Wednesday February 12, 1999

February 12, 1999 by Graeme MacKay

By Graeme MacKay, Editorial Cartoonist, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday February 12, 1999

Skipped funeral uproar: Too little time to fly to Jordan: PMO

If Jean Chretien had 90 minutes more warning he could have made the state funeral of King Hussein of Jordan, officials said yesterday. Chretien received 221/2 hours notice of the funeral, not the 24 hours required to get from Whistler, B.C., to Amman, Jordan, said a spokeswoman in the Prime Minister’s Office.

Rather than be late for the service, which was attended by a who’s who of global power politicians, Chretien continued his ski vacation and returned to Ottawa late yesterday.

“The prime minister had every intention of going to the funeral, ” said spokeswoman Jennifer Lang. “Logistically, it became impossible to get him there on time.”

Elias Haddad, 33, was one of many Jordanian-Canadians who were offended and deeply hurt. The Hamilton resident plans to send an angry letter to Chretien denouncing his move.

There are about 150 Jordanian families in the Hamilton area.

“He should have gone for us as Canadians, ” said Haddad, who owns a Dundas retirement home. “I think it’s very bad. I’ve been very upset about it. If he doesn’t respect other people, he shouldn’t be prime minister.”

Haddad noted that even Russian President Boris Yeltsin made it to the funeral, climbing out of his sickbed and ignoring the advice of his doctors.

“All over the world, they show their respect, ” added Haddad, whose home on Veevers Drive was adorned with Jordanian and black flags to note the passing of the beloved monarch.

Opposition critics and foreign affairs observers slammed Chretien for missing the most significant state funeral since that of Israel’s peacemaking prime minister, Yitzhak Rabin, in 1995. (Source: Hamilton Spectator)

* * * * *

Shifting Sands: Navigating the Evolving Political Landscape

Reflecting on the ever-changing currents of politics, I am reminded of the editorial cartoon I drew 25 years ago. It accompanied an editorial urging calm during a time of political turbulence. Looking back, it feels like peering through a foggy window into the past, as time has a curious way of reshaping our perspectives.

March 23, 2005

The cartoon, a satirical take on then-Prime Minister Jean Chrétien’s choice to go skiing instead of attending King Abdullah’s funeral, now seems almost quaint. In 1999, I might have detected a hint of arrogance in Chrétien, but Canadians hadn’t, and he went on to secure another majority in 2000. The storm of Shawinigate and the Sponsorship Scandal had yet to hit, and Chrétien’s political career still had four years left before he retired in 2003. Today in 2024 , he’s still alive and kicking at the ripe old age of 90.

At the time, the editorial criticized Chrétien’s absence as a diplomatic blunder rather than a deliberate snub. The cartoon depicted Chrétien with skis strapped to the roof of his limo, heading towards Parliament Hill. A bumper sticker humorously declared, “I’d Rather Be Skiing.” The subtle wordplay on the skis and the ski tow leading up to the Centre Block added layers of commentary.

Little did we know that more political dramas would unfold, with different leaders facing unique challenges. Boris Yeltsin, briefly mentioned in the editorial, continued to be in power until 2007. In January 1999, Yeltsin was increasingly viewed as a drunken buffoon, and a few months later, he passed the reins to Vladimir Putin, a name now notorious for global crisis.

November 22, 2016

Fast forward to 2016, and an Op-Ed by Thomas Walkom critiqued Justin Trudeau for skipping Fidel Castro’s funeral. The piece lamented Trudeau’s decision, highlighting the evolution of political landscapes and the complexities of international relations. It invoked the historical context of Canada’s relationship with Cuba and emphasized the importance of recognizing the complexities of the Cuban Revolution.

What strikes me most is how political landscapes change over time. The editorial recalled Pierre Trudeau’s visit to revolutionary Cuba in 1976 and the path to reconciliation with realism and respect. It contrasted this with Justin Trudeau’s decision and the criticism he faced for not explicitly mentioning Castro’s dictatorship in his eulogy.

The 2016 piece also touched upon the dynamics of international relations, noting that other leaders, like François Hollande and Theresa May, chose not to attend Castro’s funeral, possibly due to the shifting stance of the incoming U.S. president, Donald Trump.

November 16, 2022

There have been broader discussions on political snubs, referencing instances like Yasser Arafat’s funeral, Prince Charles’s civil ceremony, and Boris Yeltsin’s notable no-show on the tarmac. These discussions contemplate whether these actions are genuine snubs or mere political posturing, acknowledging the fine line between bluster and substance in diplomatic relations.

Regarding the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, the subject of the snub, it has endured as one of the most stable states in the troubled Middle East over the past quarter-century. Despite some worries during the Arab Spring, King Abdullah II has reigned without the calamities faced by neighbouring Iraq, the civil war in Syria, or the war-ravaged Israel/Palestine conflict.

Looking back on that cartoon and its accompanying editorial, I see it not just as a snapshot of a moment in time but as a lens through which to view the ever-changing currents of politics. The perceived arrogance of one leader in 1999 became a mere ripple in the ocean of subsequent political waves. It serves as a reminder that, in the grand scheme of things, even the most pointed critiques and satirical cartoons are just fragments of a much larger narrative. (Graeme MacKay January 15, 2024)

Friday January 22, 1999

January 22, 1999 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday January 22, 1999

Homelessness is our problem

People who live outside Toronto generally have concerns other than worrying about the plight of the homeless in that city. But it’s hard to ignore the housing crisis in Canada’s largest metropolis. Toronto’s problems of homelessness and chronic shortage of low-cost housing are becoming Ontario’s problems. That much is clear after a new report urging substantial spending by the senior levels of government to ease the hardship.

The reluctance of the private sector to build housing for low-income people, a stark reality, is underlined in the report from a task force headed by Greater Toronto United Way president Anne Golden. Developers aren’t eager to provide affordable housing for very-low income households, at least without some government help. Cash-strapped governments face a daunting task in trying to supply all of the demand at the bottom end of the market. In fact, the federal and provincial governments have seen fit to withdraw from construction of social housing. It’s not surprising that homelessness is rising, together with waiting lists for affordable housing, and not just in Toronto. Drop-in centres, temporary shelters, food banks and similar social services are under serious pressure in Hamilton and most urban centres.

Golden’s task force leans heavily in the direction of public as opposed to private sector solutions. Urging action by all three levels of government, the report has sobering recommendations for hundreds of millions of dollars in new spending ever year. Projects for new and renovated low-income housing, and enriched shelter allowances for the working poor carry some of the highest price tags.

Public investment on this scale is a tall order, especially when governments have retreated from subsidized housing in order to fight bloated deficits. But the magnitude of the problem is equally massive. The visible hardship is reflected in the destitute who sleep on the street. The so-called hidden homeless, struggling to live in substandard accommodations, are often almost as desperate. The pressure on governments to act will only increase if the trend doesn’t improve.

While senior governments should accept more responsibility, fiscal reality sugge sts that it will be difficult to move as boldly as the report suggests. Better results might lie in addressing the root of the problem: lack of private sector involvement. Governments could find that it’s more cost-effective to attract private builders with a range of new incentives than to attempt a massive reinvestment.

There are many ideas to promote low-income housing. Suggestions include:

– more generous property tax incentives;

– more creativity in municipal planning and flexibility in zoning bylaws;

– requiring a percentage of affordable housing in new residential projects;

– rebates on provincial and federal sales taxes for developers of affordable housing;

– making publicly-owned properties available.

Accelerated, widespread incentives to investors will trim government revenues. B ut much of the expense will be offset by savings from reduced demand for social services. Of equal importance, finding decent housing for the poor will pay big dividends in sparing Toronto, Hamilton and other communities from the ugly social and economic problems that afflict many American cities. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial, A10, 1/22/1999)

* * * * *

Bridging the Gap from Cartoon to Crisis

July 21, 2023

Twenty-five years have elapsed since the ink of an editorial cartoon dried, imprinting a stark warning about a looming housing crisis in Ontario, Canada. The illustration portrayed the grim reality of homelessness juxtaposed with oblivious leaders, a visual narrative that echoed a prophetic call sounded by the Ann Golden task force. Yet, in the year 2024, the crisis has not just persisted; it has snowballed into a formidable issue demanding our collective attention.

In the political landscape, promises like Trudeau’s commitment of $15 billion for affordable housing emerge, but the reality on the ground remains starkly different. The winter of 2023 laid bare the inadequacies in the city’s response, highlighting gaps that threatened the safety of those already vulnerable. Matthew Cymbalisty’s journey, from battling frostbite on the streets to finding stability in subsidized housing, encapsulates both personal triumphs and the systemic failures that still haunt our society.

April 7, 2017

Reflecting on the past reveals that the roots of homelessness in Canada can be traced back to policy shifts in the 1980s. The editorial cartoon served not just as a warning but as a call to action that unfortunately seemed to have fallen on deaf ears. The 2017 National Housing Strategy committed a substantial $72 billion, but the question looms: Is it being deployed effectively to address the urgent needs of the population?

As we mark a quarter-century since the publication of that particular cartoon, the signs of “vacancy” should not merely symbolize continued cluelessness. Instead, they must serve as a rallying cry for a profound reevaluation of priorities. Homelessness is not confined to Toronto or Hamilton; it is a national problem that requires urgent, collaborative action. The commitment must shift from merely funding homelessness programs to securing affordable housing—a fundamental human right that resonates through the 1948 UN Declaration of Human Rights and the 1976 International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights.

The 25-year milestone is not just an anniversary; it is a moment for introspection and renewed commitment. The cartoon’s warning is still relevant, and the signs of “vacancy” must be transformed into symbols of proactive leadership and compassionate governance. Homelessness demands not just financial commitments but a comprehensive, coordinated effort across all levels of government, industry, and non-profit organizations. It is time for Canada to rise collectively and turn this crisis into an opportunity for lasting change. (Graeme MacKay, January 16, 2024)

Wednesday January 17, 1999

January 17, 1999 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday January 17, 1999

Mr. Martin plays it safe

Paul Martin’s second straight balanced budget won’t thrill anyone, and that’s probably a good thing.

Once again, the finance minister and Liberal-leader-in-waiting has proven himsel f the consummate juggler by doing something for nearly everyone and not taking any risks. He and his government will be roundly criticized in days to come, but that’s to be expected. Let’s face it, government budgets are as much about spin and strategy as they are about substance. There is so much flexibility and interpretation in revenue and spending figures, the auditor general won’t even sign off on the budget. Federal finance ministers and their provincial counterparts routinely under- and
over-estimate to suit their political purposes, and Martin is no exception.

None of this is to suggest the budget isn’t important — it is. It speaks volumes about the Liberal strategy for governing. Based on what we saw from Martin yesterday, the Liberals are opting for the strategic status quo: Ultra-cautious management and very specifically-targeted new program spending.

Martin recognizes the need for tax cuts, health care reinvestment, research funding and support for the cash-strapped military, but he also recognizes that the single biggest threat to stability and prosperity is the national debt. When Martin took over as finance minister, 36 cents of every tax dollar went to pay interest on the public debt. Today, that figure has dropped to 27 cents. That’s significant progress, attributable to government spending restraint, a vibrant economy and low interest rates. However, we’re still spending more than a quarter of all public revenue to service debt. That’s about $41 billion per year, more than the feds spend on old age pensions, health care and unemployment benefits combined. This massive load will only get heavier with the passage of time, our aging population and increased demand on social services. So Martin is quite right to resist calls for drastic, across the board tax cuts and opt instead to maintain debt reduction as a priority.

He’s also right to recognize the increasing national anxiety about deteriorating health care. But here, Martin is less forthright with Canadians. Yes, the budget amounts to a considerable transfer payment increase that will go toward bolstering health care, provided provincial premiers keep their commitment made during social union negotiations. But as Martin admitted, this investment only restores health care funding to mid-’90s levels. It will relieve some pressure, but is nowhere near enough to completely restore levels of care. More importantly, this budget does nothing to accommodate the future. In the next decade, our rapidly aging population will place increasing demands on health care, and in the absence of less expensive, more effective forms of community-based care, this problem will not go away.

Martin’s critics will rail over the modest tax cuts in this budget. Their arguments have some merit. We are among the most taxed people in the developed world, a sad fact which makes our economy less competitive and Canadian families less prosperous. Could Martin have done more? Yes. Should he have done more, given other priorities like health care, debt reduction and global economic uncertainty caused by Asian and South American flu? No. There is modest tax relief in this budget, and there will be considerably more in next year’s. That’s an acceptable compromise.

We give mixed reviews to other initiatives unveiled in the budget. We welcome renewed investment in our military, but note the amount allocated is far less than what is needed to give our soldiers a decent living wage. Similarly, increases in research spending are welcome, but still leave Canadian researchers far behind their counterparts elsewhere. We wish Martin had announced spending cuts in some areas, like regional development, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation and business subsidies. These are all areas better dealt with by the private sector, leaving Ottawa to direct the money saved to other more essential areas.

In the days to come, we’ll look in more detail at some of the programs announced in the budget. For now, we’ll retire to study Martin’s latest opus, and fervently hope that next time Canadians are subjected to a budget speech, it’s half the length of this one. (Hamilton Spectator Editorial, A10, 2/17/1999)

Saturday January 16, 1999

January 16, 1999 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday January 16, 1999

Compromise on magazine bill

A reality check is in order before Canada and the United States allow differences over Ottawa’s plans to protect the Canadian magazine industry to mushroom into a trade war. Are both countries, especially Canada, willing to risk serious damage to key industries — including Hamilton-based steel producers — in a showdown over magazines? The potential job losses in steel, lumber and other sectors aren’t worth it.

Heritage Minister Sheila Copps may be well-intentioned in trying to help Canadian magazines to prosper against American competition. But her proposed magazine bill is a thinly-veiled and probably self-defeating attempt to artificially protect the domestic magazine industry. With its punitive provisions, it’s not surprising that the U.S. is reacting with heavy-handed threats to close some key markets in retaliation. The bill would make it illegal for Canadian advertisers to place ads in so-called split-run magazines — domestic editions of U.S. publications which contain little Canadian content. Publishers who break the law could face fines of up to $250,000.

Although Copps’ bill is too harsh, the concerns of Canada’s magazine industry are legitimate. Publishers of periodicals such as Saturday Night and Maclean’s essentially compete for advertising on an uneven playing field. American publishers can undercut Canadian competitors with lower advertising rates because their costs are already covered in the U.S. market. This is a legitimate issue of fairness, which helps explain the fact that U.S. magazines and other foreign periodicals predominate on Canadian newsstands. Nonetheless, Canadian magazines aren’t exactly an endangered species. Half of the magazines bought in Canada, through subscriptions and newsstand sales, are Canadian publications. While the U.S. ships a hefty $700-million worth of magazines into Canada each year, Canadian magazines post impressive numbers too — they generated $1-billion in revenues in 1996-97, 60 per cent of it from advertising.

The bill is Canada’s latest attempt to skirt international trading rules to protect domestic magazines. Its chances of success seem no better than previous unsuccessful initiatives. The U.S. is likely to challenge it, especially under the North American Free Trade Agreement. Like all protectionism, Copp’s bill carries the risk of a backlash. How would Ottawa like it if the U.S. imposed duties on Canadian music?

It isn’t only Americans who are concerned about the bill. Canadian advertisers understandably resent being told that they can’t advertise in U.S. periodicals. Eaton’s and Canadian Tire, for example, need exposure in American magazines to compete effectively against multinationals lik e Wal-mart. Readers, of course, have a stake too. Sports Illustrated, a key target of the bill, is popular in Canada. Should Canadians be denied a split-run edition of Sports Illustrated with more coverage of Canadian sports, or The Economist with a special Canadian section? The government partly deferred to reality by exempting Time from the bill. But it remains flawed. The government should listen to Canadian steelmakers and others who are urging compromise.

More creative, pragmatic alternatives to help Canadian magazines exist. Tax breaks could be increased for Canadian advertisers in domestic magazines. Subsidies for the industry could be increased. Perhaps special licencing fees could be applied to split-run magazines. All of these options might have drawbacks, but the problems pale in comparison to a trade war. It’s time for the government to put its legislative big stick on hold and negotiate a settlement with the Americans. (Hamilton Spectator, D4, 1/16/1999)

* * * * *

“Sheilacoppsyism”: Navigating Trade Wars, Cultural Protections, and the Shifting Tides of Media

As I pen down reflections on “Sheilacoppsyism,” I can’t help but acknowledge the layers of history that have unfolded since that pivotal moment 25 years ago. Sheila Copps, the unapologetic scrapper from our shared hometown of Hamilton, emerges as a central figure in a narrative that intertwines political assertiveness, cultural protectionism, and the evolving dynamics of the media landscape.

In my less-than-subtle caricature 25 years ago, Sheila Copps, like a modern-day Eugene McCarthy, interrogates a Canadian consumer in a Senate committee hearing room. The dialogue, laden with satire, encapsulates the complexities of the split-run magazine dispute, where national interests clashed, and the line between cultural protection and economic pragmatism blurred.

May 1, 2003

In retrospect, I find myself acknowledging that perhaps I was a touch too harsh in my depiction of Copps. Her outspokenness, often a thorn in the side of political adversaries, was rooted in a genuine commitment to championing Canadian interests. Known for her scrappy demeanour, Copps embodied the resilience of our hometown, Hamilton, in the face of political storms.

The editorial cartoon becomes a self-deprecating artifact, capturing a moment when my pen wielded satire with a certain vigour. As I revisit this piece of history, I recognize the nuance in Copps’ stance – a delicate dance between protecting Canadian culture and navigating the intricacies of international trade.

The cartoon, drawn a quarter-century ago, stands as a reminder of the spirited exchanges that shape political discourse. It becomes a testament to the evolving narratives, the changing tides of media, and the individuals like Sheila Copps who, in their outspokenness, leave an indelible mark on the pages of history. As we navigate the complexities of today’s world, this reflection serves as a gentle reminder that history, much like satire, is often a product of its time, subject to the shifting sands of perception and understanding. – (Graeme MacKay January 15, 2024)

Tuesday January 12, 1999

January 12, 1999 by Graeme MacKay

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday January 12, 1999

Time for a new look at Cuba

It has taken almost 40 years, but the United States is finally beginning to realize that its hard line toward Cuba has failed. President Bill Clinton, better late than never, is recognizing that the trade embargo against Cuba is an ineffective way to promote democracy and human rights in Fidel Castro’s dictatorship. Sadly, however, prospects for a rapid thaw in the costly deep freeze between Cuba and the U.S. remain elusive.

Two obstacles — Clinton’s reluctance to take bold action to ease the embargo, and Castro’s hostility to even limited American overtures toward Cuba — keep Washington and Havana in a no-win stand-off. It doesn’t make sense. An end to American economic sanctions on Cuba can’t come a moment too soon. Lifting the embargo has the most potential to force Castro’s repressive regime to change.

Clinton took a helpful, if modest, step to break the ice last week. He announced a further loosening of sanctions against Cuba, such as expanding direct charter flights to the island, allowing direct mail service, and encouraging exchanges of athletes, scientists and other professionals. Building on an easing of the embargo last March, Clinton is making a tacit admission that American policy toward Cuba is failing. The Americans are heading down the road of dialogue and engagement toward Cuba, as Canada has done for decades. But Clinton is moving too slowly, evidently for fear of upsetting the anti-Castro lobby in Florida and hardline Republican congressmen.

A growing number of influential political and business voices want Clinton to take more dramatic action. A non-partisan commission, including Republican heavyweights such as former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, volunteered to study alternative policies toward Cuba. Clinton should take that opportunity. If the U.S. were to end the embargo, Castro would be deprived of his most potent propaganda weapon, his litany of complaints about the U.S.

Castro is as much to blame for the paralysis as unsuccessful American policy. Apart from occasional public relations gestures, s uch as Pope John Paul’s visit last year, Castro shows little interest in easing the harsh realities of his regime. He has long insisted that Cuba will not allow democratic elections. True to form, Castro’s government denounced Clinton’s latest overtures. Castro would have reciprocated if he was truly interested in helping ordinary Cubans to survive the hardships of the embargo. The sanctions cost Cuba an estimated $800-million (U.S.) every year.

The aging dictator’s refusal to co-operate with the U.S. dampens hopes for an early transition to democracy. Perhaps he’ll listen to Canada, a big supplier of foreign investment and tourists. Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axworthy last week urged Castro to release more political dissidents. Cuba freed several political prisoners after Prime Minister Jean Chretien visited last year. There was no immediate sign that Castro would budge this time.

Few leaders are as intractable and short-sighted as Castro. However, that doesn’t excuse the mistakes made by the U.S. in Cuban policy. As long as the American embargo remains, Castro will continue a propaganda war that helps him — but doesn’t do anything for long-suffering Cubans. (Source: Hamilton Spectator editorial)

* * * * *

Cuban Reflections: 25 Years After a Cartoon, A Glimpse Into Today

In 1999, I sketched an editorial cartoon for the Hamilton Spectator, capturing the poignant image of Lloyd Axworthy, Canada’s foreign affairs minister at the time, known then and thereafter as a champion for human rights, engaged in a bear hug diplomacy with Cuban President Fidel Castro. Little did I know that a quarter-century later, the relations between Canada and Cuba would remain relatively cordial, in stark contrast to the rocky path the United States has treaded in its dealings with the island nation.

Back then, my cartoon accompanied an editorial that lamented the ineffective nature of the U.S. trade embargo against Cuba, expressing hope for a thaw in the icy relations. President Bill Clinton took some steps to ease the embargo, acknowledging the need for dialogue, much like Canada had practiced for decades. However, the political standoff persisted, held back by reluctance on both sides.

Fast forward to 2024, and the landscape has changed. Fidel Castro has passed away, succeeded by his brother Raul for a decade before a new, non-revolutionary leader assumed power. My personal encounter with Cuba in 2014 revealed a nation marked by its resilience, rich culture, and a deep appreciation for art despite economic hardships.

In May 2014, Graeme and other Canadian editorial cartoonists travelled to Cuba

In 2014, the Association of Canadian Editorial Cartoonists (ACEC) ventured to Havana for a convention, exposing us to a side of Cuba that goes beyond political rhetoric. Our visit included tours of UNESCO World Heritage towns, revealing a nation proud of its history. However, the possibility of repression loomed large, as press freedom in Cuba ranked disconcertingly low globally.

The economic and political freedoms in Cuba seemed trapped in a quagmire, exacerbated by the enduring American trade embargo. Yet, the Cuban people, in the face of adversity, embraced art fervently, their creativity spilling onto the streets like a beacon of hope.

Our interactions with local illustrators and cartoonists showcased a vibrant and diverse artistic community. They navigated the delicate balance of pushing creative boundaries while avoiding repercussions from the government. The cartoons often targeted the United States, revealing a population well-informed about global events and critical of the pitfalls of capitalism.

Ramses Morales Izquierdo, a Cuban illustrator, became our guide and friend, offering us a glimpse into the less-traveled parts of his town. His passion for his country and optimism about its future resonated deeply. Raul Castro’s tentative steps toward private investment and entrepreneurship were evident, albeit with challenges.

December 18, 2014

As I reflect on my visit to Cuba in 2014 and the subsequent years, it’s disheartening to see that the hope kindled during the days of Obama has dimmed. The island’s economic and political challenges persist, and the spectre of over-commercialization looms. The unique blend of Cuban culture and resilience may face a new wave of change, with the inevitable influx of global brands and franchises.

I find myself echoing the sentiments expressed in the 1999 editorial – a hope that Cuba can choose its destiny unencumbered by old grievances and external pressures. The journey of this Caribbean nation, from the days of my cartoon to the present, serves as a microcosm of the complexities and challenges inherent in international relations and the delicate dance between politics and art.

Canada, Cuba, Fidel Castro, Lloyd Axworthy, human rights, hugging, diplomacy, foreign, relations, hugs, Silver Reflection