A Lesson From Canada

Most people think of Canada as a fairly benign country of peace order and good government, but in the past we've had some particularly terrible governments.  For example, between 2006 and 2015 we had the cuckoo government of Stephen Harper and his conservatives. I've been reminded of those years while watching Trump take office. I think the USA can learn from our experience.

The following are things that Prime Minister Stephen Harper actually did.  Brace yourselves for the following to happen in the ol' US of A.  I've left out some things that have already happened down south, like showing contempt for the separation of powers by criticizing sitting judges (source), and other things that are obvious like immigration and military vagaries, so here I've listed some things that haven't happened yet and things you might not expect.

• First, and most likely, The federal government’s name will change to The Trump Government.  Our Prime Minister Stephen Harper actually renamed the Canadian Government to The Harper Government. (source).
• All non-christian chaplains will be fired from the prison system (source).
• Expect your national census to be cancelled. (source).
• He will flagrantly will disobey court orders (source).
• They will alter government documents and records so they don't contradict their lies (source).
• The leader will now choose what questions are asked of him, not the media (source).
• He will disallow house committees from questioning his staff even if it means putting them in contempt of Parliament (source).
• He will stop talking to reporters in the press gallery.  Harper appeared at the press gallery a mere seven times in 9 years: February 1, 2006, October 3, 2007, November 9, 2007, January 28, 2008, November 8, 2008, April 22, 2009, June 15, 2009 (source).
• Librarians and archivists who set foot in classrooms, attend conferences or speak up at public meetings on their own time will be considered to be engaging in “high risk” activities.  Such federal employees will be required a “duty of loyalty” to the government. (source).
• Museums will be required to tell only government approved stories (source).
• Scientists will be barred from speaking to the public unless they appear with a government “minder”, and pre-clear the subject they wish to talk about. (source).
• The tax man will be given money specifically for auditing environmentalists and other organizations that oppose the government’s policies (source).
• The government will order YouTube and others to take down unpatriotic videos (source).
• Parks Departments employees will be banned from criticizing the government, even on their own time (source).
• Nuclear Safety inspectors will be fired (source).
• Your government will act in contempt of the house, and in violation of the constitution (source).
• Democratically elected politicians from foreign countries will be denied entry if their views differ from the government (source).
• Formal complaints to government agencies may be made only by approved complainers (source).
• Anybody in government that is in charge of ensuring bills don’t violate the constitution will be fired.  (source).
• An attempt will be made to silence politicians under the guise that it’s too expensive to let them talk. Yes, democracy itself will be deemed too expensive (source).
• Scientific labs that make any conclusions contrary to the government’s positions will be stripped of their credentials (source).
• Money over principals will go from being the cynical view of government to being official policy (source).
• Wearing a mask at a protests will become illegal (source).
• Vandalizing statues, and memorials will get you a 10 year prison sentence if they are dedicated to the military (source).
• They will try to make posting on the Internet anonymously illegal (source).
• The government will start spending an unthinkable amount of money to spy on specific citizens that try to fight discrimination (source).
• Public tours of democratic institutions will be curtailed (source)
• Scientific research stations will be closed (source).
• Obscure and obsolete parliamentary procedures will be dredged up and use to silence witnesses and hide evidence, and handbooks and instructions on how to do this will be distributed to conservative politicians (source).
• The people will be taught that their democracy works differently than it actually does, in order to create chaos should they loose the next election (source).
• An unfathomable amount of taxpayer money will be diverted from education and medical to already profitable oil companies for seemingly no reason (source).
• Police could be absolved of past crimes by retroactive laws.  These laws would go back in time and make past illegal actions not illegal anymore (source). 
• Government staff will become actors and will pose as citizens in for propaganda photos (source).
• Environmental and scientific libraries will be literally thrown in the garbage (source).
• They will hide a clause in a huge bill that will allow them to spend and borrow money without the house's permission, fundamentally altering the balance of power between the executive and the representatives (source).
• They will eviscerate public broadcasting (source).
• Private government information about individuals such as political opponents and activists will be leaked to embarrass and discredit them, in one case it was a veteran's advocate and his medical records (source).
• They will secretly record political opponents and also use agent provocateur techniques to try and entrap them (source).
• At least one politician will end up in jail if the election authorities look into election irregularities (source).
• They will become a source of fake news that will leak to the press (source).
• Fake protests will be created using junior staffers (source).
• They will change copyright law to allow theft of content for use in propaganda (source).

There are, however, some things that are uniquely Canadian and have little chance of happening south of the border:

• There won't be rumours of the first lady committing adultery with a female mountie (source).
• No fictional characters name Pierre Poutine will meddle with the electoral process (source).
• Trump won't sing Beatles songs to an audience (video).
• Congressmen and Senators will probably not actually literally fight each other (video).

The cloud

I've decided that nouns belong in the cloud and verbs are best local.

Strongly worded e-mail: CBC's The National

I wrote to CBC's The National in December 2011 because they had made an extremely incorrect statement on air.  They graciously sent me an unconvincing reply.  Even if one is to accept that their incorrect statement is technically correct you have to concede that it was super misleading.

TO: The National
SUBJECT: Fact Correction
DATE: Dec 19th 2011

I listened to the "Year Ender" At Issue segment on your podcast today, and I was taken aback at a glaring error in facts in the introduction and again in the conversation.  

In the introduction, Peter Mansbridge read out that the government fell on the budget, saying, "It seems an awful long time ago that Jim Flaherty's 5th budget sent the country into it's 41st election."

I had to double check that I was't accidentally listening to an old podcast, but no, the topic was indeed this year in review.  Errors like this can be usually forgiven and overlooked, that is, unless, they weren't about arguably one of the most important political events in recent Canadian history.

The government did not fall on the budget.  I wish the election was caused by something so pedestrian, then it wouldn't have been so scary.  As you should know, the election was caused by an historic non-confidence motion due to the government being found in contempt of Parliament.

The import of this cannot be understated.  It is one for the history books.  Don't take my word for it; call up any constitutional scholar and learn more.  No government in the centuries of history of all commonwealth countries has ever dared to go so far down this road antidemocratic behaviour and been called out for it.  It is worth noting that the government could have been found in contempt the year before over its refusal to release the Afghan documents to Parliament ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dw-tM364X-0 ), but the opposition failed Canadian democracy by acting selfishly and short sightedly rather than protecting the dignity of Parliament. 

Shockingly, the misstatement was not corrected by any of the panelists.  In fact, one of the panel, Bruce Anderson mused that the Liberals made a mistake in going for the election considering their political position.  Perhaps if they fell on a budget bill then it could be seen as a case of poor timing, but a government found in contempt can not be allowed to continue governing under any circumstances.  If the Liberals didn't call the Conservatives out on that (for a second time) then we might as well just give up on our system.

The most terrible thing that came out of this, is how few Canadians understood what happened, and gave a majority to a government that was found in contempt of the democracy that elected it.  However, it is not surprising considering that even the flagship CBC TV news program is capable of forgetting what actually happened.

I expect that The National will make an on-air correction soon.  I'd hate to think that so many Canadians be left in confusion on this issue.

dave

TO: Dave Duprey

SUBJECT: At Issue - CBC News 
DATE: Dec 24th, 2011

Dear Mr. Duprey, 

  

Thank you for taking the time to send your e-mail. I'm grateful for the chance to provide an explanation. 

  

Peter didn't mean to suggest that the government fell on a vote over the budget. You are, of course, absolutely right about the issue at the heart of the non-confidence motion. Our program covered the story extensively at the time. It was also the discussed through the election campaign and on election night. 

  

The intent was to refer more generally to the dynamic at play at the time. All of the parties had indicated they wouldn't support the government's budget. Once that happened, its fall was a matter of time. There was a great deal of manoeuvering to determine and control the actual non-confidence vote. The Liberal Party preferred that the fall be over the government's "contempt for Parliament," hoping to frame that as the ballot question (David Herle talked about that decision on Tuesday's The Insiders panel). However, when Peter said "Jim Flaherty's fifth budget sent the country into it's 41st election" he was not referring to the actual non-confidence vote and, I say this with respect, the statement is correct. You pointed out that the At Issue panelists did not correct Peter. I believe that was because they understood the intent behind the statement.You have written a thoughtful and passionate note. If you are not satisified with this response, you may wish to request a review by CBC's Ombudsman. The Ombudsman may be reached at: 

Box 500, Terminal A, Toronto, Ontario M5W 1E6, or by fax at (416) 205-2825, or by e-mail at Ombudsman@cbc.ca. 

Yours Sincerely,

Mark Harrison

Executive Producer

CBC News: The National  

The Government became illegitimate

On December 10th, 2009, Parliament ordered the Government to produce certain documents right away. Some have compared Parliament's Order to a subpoena but is actually far stronger, more like a super-subpoena. In our system, the people's democratic will is expressed through our Members of Parliament and so Parliament is supreme, as we the people, in a democracy, are supreme, instead of kings or dictators. So when Parliament votes an Order, it is law, and must be obeyed. Since Confederation, in 1867, no Canadian Government has ever outright refused to obey a parliamentary order: that would be illegal, and mean the government was placing itself above democracy and above the people's elected representatives, making the government illegitimate.

On December 11th, 2009, the current Government announced it would not obey the Parliamentary Order. At that moment, 10:19:15 am EST apparently, the Government became illegitimate, having placed itself above and outside the law (press conference was scheduled for 10:15 and relevant statement started after 4min 15sec). Until the Government obeys the Parliamentary Order, it remains illegitimate. Parliament could do what is needed to enforce the Order, but on December 30, 2009, the Government unexpectedly closed or "prorogued" Parliament until March 3, 2010.

So the current Government is refusing to obey the super-subpoena that is a Parliamentary Order. It has closed Parliament and run away. It is breaking the law. The Government is saying it is above democracy and democracy's rules, and as a result, by democracy's standards, the Government is not legitimate: the Government is an outlaw. And every day the Government remains outside the laws of Parliament & democracy, it becomes more illegitimate.

Strongly worded e-mail: Peter MacKay, Minister of Foreign Affairs

I wrote to my local MP and to my utter surprise, 4 months later I actually got a reply from the Minister of Foreign Affairs (or someone writing on his behalf). Too bad it's 5 paragraphs don't actually say anything.  It kind of reminded me of Yes, Minister.


TO: Fry, Hedy - M.P.; Bell, Don - M.P.
SUBJECT: Skye Resources of North Vancouver
DATE: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 3:07 AM

Hi,

I felt sick to my stomach when I discovered this.  Is there anything
that can be done about it?

Dave Duprey
Vancouver, Canada

http://www.indiancountry.com/content.cfm?id=1096414450

Excerpt:

Security forces burn peasant settlements for Canadian nickel firm

NEW YORK - On Jan. 8, some 600 Guatemalan national police and army
troops occupied two Kekchi Maya indigenous communities at El Estor,
Izabal department. Their orders were to evict the 308 families that made
up the settlements of La Union and La Pista. The following morning, 175
more Kekchi families were forcibly expelled from the nearby communities
of La Revolucion and La Paz. A Kekchi community at Lote 8 in the
neighboring department of Alta Verapaz was also evicted.

The evictions were carried out on behalf of the Guatemala Nickel Co.
(CGN), a subsidiary of the Vancouver-based Skye Resources Nickel Mining
Co., which holds a disputed title to the lands.


FROM: Office of the Hon. Dr. Hedy Fry
SUBJECT: RE: Skye Resources of North Vancouver
DATE: Feb 28th 2007

Dear Mr. Duprey:

Thank you for your e-mail.  I will be sure to bring it to Dr. Fry's
attention at the first available opportunity.


FROM: Hon. Dr. Hedy Fry
TO: Hon. Jean-Pierre Blackburn, P.C., M.P.
DATE: March 13th, 2007

FROM: Human Resources and Social Development Canada
DATE: April 2nd, 2007

Dear Mr. Duprey:

On behalf of the Honourable Jean-Pierre Blackburn, Minister of Labour, I am pleased to respond to your electronic message of February 20, 2007, which was forwarded to him on March 13, 2007, by your Member of Parliament, the Honourable Dr. Hedy Fry.  You wrote concerning a subsidiary company of the Vancouver-based Skye Resources Nickel Mining Company, in Guatemala.

Please be assured that your concerns have been brought to Minister Blackburn's attention.  Although I understand your position, I must explain that the issue you have raised falls under the responsibility of the Department of Foreign Affairs.  After confirmation with our colleagues from that Department, I wish to clarify that the Honourable Hedy Fry took the right course of action by forwarding a copy of your correspondence directly to the office of the Honourable Peter MacKay, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Minister of the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency, who will be responding to your concerns.

I hope that this proves helpful.  Thank you again for writing.

Sincerely,

Wanda Thompson
Director
Ministerial and Executive Correspondence,
Events and Appointments
Human Resources and Social Development Canad

FROM: Peter G. MacKay, Minister of Foreign Affairs

DATE: June 13th, 2007

Dear Mr. Duprey:

The Office of the Honourable David Emerson has forwarded to me your email of February 20, 2007, concerning the exploratory operations of Skye Resources Inc., a Canadian mining company, in Guatemala.  I regret the delay in replying to you.

As part of Canada's balanced engagement with Guatemala, Canada advocates for both the defence of human rights and the environment, as well as the promotion of sustainable development through responsible Canadian investment. Canada's position on the importance of corporate social responsibility and harmonious relations with neighbouring communities and stakeholders is well known to Canadian companies operating in Guatemala, including Skye Resources Inc.

The Canadian Embassy in Guatemala actively encourages open and constructive dialogue on mining issues between all stakeholders in Guatemala, including government officials, local communities, the

church, civil society, and Canadian mining companies, in order to promote a well-informed and healthy debate on concerns related to extractive industries. Skye Resources representatives are taking part in meetings with community members in El Estor, Guatemala, in the hope of reaching a positive outcome for all parties concerned.  

Canadian government officials have met with their Guatemalan counterparts to express Canada's support for efforts to institute a consensus framework for community consultation and for any modification of Guatemala's mining laws that is considered desirable. 

Please be assured that Canada will continue to promote Canadian investment in Guatemala that is both socially and environmentally responsible.

Thank you again for taking the time to write and share your concerns.

Sincerely,

Peter G. MacKay

Minister of Foreign Affairs