Re: “Notwithstanding clause a democratic safeguard” (Letter of the day, March 27)
Denis Coderre forcefully defends the notwithstanding clause in Section 33 of the 1982 Constitution Act as the embodiment of a fundamental principle that elected officials in a democracy must ultimately govern, even if it sometimes requires overriding charter rights.
And yet, Section 1 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms already imposes what seems to be a sufficient limit on rights guarantees, stating it is “subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.”
The notwithstanding clause, then, seems logically to contemplate the infringement of guaranteed freedoms and rights in a way that cannot be demonstrably justified in our free and democratic society.
If so, that should be only in extreme circumstances and, even then, as Section 33 indeed requires, for a limited time.
If, instead, the override clause is to be treated as a fundamental feature of our democracy to be invoked whenever governments see fit — pre-emptively and beyond the reach of the courts — that would seem to be a detriment to our democracy rather than a safeguard.
Daniel Levinson, Côte-St-Luc
Put the focus on primary care
My admiration goes out to the doctors who insist our health-care system pivot to a priority for access to primary care, especially for vulnerable people, women, the young and the old or fragile.
However, they need to sell primary care to aspiring doctors so that many more will value the field and go into it with the understanding that our whole system depends on them.
The more we care for people in primary care, the stronger our population will become and the more efficient our system will be.
Yes, cutting edge technology and treatment are wonderful, but they should not come at the expense of basic health care.
Unless the long-term effects of preventive medicine are well documented and publicized, I fear we will continue to struggle with access to basic health care services for everyone.
At the same time, we must ensure the working life of a family doctor is sustainable and rewarding.
Julie Waters, Montreal West
Youth employment demands attention
Re: “Job losses aren’t cause for panic yet, but youth finding it tough to find a job” (The Gazette, March 18)
For an entire generation, it is a giant barrier to leaving home, building stable lives, gaining experience and preparing for the road ahead.
We cannot risk a future where technological shifts, such as AI-driven change and automation, leave an entire generation behind.
Youth unemployment shouldn’t be treated as a side issue. It demands programs and policies that protect youth so they can enter the job market and plan for the future.
Shannon Michelle Booth, Sainte-Agathe-des-Monts
Submitting a letter to the editor
Letters should be sent by email to letters@montrealgazette.com
We prioritize letters that respond to, or are inspired by, articles published by The Gazette.
If you are responding to a specific article, let us know which one.
Letters should be sent uniquely to us. The shorter they are — ideally, fewer than 200 words — the greater the chance of publication.
Timing, clarity, factual accuracy and tone are all important, as is whether the writer has something new to add to the conversation.
We reserve the right to edit and condense all letters. Care is taken to preserve the core of the writer’s argument.
Our policy is not to publish anonymous letters, those with pseudonyms or “open letters” addressed to third parties.
Letters are published with the author’s full name and city or neighbourhood/borough of residence. Include a phone number and address to help verify identity; these will not be published.
We will not indicate to you whether your letter will be published. If it has not been published within 10 days or so, it is not likely to be.
Please send the letter in the body of an email, not as an attachment.