonment, torture, murder, etc. that we missed? Apparently money talks louder than anything else.

Michael Dettman Vancouver

Special circumstances

Re “ ‘No one person’ responsible for Ottawa failing to warn Michael Chong he was being targeted, national-security adviser says” (June 2): I am reminded of the saying that one should never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.

Gisele Bourgeois-Law Victoria

Re “If Parliament has no confidence in Johnston, how long can it have confidence in the man who appointed him?” (Opinion, June 3): If Jagmeet Singh does the honourable thing and defeats this government, I will give him and the NDP my vote for the first time in my seven-decades-plus of life.

Leo Quilty Brampton, Ont.

Of all people, David Johnston should recognize that MPs represent Canadians across the country. It is therefore citizens who have expressed the wish to have him step aside.

That Mr. Johnston has chosen to ignore Parliament should diminish the value of his intent to further examine the issues. To preserve his reputation as an outstanding Canadian, I hope he changes his mind and resigns.

Gordon Simpson Toronto

I did not vote for Justin Trudeau’s party because I neither like nor respect him. Yet I’m disappointed by most of what I read regarding David Johnston.

When Stephen Harper used Mr. Johnston to look into Brian Mulroney’s dealings with Karlheinz Schreiber, he wasn’t a problem. His understanding of the need for a closed inquiry to protect lives and families in the intelligence community should be evident to all.

As much as I dislike Mr. Trudeau, I support him getting on with using Mr. Johnston.

Michael Newell Toronto

As one of several dozen special rapporteurs appointed by the United Nations Human Rights Council, I find the use of this title for the appointment held by David Johnston acutely embarrassing.

Unlike Mr. Johnston, UN special rapporteurs are fiercely independent and serve as volunteers despite the onerous demands on our time. I urge Justin Trudeau to terminate Mr. Johnston’s position and stop abusing the phrase “special rapporteur.”

David Boyd UN special rapporteur on human rights and the environment, Vancouver

More, more

Re “Cross country” (Letters, June 3): A letter-writer expresses dismay over the possibility of increased taxes in Alberta had the NDP won the election.

We have a shortage of hospitals and staff and forest service firefighters. There are thousands of abandoned wells in need of remediation. These are just some of the needs that probably can’t be addressed without more taxes.

I am willing to pay more taxes as long as the funds are used wisely. Taxes allow modern societies to function, not just in Alberta.

Kenneth Roy Edmonton

Hand in hand

Re “Immigration: Canada needs more newcomers and (much more) housing” (Editorial, June 5): Almost 30 per cent of Canadian homes are owned as investment properties by people that live elsewhere.

Under present rules, new home construction will most likely be snapped up by well-to-do investors, not the underhoused. This issue should be openly discussed, not ignored.

Tom Suhadolc Grimsby, Ont.

Linking increased immigration to adequate housing is critical, but seemingly without a plan.

Let’s hope the majority of new Canadians are in health care or at the very least healthy. Building better health care to accommodate all Canadians should be equally important.

William England Edmonton

Although I am generally in favour of immigration, it makes no sense to me to increase demand for housing and health care until we have addressed these issues.

I am calling for a one-year moratorium on immigration to allow us some breathing room. It would also behoove the federal and provincial governments to address long-term solutions, rather than the usual demand of provinces for more federal money.

Derryck Smith Vancouver

All my friends

Re “Fellow Canadians: Visit British Columbia at your own risk” (June 2): It is interesting that B.C. health care is being painted as being in overarching crisis affecting everyone.

Recently, my husband had a colonoscopy (a two-month wait) and a cataract removal (one month). My brother waited three months for hip-replacement surgery (although it took a long time to see the orthopedic surgeon). My friend, who is experiencing cancer, is getting timely care including a liver biopsy within one week of concerning imaging.

I have no doubt there are challenges, have been for years. However, getting everyone into a panic is unhelpful.

Jane McCall Delta, B.C.

Butt out

Re “Just say no to Ottawa’s nanny-state rules for smokers” (Editorial, June 2): We fail to see how good advice is intrusive.

If health care professionals make recommendations, is that intrusive? If government echoes the advice, does it become oppressive?

There seems to be a conflation of advice and laws. It’s debatable whether people should have the right to engage in harmful behaviour. In this case, no one is advocating a ban, only discouraging behaviour.

Roger and Rozanne Stein Collingwood, Ont.

Was the nanny state responsible for the mandatory use of seatbelts, airbags and daytime running lights in cars; smoke and carbon detectors in homes; mandatory winter tires in Quebec?

I recall that, for each of these initiatives, somebody yelled “nanny state.” I think the government should be lauded for its moves, as it was for making cigarette manufacturers pay heavily for misleading advertising.

Living with chronic bronchitis, emphysema and ischemic heart disease is serious business that is tragic for families and expensive for society.

Michael Gordon MD, Toronto

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