Category: Federal Politics

Frum, from hunger!

by Peter Lowry

The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation news used to have balanced panels to help Canadians understand issues. That idea seems to be gone along with Peter Mansbridge. Instead we can now get a biased, neo-conservative David Frum being lobbed soft-ball questions by an admiring news reader. And who trusts that?

What is even more annoying, Barbara Frum’s kid told us nothing we did not already know about his friend Donald Trump. After all, how many times do you have to hear about Trump’s narcissism before you start to understand it?

You almost feel relieved these days when a deadly hurricane can replace the daily ‘Fear of Trump’ newscasts.

Not that Frum can replace anything. His great claim to fame is that he wrote the “axis of evil” line for former U.S. President George W. Bush. As a political speech writer, he had obviously never learned that you do not claim credit for what you have written for others. The copyright belongs to those who pay you to write for them.

Even the times when I wrote speeches for free for my M.P. or for friends in politics, it was never revealed to the media who had written the speech. There was the odd time that it was obvious who had written it but the media would go along.

This has got me thinking back over my political career and maybe I was wrong to never personally publicize my political involvement. I was a ‘spin doctor’ long before they called the role ‘spin doctor.’ And I never called campaign operations a ‘war room.’ While I used to train campaign workers with quotes from von Clausewitz’ On War, I never believed in a War Room. It sounded too confining. The only way you can stay current with what is happening in a campaign is to constantly listen to the voters and feel the mood. If you are cloistered or only listening to sycophants, you are what is called ‘drinking your own bath water.’ You will delude yourself.

That is why I am concerned about the CBC failing its audience of people who want to not only hear the news but also to hear why. People like Frum hardly provide balance. We expect balanced news from the CBC.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

The water of life.

by Peter Lowry

A handful of snow melting on a peak in the Rockies can become part of a torrent by the time it reaches the ocean. It is the water of life for the creatures of both land and sea. It is a place for salmon to spawn, the creatures of the forest to drink and humans to take their waters. It feeds the green of our forests, the growth of our cash crops and the needs of our towns, cities and farms.

And it is so fragile. The disgrace is if we spill the contents of a pipeline loaded with diluted bitumen into those waters. From the tiny babbling brooks to the mightiest of rivers, diluted bitumen is the threat of death. It floats down river to when its diluent is washed away and then it sinks, there on the bottom to conflict with the ecosystem.

Diluted bitumen is not crude oil. It is enabled to go through a pipeline by heating that pipeline and forcing it through the pipeline at greater pressure. It is not a question as to will the pipeline fail but when?

Ask the 70,000 people who live along the North Saskatchewan River. The Husky spill of bitumen on that river travelled 370 kilometres before it was just an oil slick that continued to contaminate. The bitumen had settled along the river bottom. And that was less than 250,000 litres of diluted bitumen that denied potable water to humans and animals alike.

Ask the people of Michigan along the Kalamazoo River and its tributaries. The Enbridge bitumen spill in Michigan cost more than US$2 billion and will never really be cleaned up. That bitumen that settled in the rivers has just become part of Michigan’s ecosystem.

And when Prime Minister Trudeau broke faith with the ecology and allowed the expansion of the Kinder-Morgan Trans-mountain pipeline, he was not just saying “go ahead and double the pipeline.” He was changing the old pipeline (built in the 1950s) to heat it and to increase the pressure. Along with the new pipeline being added, Kinder-Morgan will be able to triple the amount of diluted bitumen, it can send to the ocean port. This will greatly increase the tanker traffic around the B.C. coast.

As the aboriginal tribes of our west coast remind us, we are endangering the water of life. Is it worth it?

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

The reluctant reformers!

by Peter Lowry

It must have confused Justin Trudeau’s campaign team in the 2015 federal election when they realized that Thomas Mulcair and his New Democratic Party were running to the political right of them. Their first problem in that overly long election campaign was how to stretch out their planned promises. And obviously more supposed reform promises had to be added.

But promising reform and delivering on the promises are different things. Policies that are proposed just to make the party look like reformers are often hard to deliver.

The most obvious slip from cup to lip was Justin Trudeau’s promise of voting reform. Whomever came up with that idea without thinking it through is no genius. And giving responsibility for the file to a political newbie was a disaster. For those who took the time to follow the special parliamentary committee’s hearings and carefully read its comprehensive report, would have found a wealth of information. The solution will be there when Canada finally corrects its out of date constitution.

Finance Minister Bill Morneau seems to be in the hot seat more than anyone else in cabinet but Canadians are still waiting for him to produce more than an update on the old-fashioned Baby Bonus. He let us all down by not ending the stock option payments for the one per cent and now he is under fire for wanting to do something about our privileged private corporations.

It warms the cockles of our hearts when those earning vulgar incomes are told they might not be able to sprinkle money around the family just to lower their taxes. If a convenience store really pays family members for their work, they deserve it. You can hardly suggest that a brain surgeon’s family are helping out in the operating room.

The Trudeau government’s most serious failures as reformers are in the environmental and the marijuana files. Justin Trudeau blew away all his credentials as an environmentalist when he approved pipelines for diluted bitumen from the tar sands.

And our sense is that it was a bad idea to rely on a retired cop to figure out how to legalize marijuana. The involvement has gone a long way beyond the original intent to simply decriminalize weed. And turning the individual provinces loose to make money on pot does not make the federal government less culpable. Judging by the Ontario government’s planned role out of legal Mary Jane, this looks like a marketing disaster.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

Hébert hails the Hair.

by Peter Lowry

It is unlikely that many of political commentator Chantal Hébert’s fans read her Toronto Star columns for the humour. It is only occasionally that she writes with her tongue firmly in cheek. If you missed her most recent column, you missed a gem. She actually wrote of how the Hair (Stephen Harper) saved Canada from Quebec separatism. The joke was only softened by her giving credit for the suggestion to Harper’s former aide Carl Vallée, writing in L’actualité magazine.

It is hard to believe that the 2015 federal election was anything more than Quebec making common cause with the rest of Canada to get rid of Harper and his government. Nor was it much other than Tom Mulcair getting all flustered about niqabs and forgetting the NDP had any policies that washed out Quebec’s Orange Wave.

While there is a vestigial bigotry in Quebec that can be annoying at times, it’s use by Pauline Marois backfired on her and the Parti Québécois. Harper might have made note for his future, fictional, autobiography but he made no public comment at the time.

The simple facts are that the Parti Québécois spent the second half of the Hair’s regime in Ottawa finding its own way to perdition. When the separatist party chose Pierre Karl Péladeau as leader in 2015, we figured that was it for the dreams of René Lévesque. A millionaire, a confirmed union buster and a political dilettante, Péladeau was anathema to anything Lévesque had stood for.

At the same time, the Bloc Québécois became a non-party in the House of Commons and of no use to Quebec separatists. That more than anything else has spelled the lack of enthusiasm today for Quebec separatism.

What Vallée is telling us, Hébert says, is that Harper redirected Quebec attention to a left-right dialogue instead of a go-stay argument. While there is merit to that idea, it could hardly benefit Harper. In fact, it is hardly likely that it was deliberate.

When Babel-on-the-Bay saw which way the wind was blowing in Quebec, we put all our bets on a Liberal majority government in 2015. The simple facts were that Harper was the architect of nothing. He was a spent force.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

How’s the kitchen coming Chrystia?

by Peter Lowry

Though not sure if the analogy of NAFTA negotiations being like renovating a kitchen comes from Canada’s foreign minister, by now she would disown the quote anyway. After meetings in Washington and in Mexico City, it is obvious that the discussions of North America’s trade agreements are going nowhere. By the time the three amigo countries get together in Ottawa there is likely to be a fist fight.

It seems that nobody is in a position to save this screw-up. History is going to have to remember Donald Trump as a master of disaster. He has sent American negotiators on an impossible task. They really cannot win agreement from people by constantly abusing them. The Mexicans are certainly mad as hell and are not going to take it anymore.

Canada is hardly going to allow our dairy farmers to be screwed the same way American dairy farmers are routinely bankrupted. And that fixed smirk on the face of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau when people mention Trump is starting to look like a death mask. The Mexicans are already pissed by Trump’s racist insults and his stupid wall.

But the Mexicans are also becoming annoyed with Canada. While the U.S. delegates simply scoff at Freeland’s environmental protection and balanced labour suggestions, the Mexican’s saw it as an attack on their labour-cost advantage. This is a three-way, two against one negotiation, when both Canada and Mexico could use an ally. Instead, they are all talking and nobody is listening.

There is no rule that says we have to resolve these questions this year or even three years from now. It would certainly be nice to find a faster solution to the softwood lumber dispute and Canada might have to apply some tit-for-tat tariffs if Trump thinks he can just ignore the existing treaties.

But an angry American Congress might have something to say if Trump tries to end NAFTA. Congress is confident that only it has the authority to accept or reject country to country treaties when the U.S. is one of the parties.

The one thing the three countries might agree on is that NAFTA needs some adjustments after a quarter century. It just cannot be as one-sided as Mr. Trump thinks it should be.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

For love of country.

by Peter Lowry

Travel in Europe, Asia and throughout North America has helped strengthen my love for Canada. When people in other countries tell me how much they admire our country, I rarely try to explain that we are still a work in progress. There is no need to tell them that we could certainly ratchet up our   efforts for our aboriginals, improve the foundations of our democracy, facilitate better communications between provinces and build on the benefits of our two languages. We are a country that needs to concentrate more about what holds us together rather than what can drive us apart.

This was the thinking when reading an op-ed about Quebec secularism by Quebec M.P. Guy Caron yesterday in the Toronto Star. I am not sure whether I was angered the most by his hoary old chestnut about the Church of Rome or his ignorant comment about the rest of Canada’s paternalism towards Quebec Province.

For the last century, the Roman Catholic Church has been in a losing race to catch up with an increasingly secular world. Even religion has to modernize to keep up with a changing world. The problem in Quebec is the same as noted in many church dominated societies. As the church fails, the faithful become more secular and experiment with other leaders.

And Mr. Caron can talk around the subject all he likes but the church fostered much of the bigotry that exists today in Quebec. It is a small step from railing against the ‘blockhead’ English to antisemitism. Bigotry is fed by ignorance and denied opportunity.

Leaders such a Wilfrid Laurier and Pierre Trudeau offered Quebecers a world of opportunity. Yet Caron sees the NDP’s pandering to Quebec with the Sherbrooke Declaration as some sort of answer. It is not. It insults.

Quebecers will have the respect of all when they recognize that their home is Canada. They have the charm of the Atlantic Provinces in their front yard and the strength and scope of Ontario and the west in their back yard. Anything Quebecers want to achieve, they can do better as Canadians. Because Quebec is the keystone that holds the country together.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

The Morning Line: Canada’s NDP Leadership

by Peter Lowry

Our best advice to the New Democratic Party is that they forget the next Federal election and concentrate on finding a modern direction for their party. And we have no idea whose membership numbers we were looking at when we assumed that the NDP had closer to 200,000 members in 2016. With the party growing from about just 40,000 to 124,000 from March to August 2017, with members concentrated in British Columbia and Ontario, there is little need for a Morning Line to tell you the prospects for the current leadership contest. The party could end up wishing it had kept Thomas Mulcair.

Charlie Angus M.P. – 4 to 1

More than any other contestant, Charlie Angus, the M.P. from Northern Ontario typifies the New Democratic Party and its ideals. He could wear the mantles of Tommy Douglas and Jack Layton with the swagger of a union brawler. He is the most in tune with the Canadian voter. He could take the party to its next logical step.

Niki Ashton M.P. – 6 to 1

This Manitoban is a hard-working campaigner and an even stronger feminist. She was the newcomer in the 2012 leadership race that was won by Tom Mulcair. In that race she got less than six per cent of the votes. She was going to do much better this time, until Jagmeet Singh came into the picture.

Guy Caron M.P. – 11 to 1

Every good leadership campaign requires a thinker and in this one, it is Quebec M.P. Guy Caron. His ideas on taxation, his start on a guaranteed income plan and his approach to international trade are all helpful. His party should start listening to his policy ideas. It will not have him as leader though with the small vote base that his Quebec constituency gives him.

Jagmeet Singh M.P.P. – 2 to 1

The NDP has been forced to admit that the party’s membership was at a low of 40,000 until March of this year. It has increased threefold in the past six months and there is only one candidate who could have caused that surge. While a diligent member of the Ontario Legislature, Jagmeet Singh has demonstrated few, if any, leadership qualities. As deputy leader in Ontario, there seems to be a dearth of ideas from him and his leader. There is no doubt though that he is a favourite of the Sikh communities in Ontario and British Columbia.

But before Justin Trudeau and his Liberals think that the NDP’s choice could be a Liberal gain, they could be very wrong. While a Sikh leader might not have the appeal in Prince Albert, Saskatchewan or Chicoutimi, P.Q. he could cut a broad swath of support through the B.C. mainland and the Greater Toronto Area in Ontario. The Conservative’s ‘Chuckles’ Scheer must be chuckling.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

French fuss over makeup for Macron?

by Peter Lowry

In France, they are fussing over the cost of makeup and makeup artists to keep their new president Emmanuel Macron looking good for his public appearances. If they had any idea what it cost Canadians for the Harper hair and makeup during his regime as Canada’s prime minister, they would consider Macron’s costs reasonable.

The difference is that Emmanuel Macron is good looking to begin with. The French president is only 39 and his hairline requires no serious augmentation. In contrast, Stephen Harper was 46 when he became prime minister of Canada and there was a period when freelance makeup artists had to be tested and as the French are seeing, that is when costs are particularly high.

Harper’s solution to the problem was Michelle Muntean from CTV who served as his personal hair, makeup and clothes advisor during most of the time he was prime minister. The standard joke was that she was the reason he was always late for group pictures at world meetings.

But Canadians never did get the total cost picture as the French are getting. The Prime Minister’s Office and the parliamentary budget office stonewalled requests for information all the way. Yet, there is every reason to expect that the French figures are low in comparison. The bill for the first three months for President Macron was claimed to be 26,000 euros (about C$37,000). The rates always go up on deliveries to the Elysée.

This will be much lower when they decide on a permanent staff member to handle the task. In Canada, the story was that the Conservative Party paid Ms. Muntean’s salary. Taxpayers were definitely on the hook for her expenses when travelling around the world with the PM.

It was Ms. Muntean’s efforts that earned Stephen Harper the nickname ‘The Hair.’ His hairpiece and his real hair were lacquered to his head like a helmet. He never went on television without his eyes defined with eyeliner and a delicate blush on his cheeks to prevent a lighting glint.

And I cannot even imagine the cost of hair dos and makeup for U.S. President Donald Trump.

It was later in my lifetime that I found that young men in search of female companionship are also wearing makeup. And this is at a time when the improved quality of television cameras is saving those of us with healthy skin from having to wear makeup during casual TV appearances.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

What’s wrong at NDP HQ?

by Peter Lowry

There was a promise that Babel-on-the-Bay would publish its Morning Line on the New Democratic Party leadership today. That is hardly possible when we have been stalled by the party not yet releasing its new membership figures. Without these figures to analyze and compute along with our knowledge of the people involved, we have no hope of providing readers a reasonable handicapping of the race.

There is little point of either research company polls or our more in-depth analysis without the new membership figures. With a membership of less than 200,000 nationally before this contest got started, anyone who can sign up more than 50,000 new members has to be taken very seriously.

There is no point in denying that the only leadership candidate who could have signed up in excess of 50,000 new members would be Ontario MPP Jagmeet Singh. He has easy access to South Asian immigrants across Canada and is very popular in those communities.  In the Greater Toronto Area and in Vancouver and Lower mainland alone, there are enough potential supporters to practically guarantee him the leadership.

But whether he was organizing the effort early enough is just one question. The more important question is whether he would be wasting his time if he did not have broad support throughout the established party membership?

We are seeing now what is happening to the Ontario Conservatives when a leadership candidate imports temporary members to swamp the established membership. Patrick Brown is being challenged by break-away groups, improper tactics in local nominations and friction from all sides because he disrespected the traditions of his party.

Jagmeet Singh also has the problem of Quebec. As he admitted in yesterday’s debate in Montreal, a turbaned Sikh would have a struggle for support among openly tribal and racist elements in Quebec. While MP Guy Caron tried to make secularism a solely provincial matter in yesterday’s debate, there is no denying that a two-country solution will not fly across the rest of Canada.

When we see the new membership figures, we will let you know the Morning Line. There is little question that the decision is between Ontario MP Charlie Angus and Ontario MPP Jagmeet Singh. Of course, Manitoba MP Niki Ashton already knows she is having twins! We also wish her well.

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]

Lottsa’ Luck Senator Duffy!

by Peter Lowry

Senator Mike Duffy already has his payoff. He is still being paid as a member of Canada’s parliament. The report that he wants to sue the Senate and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police is an insult to both bodies.

And the suggestion that Duffy’s case is anything like that of Omar Khadr is erroneous, disgusting and misleading. The Duffy trial was over his sense of entitlement and privilege. Whether we agree with the judge or not, he was found not guilty. And that should have been the end of it.

Duffy was reinstated in the senate and life goes on. He was never shot, tortured or incarcerated as was Khadr. Duffy was never denied his rights as a Canadian citizen.

Unlike fellow journalist on the political scene, Allan Fotheringham, Duffy’s campaign to become a senator was subtle. The ‘Foth’ publicly enlisted reader support to tell the prime minister what an excellent senator he would be, while ‘The Duff’ went right to the one vote that mattered, that of Prime Minister Harper.

As Senator Duffy, he traveled Canada with Prime Minister Harper as his opening act. He was much in demand by other cabinet members to do their intros. And nobody seemed to care that Duffy was supposed to be a senator from Prince Edward Island, who lived in Ottawa. That deception was reported to be Stephen Harper’s idea, not Duffy’s.  And is it a big deal if the senator’s expense reports were somewhat confusing and overly generous?

They are all supposed to be honourable men and women in the Senate of Canada. Who gives a damn about how the citizens feel about it? It is a place of sinecure and privilege for the friends of our leaders.

It is very difficult to come to grips with Duffy’s claim that he was let down by the Canadian legal system. What could possibly be the problem when superior court judges, who are appointed by this political party or that political party, are the people to deal with questions of propriety of political apparatchiks in the Canadian Parliament. Is this not a fair system? Why does he not sue the guy who got him into the mess: Stephen Harper?

-30-

Copyright 2017 © Peter Lowry

Complaints, comments, criticisms and compliments can be sent to  [email protected]