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

As the Senate remains suspended for the duration of the pandemic, with periodic returns to pass emergency legislation, there have been strange rumblings coming out of the office of Senator Yuen Pau Woo, the "facilitator" of the Independent Senators Group.  While Woo was attempting to move certain rule changes by dubious means going into the current crisis, actions he has been taking since have been cause for concern, even within members of his own caucus.  Aggressive procedural moves and attempts to push through certain manoeuvres while during the skeletal sittings should be cause for concern for anyone who is keeping an eye on the Upper Chamber, given that the institution is already teetering on the brink.

At the beginning of the current Parliament, Woo started off early by trying to push through massive changes to the Rules of the Senate, along with badgering the government for amendments to the Parliament of Canada Act that are of dubious constitutionality because they are looking to fundamentally alter the Westminster character of the Senate without a constitutional amendment.  While other senators have attempted to forestall some of these motions and have them declared out of order, the Speaker has thus far allowed debate to continue.

Leading up to the point where the Senate wound up suspending for the duration of the pandemic, there continued to be problems with getting the routine functions of the Chamber up and running, such as populating committees, in part because Woo was in a fight over funding and the allocation of seats on those committees.  Recall that Woo has been trying to sideline the remaining Liberal/Progressive senators in the hopes that they cannot make a formal comeback.  As part of this, he pushed through a motion in the Senate that stated that for the duration of the current session, that committee seats were locked into their current caucus alignments in other words, if someone were to leave their current caucus and join another one, that they would not be able to retain their committee seat as they had in the past (and we do know that Woo was incredibly vexed when Senator David Richards left the ISG and retained his committee seat in the previous parliament).  This pattern also continued when Woo spiked the deal around membership of committees that were to be set up to provide oversight over the government's COVID-19 response, and then cried to the media that other parties were the problem when it was him all along.

What happened this last Friday when the Senate was recalled in skeletal format to pass the latest emergency measures bill, was that Woo forced a meeting of the Senate's committee selection committee to meet that same morning but didn't bother telling all of the members of the committee, and when he was called on it on a point of privilege in the Chamber, said that public notice of the meeting was sufficient.  He also said that the meeting was supposed to be about the "consideration of future business" meaning drafting an agenda for future meetings and instead demanded that they populate the Senate's committees immediately, and not only that, to push through the selection of his pick for Speaker Pro Tempore (essentially the Deputy Speaker of the Senate), despite the fact that his pick was not unanimous even within his own caucus, nor was she the one who had been agreed to by the other parties.

What is important to remember here is that under normal circumstances, these kinds of decisions are made by consensus in the Senate, even in the "bad old" partisan days.  By Woo forcing decisions through with majority votes when he has the caucus with the most seats he is poisoning the well.  Even more to the point, he is forcing through decisions that don't need to be made right now, because there is little point to having them.  The Senate's committees have not been given any orders of reference by which to meet, nor do they have legislation to consider.  There is also little point for them to attempt any kind of "virtual" meetings, outside of the two that have been given terms of reference in COVID-19 oversight, because the Senate needs to share these resources with the House of Commons, and they have very nearly maxed out the capacity with their own "virtual" meetings.  It's especially curious that he is trying to push through his pick for Speaker Pro Tempore because he's trying to do it at a time when the whole Senate cannot vote on the pick, which is even more suspicious.

While it's hard to impugn motive, there are grumblings that have emerged from among ISG members.  There are a number of unhappy senators in the caucus, and it seems fairly obvious that by trying to force through the committee assignments, he has a means of trying to ensure that those senators will be discouraged from leaving the ISG lest they lose said committee seats.  As for the push for Speaker Pro Tempore, the prevailing theory has been that his pick, Senator Pierrette Ringuette, is within Woo's leadership "inner circle" in the ISG, whereas Senator Patricia Bovey, who was the agreed-upon candidate among the other caucuses (in part because she filled in for Senator Nicole Eaton, the Speaker Pro Tempore in the previous parliament, when Eaton was away), is in Woo's bad books because she is seen as being "too collaborative" with members of other caucuses.  And for as much as members of the ISG, and Woo in particular, swear that they're not partisan, the open disdain they hold for the Conservatives certainly betrays that assertion.

Indeed, it is starting to look very much like Woo believes that he runs the Senate because the caucus he leads has the most senators within it (though Senator Pierre Dalphond took great exception at the Selection Committee meeting on Friday to the notion that Woo actually leads his caucus).  Woo's push for a chamber comprised solely of independents is breaking down the fabric of the institution, and nothing good can come of that.

Photo Credit: Senate of Canada

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.


Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has announced a garden variety of multi-billion dollar programs designed to provide financial relief to Canadians during the coronavirus pandemic.  This includes the Canada Emergency Wage Subsidy, Canada Emergency Response Benefit and Canada Emergency Business Account.

Will this generosity be extended to the Canadian Football League?

Last week, the CFL requested up to $150 million in financial assistance from Ottawa during the economic lockdown.  Roughly $30 million would be allocated to the league's current challenges in dealing with COVID-19, and another $120 million (or thereabouts) would be factored in if this year's regular season was abandoned.

"One of the things, I think, that the CFL and all of us who love the league pride ourselves on is we're striving to be very optimistic," league commissioner Randy Ambrosie told the Canadian Press on April 28.  "But to be realistic, the kinds of losses could have an effect on the future of this league."

If you read between the lines, Ambrosie's message is clear.  Without a significant cash infusion from Ottawa, the fate of Canadian football could be a fait accompli.

The Liberals haven't rushed to the CFL's aid on galloping white horses, however.

First, Ottawa realizes this sort of financial commitment would be much harder to justify than a federal wage subsidy or rent reduction.  Public money used to help individuals and families in need can be spun by political strategists as a net societal benefit.  Conversely, the proposed CFL bailout could be viewed as specialized, narrow and/or wasteful spending of taxpayer dollars.  The direction of the needle of public opinion is easy to determine.

Second, the CFL's financial situation has been a real concern.  TSN's Dave Naylor wrote in a May 17, 2019 online column, "most revenue streams are flat and six of nine teams last season operated in the red."  CFL teams like the Saskatchewan Roughriders and Edmonton Eskimos have achieved profitable seasons, whereas the Toronto Argonauts, Montreal Alouettes and Hamilton Tiger-Cats have all witnessed lean years.  If good money (from the public coffers) is used to prop up clubs in mostly poor financial health, these funds could quickly turn bad and more money would be required than originally earmarked.  It's unlikely the general public would go for this.

Third, Canadians love sports, but don't follow the CFL as closely as before.  An August 31, 2018 study by the Angus Reid Institute showed that 39 percent of respondents preferred the CFL, an additional 39 percent preferred the National Football League, and 22 percent enjoyed them equally.  That statistic didn't tell the whole story.  If you dig deeper, the NFL was preferred by Canadians aged 18-34 (53-31%) and 35-54 (41-35%), while respondents 55 years and older preferred the CFL (47-27%).  This is a sports league that evidently caters to an older demographic.  The Trudeau Liberals, who strongly prefer to court younger people to build long-term policies and strategies, surely know this and realize a CFL bailout wouldn't work to their political advantage.

That being said, let's be realistic.  Saying "no" to the CFL would be detrimental to the minority Liberal government.

The CFL has existed since 1958, but its roots go back to the early 1900s and the Interprovincial Rugby Football Union.  The league has its own set of rules, including three downs, a wider playing field and the single point known as the rouge.  The Grey Cup was first awarded to the University of Toronto in 1909 after beating the Toronto Parkdale Canoe Club 26-6, and has been played 107 times.

In other words, the CFL is one of North America's oldest sports leagues and is uniquely Canadian.  Letting it die a painful death wouldn't be a viable option, no matter your feelings about everything from nationalism to capitalism.

The Wall Street Journal's Ottawa correspondent Paul Vieira proposed an interesting strategy in an April 29 tweet, "Learned associate of mine makes a good point: Couldn't the Canadian Govt just buy all the CFL franchises for C$150M?"

Yes, Ottawa could do that.  Then again, do Canadians really want to become the "owners" of these nine teams?  What would the monetary value be for these teams if a public entity like the feds owned them?  Could they all be sold after the coronavirus pandemic either settles down or comes to an end?

Long story short, there's too much risk involved in this proposal.

Financial assistance may turn out to be the only solution to keep the CFL afloat.  It shouldn't be awarded in the form of a gift.  The loan must be repayable to justify the cost for Canadians.  It could be set at a low interest rate with a long term, but the taxpayers' money must come back in some way, shape or form.

As someone who enjoys the NFL and CFL (I was highly critical of the latter for years, but have recently returned to the fold), I could live with this.  Financial bailouts aren't part of my personal or political DNA, but we're living in unusual times.  Canadian football's long history and rich legacy are at stake, so a one-time exception seems to be in order.

Photo Credit: Canadian Football league

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.