FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Today, Something Unprecedented Is Happening Among Canadians

In reaction to Donald Trump’s statements about Canada as a 51st state and the imposition of tariffs on Canadian products exported to the U.S., a number of things are happening in the country.  Canadian nationalism is rising to heights not seen since the Second World War, stressing the need for a concerted and unified national reaction to the Trump administration.  There is an evident “Buy Canadian” movement that has grown quickly among Canadian consumers.  In the midst of a federal election, all the parties are in one way or another vowing to stand up to American economic aggression and push for expanding Canadian trade to other countries.  Canadians are also cancelling vacations to the U.S. and looking to vacation either in Canada or other countries.  Cross-border travel to the U.S. by Canadians has tumbled by more than half.  Canadian politicians are carrying their message about the harm to American consumers through visits to the U.S. and via digital billboards, broadcasts, media sources and social media targeting Americans themselves.  In recent basketball and hockey games in Toronto, Ottawa, Calgary and Montreal, fans booed the American national anthem, something unheard of before.  So-called “polite” Canadians are openly expressing their national pride in increasingly angry ways and through outbursts of disappointment.

It is remarkable that the current interim Canadian Prime Minister, Marc Carney, has flatly stated that the trust between the two countries has been broken, and that the relationship will never be the same.  As a result, his parliamentary website states that he leads a government that will take action to unite Canadians, defend Canada’s sovereignty, and build the strongest economy in the G7.  Do not be fooled, the candidates for P.M. all recognize that the damage of tariffs to the Canadian economy will be significant, possibly causing a recession and high rates of inflation and unemployment in the not-so-near future.  Trump’s economic policy and political statements have created an environment of uncertainty and distrust.  Canada will and has already reacted with the imposition of its own tariffs on selective American goods while waiting to see what Trump’s next moves will be.

Whoever becomes the next P.M. on April 28th knows that he will have to present a strong defence of Canada’s economic and political concerns vis-à-vis the U.S. The election has turned into primarily a one issue campaign, that being about how Canada will deal with Trump.  This situation is unprecedented in itself, and is a major reason why many Canadians believe that Marc Carney, a former Governor of the Bank of Canada, head of the Bank of England and businessman, would be a good match to confront Trump.  Since becoming leader of the Liberal Party of Canada in March of this year, he has turned around support for his party following a previous major lead of the Conservative Party of Canada in polls.  His main opponent, Conservative Pierre Poilievre, is a full-time politician with little international or business experience.  As P.M., Carney has said he’ll keep Canada’s counter-tariffs in place until “the Americans show us respect and make credible, reliable commitments to free and fair trade.”  Being P.M. at this time also gives Carney a clear advantage as he can make prime-ministerial like statements which naturally are covered daily by the mainstream media.  This contributes directly in his positive polling results.

No matter who wins the election, average Canadians will look to a strong leadership when it comes to defending Canadian interests against Trump’s attacks.  Canadians do not blame Americans for the current situation, instead focusing on the economic and political attacks by the Trump administration.  However, there is little doubt that a future Canadian administration will have to focus on reducing Canada’s dependence on U.S. trade relations and defence policies.  Having lived together for decades within an integrated North American market and coordinated defence and security regime, this will not be an easy transition for both countries.  Let’s hope that the damage that’s been done can be mitigated down the road.  Like Americans, Canadians are a proud people and have a shared history of cooperation and trust, thus hopefully leaving the door open to re-establishing our mutual relationships.

Leave a comment »

Assaults on Canadian Politicians Increases Costs for Security Details

A recent CBC News article highlighted the fact that the cost of keeping Canada’s Prime Minister (PM), Cabinet, and members of Parliament (MPs) safe has hit a record high.  This isn’t really all that surprising given the politicization of such highly contentious issues as past COVID-related government measures and the current Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  Fortunately, unlike the U.S., Canada has to date never seen a PM or Cabinet member assassinated.  History however has some examples of recent incidents involving lone wolves who attempted to harm a federal politician.  For example, a series of shootings occurred on October 22, 2014 at the National War Memorial and on Parliament Hill involving a lone gunman.  The gunman managed to enter Parliament, but in a shootout with Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) officers he was shot  and died at the scene.  In 2020, police arrested an armed man, without incident, who had gained access to the grounds at Rideau Hall, the Governor General’s official residence.  Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and his family also live on the property at Rideau Cottage, not far from where the gunman was intercepted by the officers.  In both cases, after further investigation, it became clear that the assaults involved persons with mental health issues exhibiting previously known erratic behavior.  Terrorism was ruled out as a primary motive.

More recently on January 24th at a local level, a heavily armed man fired shots and apparently threw a Molotov cocktail in Edmonton’s city hall.  At the time, Mayor Amarjeet Sohi and several councillors were among the people present for an in-person meeting.  Fortunately, no one was hurt and upon receiving reports of shots fired at city hall, Edmonton Police Service officers arrived within minutes and took one adult male into custody.  The motive of the man isn’t yet known, and officials could not confirm whether or not he was previously known to police.

Since the 2014 incident on Parliament Hill, security has been greatly increased in order to provide better protection for Canada’s 338 members of Parliament (MPs).  Security on the hill involves the RCMP, local police services in Ottawa, the Parliamentary Protective Service and the House of Commons.  As reported by CBC News, during the first nine months of this fiscal year (2023-24), the RCMP spent $2.5 million (Canadian) on security for MPs.  If spending continues at the same pace, it is estimated that the cost of MPs’ security for this fiscal year could hit $3.4 million — almost double what it cost a year earlier.  Reportedly, former federal public safety minister Marco Mendicino said the rising price tag reflects a change in the “threat environment”, especially since the pandemic and the 2022 Ottawa truck convoy protest.  He further noted that there’s no doubt in his mind that the threat environment has escalated over the last couple of years, especially as result of the divisive Middle East crisis in Canada between pro-Palestinian and pro-Israeli supporters.

Greater harassment of the PM and members of Cabinet has certainly surfaced in recent post-COVID years, especially when they are on speaking tours.  On one occasion for example in August 2022, Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland was verbally harassed outside an event in Grande Prairie, Alberta.  There was also a very recent incident during which protesters, upset with Canada’s position on the Israel-Hamas war, gathered outside Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly’s home in Montreal.  In addition, there has been an alarming increase in threatening or abusive emails sent to individual MPs.

In general, the PM cannot go anywhere without the potential threat of harassment by anti-Trudeau factions.  As a result, RCMP security details for the PM have been greatly increased, along with the associated mounting costs.  Given the current highly volatile political environment, costlier security for politicians — federal, provincial and local — is likely to remain the new normal.  Canada has always prided itself in terms of being a country where civility and respect predominated the political scene.  All that appears to have changed as evidenced by the mounting verbal and physical harassment associated with recent events surrounding the pandemic and the weeks long truck convoy protest in Ottawa during the winter of 2022.

Leave a comment »

Why Would the Canadian Government Need a Public Inquiry on National Security Matters?

When it comes to looking into foreign interference (e.g. Peoples Republic of China) in Canada’s electoral processes, work of elected officials or government dealings, opposition parties keep clamouring for a public inquiry.  However, it would appear that fairly recent legislation already provides for more than enough ability on the part of parliamentarians to examine national security matters.

In 2017, Parliament passed the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians Act to review national security matters.  The Committee (NSICP) is to consist of not more than three members who are members of the Senate and not more than eight members who are members of the House of Commons.  Not more than five Committee members who are members of the House of Commons may be members of the government party.  According to the Act, the mandate of the Committee is to review

(a) the legislative, regulatory, policy, administrative and financial framework for national security and intelligence;

(b) any activity carried out by a department that relates to national security or intelligence, unless the activity is an ongoing operation and the appropriate Minister determines that the review would be injurious to national security; and

(c) any matter relating to national security or intelligence that a minister of the Crown refers to the Committee.

Subsequently, in 2019, Parliament passed the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency Act.  The Agency’s mandate is to

(a) review any activity carried out by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service or the Communications Security Establishment;

(b) review any activity carried out by a department that relates to national security or intelligence;

(c) review any matter that relates to national security or intelligence that a minister of the Crown refers to the Agency; and

(d) investigate an array of possible complaints.

The NSICP already can review national security measures while concurrently determining whether any review of an ongoing operation could be injurious to national security.  This conclusion was outlined in the recent report of highly respected David Johnston who was appointed by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as “special rapporteur”.  In his report, he outlined the reasons why a public inquiry was not the way to go.  This did not please the opposition parties in Parliament, who continue to call for a public inquiry, and the House of Commons consequently voted for Mr. Johnston to step aside.  The problem really is that the Conservative opposition members had previously withdrawn from participating on the NSICP over a past case involving a national security issue.  While the case was still ongoing, they wanted access to all confidential information concerning the active case.  As a result, the NSICP was and has been unable to fulfill its mandate.

There is little doubt that the opposition parties in Parliament, especially the Conservative party, see this issue as a political windfall.  However, this approach does nothing to resolve the current immediate questions of Chinese interference as a matter of national security.  Remember that the National Security and Intelligence Review Agency was set up as an oversight body, and can brief NSICP members on operational matters.  Parliamentarians should be doing their jobs via the NSICP, which is the most logical and speedy mechanism to carry out any timely national security review.  Public inquiries are expensive and normally take a long time to complete.  After all, any judge appointed to carry out such a review must first obtain expert assistance in the review and take time to become acquainted with such a complicated issue.  One has to ask oneself why all this legislation was put in place if Parliamentarians are simply going to ignore it?

Leave a comment »