For those of you still watching Canadian news channels in order to keep up with events occurring in Ottawa (and NOT the one about the Canadian Juniors, not making the medal rounds for the second time in two years). No, the “political ones”, folks. Try to stay on topic.
IF you listened to PM Justin Trudeau on Jan. 6 explain what “process” would be followed in his decision to resign his leadership of the Liberal Party, just what was your “reaction”?
For almost 75 per cent of Canadians, I will assume that their standard reaction was somewhere along the lines of “It’s about bloody well time” – plus a few choice pejoratives followed by a rejoicing – with even more pejorative utilization –posting of your feelings on social media that in no way would embrace the sentiment espoused in Leonard Cohen’s rendition of Hallelujah.
My reaction was slightly “calmer”; I yawned, and even used that “word” that my teenage students used to use in my presence to drive me nuts – “Whatever”.
First of all, it’s not going to make any difference to Pierre Poilievre, who is becoming increasingly desperate for a federal election to be called so that he can take advantage of current polls that puts the Conservative Party up some 22 points on the Liberals, while at the moment no one – at least if you listen to the two “biggies” of national news, CBC and CTV – is analyzing just what part the NDP and Jagmeet Singh will play in everyone’s wild attempt to knock Mr. Poilievre down to size, physically speaking.
What worries me, and should worry Canadians who are paying more attention to international affairs, is that in the accompaniment of Trudeau’s expectation to pass the gavel of Canadian leadership to someone who’ll probably have it in their hands in less time than did PC Kim Campbell (four months, 10 days) when Canadians gave Mulroney the heave, he has prorogued Parliament until March 24, effectively sucking all potential legislation currently on the session’s agenda into a black hole, ceasing any Committee’s ability to oversee its jurisdiction save fiscally or ethically related (3), thereby leaving those who were never concerned about ethical behaviour in the first place taking to social media to express their views on the latest conspiracy theories being advanced by artificial intelligence algorithms created by China, Russia, North Korea or even India and U.S. right-wing propagandists succumbing to the cult of personality now in ascension as we approach Donald Trump’s coronation.
What’s distressing about this is, first, that NONE of these functioning committees have any jurisdiction over the state of Canadian security within even its own borders, at a time when soon-to-be President Trump is threatening the imposition of huge tariffs upon anything being shipped into the States, and has threatened economic Armageddon upon Panama, Mexico and Greenland (and Canada) – ALL while we are without a concerted and fully united voice of leadership arguing the case on Canada’s behalf.
My specific worry is that as a result of this political malaise, Canadians will choose the next crop of Parliamentarians based upon their having set aside their whining about how many opportunities to they lost to get drunk with the boys during Covid mandates, sex-based bathroom assignment that teach our children nothing about genetics and even less about developing a tolerance for “difference”, pretending that climate change is a hoax, or that “immigrants” are destroying the value of Canadian jobs, when in actuality it is the increasing intent of our provincial governments to degrade the standards of our educational institutions even though we are at the moment incapable of producing the numbers of professionally qualified personnel (scientists, doctors, researchers, etc.) we require to maintain the standards of living to which we have become addicted.
(We also have to start embracing those who choose to come to farm in Canada, when those agriculturalists being sacrificed to the needs of AgCorp are forced to sell their land because they cannot find sufficient numbers of qualified personnel to assist in the production of market garden produce, essential to the task of having a nation no longer burdened by food sustainability issues now being created in volume by the destruction of such enterprises in, say, California.)
During Parliament’s proroguing Justin Trudeau will still be “responsible” for leading the argumentative case against Trump’s attempts to bury us with his tariff schemes. No one wants that, not even die-hard Liberals, and if Canadians stop to think about it long enough, even lesser numbers will look at Poilievre and determine his words to be more bluster and anger at not being able to convince Parliamentarians to give him the opportunity to become PM, as opposed to an immutable stand against the Trump bullying once adopted by Chrystia Freeland, whom no one is going to give a second change to lead that fight for economic sovereignty.
So, who’s left? Certainly not the premiers of the three provinces prostituting themselves at Trump’s doorsteps seeking his favour (Ontario, Saskatchewan and Alberta), and even Poilievre knows that he’s not the right person, given his look of dismay before a press gallery on Thursday talking about this very issue.
As for my own suggestion, it is based more upon reaction to our Parliamentarians now being interviewed on American media platforms than what Canadians have so far offered, other than Andrew Coyne’s occasional utilization of verbs, adjectives and even nouns becoming synonyms for Trumpian stupidity and arrogance.
Our neighbours want to see someone manning our negotiating post that talks like Trump, but still manages to remain sensible and amazingly reasonable in describing just what the next president wants from Canada, other than the “bending of the knee”…
Trump wants our water, and Americans who oppose Trump agree with the man who bluntly asserts that premise: NDP federal MP for Timmins – North Bay Charlie Angus.
