Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - April 8, 2024, Winnipeg, Manitoba Kinew should rethink alliances Re: Manitoba’s surprisingly anti-climate govern- ment (Think Tank, April 5) I agree with Scott Forbes’ arguments about the lack of incentives in the latest provincial budget to deal with climate change. I was shocked to see Premier Wab Kinew have a photo op with federal Opposition Leader Pierre Poilievre, not a good look. Poilievre has made the carbon tax a target to build his own popularity while ignoring the very dangerous future he is leaving to younger generations. Poilievre has no alternate plan for dealing with climate change. It is easy to come up with catchy slogans to criticize the Liberals’ policy, but not so easy to communicate his own proposals. The Conservatives have no policies to put forward. The provincial NDP do not either. Kinew prefers to ignore all the forest fires that are threatening our northern forests. Do we need forest fires in southern Manitoba for this government to notice? I am disappointed that Kinew gives publicity to an irresponsible populist instead of educating the Manitoba populace about why buying big gas-guzzling vehicles is a bad idea. His “axe the gas tax” policy is not helping cut down on emissions. Shame on all those people who drive big vehi- cles in the city when they don’t need them. Kinew should ally his government with the policies of the federal government, which is trying to do something about climate. RUTH SWAN Winnipeg Hoping for a Biden win Continuing the grift, Mr. Now Religious (Citi- zen Donald Trump ) is currently selling Bibles. If he doesn’t win the U.S. presidential election in November, all his delayed court cases will even- tually materialize. He will assuredly be found guilty of a few indictments against him. Incarceration is in the cards and most deservedly so. Even though the current president, Joe Biden, is old and not perfect, let’s hope he wins for the sake of democracy. ROBERT J. MOSKAL Winnipeg Portage and Main decision bizarre Opening pedestrian traffic at the corner of Portage Avenue and Main Street is a bizarre deci- sion and one that has not been well thought out. I am not a resident of Winnipeg but I expect some provincial funding will end up helping to pay for whatever happens at the intersection. I worked at the corner of Portage and Main for many years and I am very familiar with the volume of traffic at that intersection. It is very badly congested now without slowing traffic flow down and add- ing pedestrians to the mix. Adding to the congestion are pedestrians who frequently ignore the Walk/Don’t Walk signals and the elderly and handicapped who will take a longer time to clear an intersection. This delays anyone wanting to turn left or right. So there will be lots of injured pedestrians whom have been hit by frustrated and angry drivers caught in even worse bumper-to-bumper traffic. This decision should be an issue of providing both safe and efficient traffic flow and safe pedestrian traffic at one of Winnipeg’s more com- plex and high volume intersections. But that point seems to have escaped your mayor and council. Replacing the leaking membrane over the concourse is the sensible option. But in doing so, I would suggest looking at installing multiple layers of water protection and not just replacing an old leaky membrane with another new mem- brane. Waterproofing technology has most likely been greatly improved since the concourse was first built in the 1970s. The concourse is one of those wonderful unique features that Winnipeg should be proud of and should cherish. I loved the concourse in my time working at Portage and Main. I and many concourse pedestrians have encountered lost or disorientated souls and we have gladly helped them on their way. Perhaps the mayor and coun- cil could admit they made an error and reconsid- er this decision. ERROL DICKSON La Salle On family reunification Reuniting newcomer families is a major hall- mark of Canadian immigration; where permanent residents, citizens and even temporary residents (students and work permit holders) can easily bring their spouse and children to Canada to join them and live together as families are meant to be together. Helping families to reunite does not only bring happiness and achievement of family plans but it also plays a significant role in how the country attracts, retains and even integrates immigrants who will contribute to the success of the country. The inability to reunite with your spouse as an immigrant can be emotionally tough and can have adverse mental and even physical health consequences on the immigrant and families in the home country. Newcomers are at risk of fewer social networks to support them navigate a new environment and succeed. International students in Canada contribute greatly towards the Canadian economy. As a commitment towards their success, the federal government of Canada has over the years includ- ed them in the family reunification program, where an international student can bring his or her spouse to Canada. When a spouse of an international student arrives in Canada, the spouse receives an open work permit to work and support the partner economically and emotion- ally during their stay. In addition to this, prov- inces such as Manitoba issue a health card for open work permit holders, hence, the spouse can add the international student as a dependent for health coverage. On Jan. 22, Marc Miller, federal minister of immigration, refugees and citizenship, men- tioned that in the coming weeks there will be restrictions to the open work permits for spous- es of international students. Open work permits will only be available to spouses of post-gradu- ate students (masters and doctorates), whereas spouses of international students in undergradu- ate and college programs will not be eligible any longer. This came as a shock to many undergrad- uate and college enrolled international students in Canada. International students are a vulnerable and racialized population in Canada, and de-integrat- ing them in this manner does not show Canada’s commitment to inclusivity and fighting discrim- ination. It appears that postgraduate students bring weightier contribution to Canada’s econo- my than undergraduate and college international students. Many international students choose to immi- grate permanently to Canada with their families, who will also become part of the success of Cana- da’s economy through their skills and knowledge. I hope Minister Miller reconsiders this decision and allow undergraduate and college enrolled in- ternational students bring their spouse to Canada to support them emotionally, mentally and even economically as they study, and this will conse- quently develop the Canadian economy through immigrating spouses with diverse talents. JONATHAN WORAE Winnipeg LETTERS TO THE EDITOR WHAT’S YOUR TAKE? THE FREE PRESS WANTS TO HEAR FROM YOU. The Free Press is committed to publishing a diverse selection of letters from a broad cross-section of our audience. The Free Press will also consider longer submissions for inclu- sion on our Think Tank page, which is a platform mandated to present a wide range of perspectives on issues of current interest. We welcome our readers’ feedback on articles and letters on these pages and in other sections of the Free Press ● Email: Letters: letters@winnipegfreepress.com Think Tank submissions: opinion@winnipegfreepress.com ● Post: Letters to the Editor, 1355 Mountain Ave., Winnipeg, R2X 3B6 Please include your name, address and daytime phone number. ● Follow us on Twitter @WFPEditorials OUR VIEW YOUR SAY COMMENT EDITOR: RUSSELL WANGERSKY 204-697-7269 ● RUSSELL.WANGERSKY@WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM A6 MONDAY APRIL 8, 2024 Trafficking in hurtful words I T’S a beautiful spring morning in your Winni- peg neighbourhood. The grass hasn’t started to green yet, the boulevard is still a sea of soupy mud, but the birds are singing and the sun feels deliciously warm on your face. Time to walk the dog. Next door, a neighbour is carefully raking up last fall’s leaves, all of them damp and uni- form-brown, and he’s tipping rake-loads into paper compostable bags. “Hi, you old pedophile!” you shout to him, waving cheerfully. “Whose kids are you grooming today?” He stops raking, and stares at you, shocked. Down the sidewalk you go, the dog eager, pull- ing at the leash and stopping every few hundred feet to sink his nose into the bounty of spring smells. It’s wonderful not to have to worry about the sidewalk ice anymore, and you don’t even mind the herky-jerk pace of the distracted dog. Near the corner, new neighbours are unpack- ing household goods from a rented van. A pair of small children charge up to the inside of the fence around their yard, curious and shy at the same time, the way all kids are, and your dog happily stuffs its muzzle through the fence palings, eager to make new friends. “This is our Canada,” you say, smiling broadly. “You should go back to where you came from!” Two young men set down the bookshelves they are carrying and turn towards you, their faces hardening. OK, so, most likely, none of that actually hap- pened in your neighbourhood today. And, most likely, you didn’t say any of those hateful things. But spend any time online, and it most assured- ly will happen, if nowhere else than on the fringes of your internet neighbourhood. It may even happen right in the core of that internet space — you may be the one gleefully saying those exact things. How did we get here? Obviously, the anonymity of the internet has helped. There is a perverse pleasure in attacking people you don’t even know, especially when the anti-abuse and anti-racism guidelines of social media sites such as X are applied more as if they are mere suggestions than like rules that carry effective penalties. Children and young adults, let alone the rest of us, must be getting a completely distorted picture of what life is actually like. When you walk out into the world surrounded by strangers — and es- pecially for the first time — how can you help but believe that a significant number of the people around you are hiding hateful beliefs and person- al insults? That people are masquerading as good? It’s hard not to believe that online behaviour has contributed to a general coarsening of public behaviour. There have been public protests for years, suggesting that federal politicians should be voted out of office for their actions. It’s much newer to suggest that they should be hanged or shot — but that kind of language has managed to transfer from being an internet phenomenon to being somehow acceptable. And it’s not just politicians who are facing un- reasonable attacks. An Ottawa carbon tax protester was filmed this week by a compatriot as he received a $490 ticket for using a megaphone while driving — the pro- tester apparently had no problem publicly shout- ing at the non-white police officer, “This is our Canada!” And having it posted on line. Yep — the exact same words from higher up on this page. It’s not so far-fetched after all. It’s also disgraceful. There should be a basic rule: if you wouldn’t say it in person, you shouldn’t say it online. Oh and, by the way, in case it isn’t abundantly clear already, if you would say it in person, you’re the problem. EDITORIAL Published since 1872 on Treaty 1 territory and the homeland of the Métis ELISE AMENDOLA / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILES Hateful speech is easy to come by online, especially in the age of social media. ;