Happy strangle-a-protester day

Seventeen years ago today, my colleague Rob Benzie reminds me, Canada had its first Flag Day -- which prime minister Jean Chretien marked by putting  a chokehold on a protester at Jacques Cartier park. 

I have become convinced that everything we need to know about modern politics, or at least the kind we're living with today, was foretold in the events and the reaction that day. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the current Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, took careful note of how things unfolded and is applying some of the lessons today. 

First, let me back up: 

As Benzie noted in his tweet to me, the  reporters dispatched to that Feb. 15, 1996 assignment were grumpy. It was cold outside, the event was a heavily choreographed affair -- part of a series of post-referendum efforts by the Chretien government to talk up Canadian patriotism and the flag. This particular strategy felt a bit hokey; more marketing than substance. Most of the reporters on the risers that day were far more interested in what the Chretien government was drafting by way of legal response to the near-loss by the federalists in the referendum a few months earlier. We were hoping Chretien might give us some hints. 

In the crowd was a group of protesters, angry about cuts to employment insurance (sound familiar?).  They were determined to disrupt the event and Chretien, eyes masked behind sunglasses, kept turning his head in their direction while the speeches carried on. Once the event was over, he leaped into the crowd, as he liked to do, to shake some hands. It didn't take a mind reader to see that he was irked by the disruption of the event. One of the protesters, Bill Clennett, got in his way, and ... well, the rest is documented. 

Most of the reporters on hand that day, yours truly included, were not close enough to see what happened. We found it hard to believe that the Prime Minister really had manhandled a member of the public. Many of us were convinced that if it was true, the consequences for him would be serious. His wife, Aline Chretien, was also of the same mind, we later learned. 

So we all went back to the National Press Building, where most of us were based, and waited to see the film from Global News. Sure enough, the proof was there. Some of us wondered aloud whether Chretien would have to resign. 

How wrong we were. The PMO artfully put out the story that Mr. Clennett was a separatist; that Chretien was still rattled after the incident with the intruder at 24 Sussex a few months earlier. The CBC interviewed me about what I saw; I said something reasonably mild about how Chretien seemed to be out to prove something when he jumped in that crowd, and the Globe and Mail (where I worked at the time) was inundated with calls of support for what Chretien did. Way to take on those separatists and those lefty protesters! 

Okay, so step now into the present day. While our current PM hasn't physically put anyone in a chokehold (thank goodness), he does recognize that the public will rally around strong-arm politics. The average voter today doesn't have much patience with the tut-tutting media and stands up and cheers efforts to put them/separatists/protesters/unions/the left in its place. Meanwhile, the media still keeps being surprised by the power of demonstrations to disrupt events (Occupy, Idle No More, etc.)  Most of the political events that take place today on Parliament Hill are a mix of everything on display on the first Flag Day -- a combination of hokey, marketing-intended, staged events, with a heavy dose of patriotism. And the only thing that makes them interesting is  the rare, visceral reaction or outburst in the midst of the scripting. 

It's not just Conservatives who benefit from this bare-knuckle brand of politics either. A 40-year-old Liberal backbencher earned credibility last year by literally knocking out a senator from Quebec. 

So let's raise a toast to Flag Day 2013 and its power, 17 years ago, to predict the future. And if your path is crossed by a man in a wooly hat, feel free to take matters into your own hands. 

 

Third Liberal leadership debate: will sparks fly?

The first two Liberal leadership debates were tame affairs, but on paper at least, this Saturday's encounter in Mississauga has the potential for more sparks. 

The format this time is organized around direct questions from one candidate to another. Here's how that will proceed: 

• Marc Garneau asks Justin Trudeau
• Karen McCrimmon asks Martha Hall Findlay
• David Bertschi asks George Takach
• Joyce Murray asks Martin Cauchon
• Deborah Coyne asks Marc Garneau
• Justin Trudeau asks Karen McCrimmon
• Martha Hall Findlay asks David Bertschi
• George Takach asks Joyce Murray
• Martin Cauchon asks Deborah Coyne
• Marc Garneau asks Karen McCrimmon
• David Bertschi asks Joyce Murray
• Deborah Coyne asks Justin Trudeau
• Martha Hall Findlay asks George Takach
• Martin Cauchon asks Marc Garneau
• Justin Trudeau asks David Bertschi
• Karen McCrimmon asks Deborah Coyne
• Joyce Murray asks Martha Hall Findlay
• George Takach asks Martin Cauchon

Then the candidates will debate among smaller groups of three. Here's that breakdown:

• Martin Cauchon, Justin Trudeau, Joyce Murray
• Martha Hall Findlay, George Takach, Karen McCrimmon
• Karen McCrimmon, Joyce Murray, Deborah Coyne
• David Bertschi, Marc Garneau, Deborah Coyne
• Justin Trudeau, Marc Garneau, George Takach
• David Bertschi, Justin Trudeau, Karen McCrimmon
• Martha Hall Findlay, Marc Garneau, Joyce Murray
• David Bertschi, Martha Hall Findlay, Martin Cauchon
• Martin Cauchon, George Takach, Joyce Murray
• David Bertschi, George Takach, Joyce Murray
• Martha Hall Findlay, Justin Trudeau, Deborah Coyne
• Martin Cauchon, Marc Garneau, Karen McCrimmon

The themes for the GTA debate, meanwhile, are these: 

• The role of the federal government within the federation
• The future of the middle class & income equality
• Transit and infrastructure
• Job Creation, research & development, funding & innovation
• Immigration
• International trade
• Reconnecting with Canadian voters

I should say that I'm getting this from a program that warns the schedule is "subject to change." So consider this a draft.

It all gets under way at 1 p.m. on Saturday, Feb. 16 at the International Centre in Mississauga. I'll be watching this one on the TV. 

 

 

 

Trudeau versus policy in Liberal leadership race

Marc Garneau has fired a direct shot at Justin Trudeau in the Liberal leadership race, accusing him of lacking policy substance. An excerpt from the statement: 

“As Liberals, we cannot wait until after the leadership race is over to find out what we signed up for,” Garneau said in a prepared statement. “That is like asking Canadians to buy a new car without first test-driving it.”

Trudeau, however, has been saying for a while now that he won't be putting out a policy platform. He said this in an interview we ran over the holidays: link to that is here. 

And  last week, when Trudeau was talking to students at Western University in London, he pointed out this policy lack as a mark of his distinction in the race. I've filed a story with some of these quotes in it, but here's the full context, for those who are interested. It starts when a student asks him how he differs from the other eight candidates: 

That’s an excellent question and that’s a question that’s at the base of what the Liberal party is trying to figure out right now. And you’re very right, the nine of us candidates, all of us very strong candidates in very different ways, have very similar approaches -- in that we’re evidence-based, we’re not too far left, we’re not too far right, we tend to want to build dramatically on the values and the needs we have going forward. 

So the big difference, to my mind, is in what we actually see as a need for the Liberal party to do. Many of my colleagues are very much emphasizing their strengths around policy and their specific ideas and I’m actually frustrating both media pundits and a lot of others -- not because I haven’t had a lot of very clear things to say, whether it be against the Northern Gateway pipeline, in favour of the legalization of marijuana, against strengthening the language laws in Quebec, various things that are ... difficult issues for politicians to deal with. 

But because I’m not going to be putting forward a comprehensive platform over the course of this leadership. And that’s because the Liberal party has gotten far too much in the habit of generating a platform by the leader and some very smart people around them, that they then turn to Liberals across the country and say ‘now go and sell this door to door.’  

This leadership is the beginning of a platform-development process, not the end of it. And what we do around connecting and drawing in ideas from around the country, not just from Liberal circles, but from Canadians who are looking for a better option, right across the country, will be the big work we have to do over the coming months and even years leading up to 2015. 

By the time the 2015 election comes around, we will have had enough development of policies. We will have an extraordinarily detailed, extremely bold platform to present to Canadians. But now is not the time to short-cut this. My emphasis right now, rather than being on policy-development, like most of my colleagues, is on organization. It is on building the capacity to be relevant in every single riding across the country, folding people back not just into the Liberal party, but actually into the political process. Because before we can sell someone on our platform as being the best one, the smartest one, the one with the vision, the one with the long-term view for this country, we actually have to remind Canadians that it’s important for political parties to have a platform, a vision, a long-term view of this country. And that only happens when you rebuild a connection with people in their lives, on their ground, feeling like they matter in how we shape the platform for the election.