LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau recently provided a clue as to why the Canadian media is seemingly so friendly towards him and his Liberals.

Speaking before a group of students, Trudeau was recorded as saying, "We (the Liberals) try and stay, you know, serious and respectful, they (the Opposition parties) like to shout."

And yes, I know a lot of people took exception to that comment, (and many pointed out examples of the prime minister's own disrespectful behaviour) but I suspect that in Trudeau's own mind he was simply stating an obvious fact.

After all, every time he watches the news Trudeau probably sees the mainstream media presenting the Liberals as respectful and the Conservatives as shouters.

Why would this be the case?

Well, first off, you need to understand that the Canadian mainstream media has, in my view, made it their mission to defend Canada's political civility from the onrush of supposedly uncouth populist politics.

In other words, the people who run our media tend to see the emerging breed of populist politicians, both here in Canada and in the United States, as renegades who don't play by the rules of civilized behaviour, and as demagogues who degrade public discourse.

And their Great Satan, of course, is US President Donald Trump, whose boorish behaviour and unpredictability has rattled the international establish, including the establishment media.

At any rate, given the establishment/mainstream media's disdain for Trumpian/Populist-style politics, it's only natural they would see Trudeau as the epitome of a "proper politician".

Whereas Trump is cynical, Trudeau is idealistic, whereas Trump unapologetically pummels his enemies, Trudeau exudes positivity, whereas Trump will make controversial, sometimes outlandish statements, Trudeau is the personification of political correctness.

And most importantly, whereas Trump continually denounces "fake news" which he says is the "enemy of the people", Trudeau has nothing but nice things to say about the media and the role it plays in protecting democracy.

So yes, for all these reasons, Canada's media sees Trudeau as respectful, which is reflected in their coverage; if the American president represents everything that's wrong with politics, for the media, Trudeau represents everything that's good.

All this, needless to say, puts Conservative Party leader Andrew Scheer in a bit of a pickle, since as an Opposition politician he sometimes needs to be less than respectful.

As matter of fact, because he's facing a still-popular incumbent, Scheer needs to get aggressive and to go on the attack and to degrade Trudeau's brand.

What's more, to capitalize on the growing populist sentiment and to mobilize his own base, Scheer needs to show he's willing to challenge the "establishment" aka the "elites."

But anytime Scheer tries to rock the boat in this way, any time he takes the gloves off, anytime he knocks the status quo, it lands him in hot water with the media, which tends to see any deviation from political orthodoxy as a sign of Trump-inspired heresy.

We saw this, for instance, when Scheer declared in a speech that he was going to stand up to "this government, the media and the privileged elite."

Yes, that was simply an innocuous, run-of-the-mill conservative talking point, but many in the media, which is in grip of an anti-populist fever, saw it as a declaration of war against the media and as a clear sign Scheer was about to transform into some kind of Trumpian Monster, a beast which would rampage and pillage the country's most sacred institutions.

And the general judgement of the media was that Scheer was making a terrible mistake.

As Globe and Mail columnist Gary Mason condescendingly put it, "I expect better of Mr. Scheer and his colleagues."

And  it looks like Scheer got the message, because it wasn't long before he was meekly praising the media's role in holding "politicians of all parties to account" and to "hold us responsible for what we say."

Yeah, that was nice.

Unfortunately for the Conservative leader, however, being nice won't help him win the next election.

So I guess Scheer has to figure out, whom he wants to like to him more the media or voters?

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


Something peculiar happened on Monday from the Alberta legislature, where a backbench MLA on the government side decided that she's had enough, and sent out a press release stating that she will be boycotting the legislature because of a culture of "fear and intimidation" within the provincial NDP caucus.  It's a bold move, and one we've never actually seen before.  Usually, MPs or MLAs who get fed up usually wind up crossing the floor, either to another party where they feel they will be better appreciated, or to exile themselves to the nosebleeds as an independent, where they can make the odd grandstanding exhibition now that they have been freed from the shackles of party discipline.  The move to stay within the party but to stage a protest like this is unusual, and has me wondering if this will start any conversations within political caucuses anywhere else in the country.

The MLA in question, Robyn Luff, made a litany of complaints in her release, which include the fact that all votes must be at the direction of the leader, that questions from government backbenchers to ministers are written by the ministries and given to them to be asked, that any members' statements deemed "inappropriate" result in those MLAs losing the ability to make future statements, and that all decisions about who can speak to bills in debates are made by the party's leadership.  More to the point, statements and questions for committees are scripted ahead of time, and any MLA who goes against these orders face loss of privileges, being removed from committees, losing their speaking times in the chamber, and eventually being warned that their nomination papers won't be signed.  Luff further went on to note that she had private members' bills edited to change their original intent, and that she was told by a Cabinet minister that her career had been sidelined because she didn't jump when a chief of staff told her to.

On the one hand, part of me wants to shrug and note that this is pretty much par for the course these days, whether in Parliament or at any number of provincial legislatures.  We are very much in an era of message discipline, and this kind of message lockdown is often used to avoid embarrassment from their own side, which parties have used to varying degrees of success.  What I find to be particularly heavy-handed here, however, is the revelation that private members' bills were redrafted by the party leadership as opposed to whichever law clerk mechanism that the provincial legislature uses, which seems to be a fair amount of overkill amidst all of the other ways in which a backbencher is being put on lockdown.

As much as this may be business as usual, I would also note that the level of discipline here does seem to be indicative of the internal culture of the NDP, particularly given that a lot of the senior staff in the Notley government did come from Ottawa after their years of experience while in the Official Opposition.  If you recall some of the revelations in the Samara Canada study of MP exit interviews, there was talk about the culture of solidarity within the party that demands that all members act in lockstep, and as one former MP stated, "if you're not 100 per cent a team player, you're evil."  That a Cabinet minister told Luff that she had been sidelined for not being sufficiently responsive to staffers looks to confirm that this culture extends to the provincial NDP as well as the federal party.  As well, a former member of the provincial party, Karen McPherson, who left caucus to sit as an independent before joining the centrist Alberta Party, confirmed the bullying culture as one of the reasons why she left as well.

On Tuesday morning it was announced that the NDP decided to indeed expel her from caucus, and this will no doubt give Jason Kenney and his United Conservative Party fodder to make political hay of this, in order to portray his party as so much more open and accepting of a diversity of opinion than the NDP.  By expelling her, the NDP essentially proved her point that they would not allow her to represent her own constituents, which again could blow up in their faces if she can generate enough public sympathy for her attempts to do the right thing as an MLA.

I will add that while she is making the point about representing her constituents, the more unspoken aspect of this is that Luff's inability to ask her own questions to the government in Question Period is directly interfering with her ability to do her constitutional duty as a backbencher of holding the government to account.  "I have had to fight for months for the ability to ask my own question in QP, and have been questionably removed from a committee," Luff wrote, which is fairly damning because this goes to the heart of what she was elected to do.

Given that the NDP decided to make an example of her, it should be a blow to the party, deservedly, for undermining the very purpose of the legislature.  But one also has to wonder if Luff's bout of defiance will spread to other parties, legislatures, or even levels of government.  The kinds of control she cited are common elsewhere, and we've seen examples of MPs or MLAs being expelled for being wilful Steven Fletcher being one particular example in Manitoba.  It would be great if we had more MPs and MLAs embrace their constitutional roles and resisted total party control, but they need better education, and to have each other's backs when they do go up against their party leaders.  Let's hope Luff starts some needed conversations among our elected representatives, for all of our sakes.

Photo Credit: 660 News

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.


When you listen to those opposed to an increased minimum wage, you would think that we would be on the verge of economic collapse.  Doug Ford's Conservatives, for instance, have decided that there was a clear and present danger triggered by the better wages and limited benefits workers have today, like paid sick days.

So Doug Ford is moving ahead and will dismantle recent gains made by Ontario workers.  Ford's plan For The Peopleâ„¢ includes cancelling the minimum wage increase, taking away sick days, and cancelling pay equity for precarious workers, that is folks working part-time or from contract to contract.

Ford says he has to drive Ontario back in time because the minimum wage and basic benefits for workers are destroying jobs.  Yet, evidence seems to suggest otherwise.

The October Labour Force Survey from Statistics Canada shows that Ontario gained 90,000 jobs so far in 2018.  This is 10 months after the Liberals' legislation to increase Ontario's general minimum wage from $11.60 per hour to $14 per hour came into force.

If this data doesn't drive a giant truck through Ford's rhetoric, I don't know what does.  His repeated claims that a higher minimum wage is a "job killer" is complete fabrication.

There were predictions about hundreds of thousands of jobs being put at risk.  But Ontario's unemployment rate over the past year is remaining below six per cent.  In fact, Ontario's jobless rate dropped to 5.4 per cent in July, the lowest it has been in 18 years.

There were predictions of huge price increases for consumer goods.  But Ontario's inflation is barely over 2 per cent.  Businesses were about to lose oh, so much money.  Yet profits are up, way up.  Which is probably why the other prediction of companies leaving for the US in droves has also not materialized.

Ontario's economy has remained fairly strong despite the Fair Workplaces and Better Jobs Act brought forward by a Wynne government grasping at any chance for survival.  Yes, the legislation included broad ranging amendments to Ontario's Labour Laws.  These changes in the end, created better job opportunities and increased security for workers across Ontario.  They helped create full-time instead of part-time jobs.

And Doug Ford is about to roll the progress train backward.  For The Peopleâ„¢.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.