Justin Trudeau

Wednesday March 4, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday March 4, 2020

Ex-PM Joe Clark campaigns for Security Council seat in Africa, Persian Gulf

Former prime minister and foreign minister Joe Clark faces a tough slog during his travels to the Persian Gulf and Africa to campaign for Canada’s bid for the United Nations Security Council, analysts said Monday.

Joe Clark

Clark began a one-week trip Monday as “special envoy” to Algeria, Bahrain, Qatar and Egypt to campaign for Canada’s bid for a temporary two-year seat on the UN’s most powerful body.

If elected, the Trudeau government says Canada will continue to work to strengthen multilateralism, foster peace, address climate change, promote economic security and advance gender equality.

Bessma Momani, an expert in Middle East affairs at the University of Waterloo, says Clark may not get a very receptive audience to Canada’s push for women’s rights among some of the government representatives he will be meeting.

“The people certainly hold Canada in high regard, regardless of what the governments may think,” Momani said. “People are still queuing to immigrate here so clearly we are still doing something right.”

“Certainly our recent emphasis on human rights and women’s rights is probably not received that favourably in that part of the world, which tends to have more conservative values and are part of the global autocratic turn.”

February 8, 2020

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau visited Ethiopia and Senegal in February as part of his government’s campaign for the council seat. Several cabinet ministers have also been visiting countries across Africa in recent months.

The secret ballot at the UN General Assembly takes place in June for a two-year term starting next year.

Africa, with its 54 voting countries, is a key voting bloc in the tough fight that pits Canada against Norway and Ireland for two available seats. Both countries spend more per capita than Canada on foreign aid, which is seen by many analysts as an impediment to Canada’s chances to winning the competition.

December 10, 2003

Clark is an appropriate choice to campaign in the region, but he will have his work cut out for him, said Fen Hampson, a Carleton University expert who wrote a recent book on the foreign policy of the ex-prime minister Brian Mulroney. Clark served as Mulroney’s minister of external affairs.

“African leaders with long memories will recall the important role Joe Clark and Brian Mulroney played in the Commonwealth in helping to bring an end to apartheid in South Africa and also stepping up to the plate in the Ethiopian famine crisis,” said Hampson. (CTV News) 

 

Saturday February 29, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Saturday February 29, 2020

Blockades have exposed the contradictions of Justin Trudeau’s ambitious reconciliation agenda 

The on-again-off-again rail blockades in support of a handful of Indigenous hereditary chiefs have demonstrated how easy it is to bring Canada to a halt. They have also underscored the contradictions of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s ambitious reconciliation agenda.

June 3, 2015

Trudeau came to power five years ago vowing to make reconciliation with Canada’s Indigenous people his No. 1 priority. And to some degree, he delivered.

Under his Liberal government, more (but not all) First Nation reserves gained access to potable water. A commission of inquiry was set up to look into why so many Indigenous women and girls went missing or were murdered in recent years.

But the centre point of the reconciliation agenda was political. The Trudeau Liberals vowed to establish respectful nation-to-nation relationships with Indigenous peoples, one that would eventually redefine their legal relationship to the Crown.

July 13, 2017

Among other things, the Liberals promised to write the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, which in its present form is an unenforceable statement of general principles, into Canadian law.

However, exactly what was meant by a nation-to-nation relationship was left unclear. Did the Liberals mean nation in a vague cultural sense, in the way that Quebec is viewed as a nation inside Canada? Or did they mean something more substantive?

More to the point, with whom would the federal government have this political relationship? Elected band councils? Hereditary chiefs? Or both?

July 23, 2019

In much of Canada, this question is moot. But in British Columbia, Southern Ontario and Quebec — where traditional clan-based governments remain strong — it is not.

In B.C., there is a second wrinkle. Unlike the rest of Canada, few treaties have been signed with First Nations in that province. To whom then, does the land not covered by treaties belong?

Many First Nation leaders, including the hereditary chiefs of the Wet’suwet’en, argue that since this land has never been ceded, it belongs to them.

If that were true, the argument goes, then the hereditary chiefs alone have the right to decide who enters this land and who, if anyone, polices it.

For the governing Liberals, committed as they are to respectful nation-to-nation relationships, this is a hard argument to counter.

But if the Wet’suwet’en have the right to keep outsiders from their traditional lands, then surely so do other First Nations — including the Mohawks of Tyendinaga near Belleville, Ont.

February 13, 2020

That, at least, was the logic behind the decision of some Mohawks and their allies to block the CN Rail main line for days on end, an action that threw much of the country into an economic tailspin.

The Liberal government tried to resolve that blockade by sending Indigenous Services Minister Marc Miller to Tyendinaga to engage in a respectful, nation-to-nation political relationship.

That took nine hours and accomplished nothing.

Eventually, with Ottawa’s implicit blessing, the Ontario Provincial Police went in and arrested protestors. That, in turn, provoked more rail blockades. (Toronto Star) 

 

Thursday February 20, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday February 20, 2020

Force won’t fix Canada’s blockade problem — but that won’t let Trudeau off the hook

The most evocative image coming out of this week’s protests against the Coastal GasLink pipeline was that of a Canadian flag hanging upside-down outside the provincial legislature in Victoria, with the words “Reconciliation is dead” scrawled across it.

February 13, 2020

Because it’s 2020, that phrase was a hashtag, too.

Between the declaration of reconciliation’s demise and competing claims that Canada has fallen into “chaos” or “mob” rule, there is a yawning vacuum that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau might need to fill — to make the case again for a reconciliation project he embraced of his own volition.

There is more here than can be conveyed in a sound bite or tweet.

“Contemporary events have two-hundred-year-old tails,” Harry Swain, a former deputy minister with Indian and Northern Affairs (as the department was then known), wrote a decade ago in his book Oka: A Political Crisis and Its Legacy.

July 14, 2005

“Flashpoints like Oka occur when Indian people believe that governments have violated treaties or their own laws, when a long struggle to right the wrong has been unavailing, and when a government crystallizes matters by licensing a further insult or alienation,” he added. “Land is always at the heart of the broken promises.”

On those terms, historians might file the Wet’suwet’en protests against the Coastal Gas Link project alongside events like Oka, Ipperwash, Caledonia and Gustafsen Lake.

But those examples also point to the great danger involved in attempting to resolve such disputes with force. In Oka and Ipperwash, people died. Wherever there is violence, there is lasting trauma. And the last thing the relationship between Canada and Indigenous Peoples needs now is more trauma.

September 1, 2006

Even if calls for Trudeau to immediately intervene seem either to understate the difficulty of doing so, or to promote a potentially dangerous course of action (one commentator this week invoked Margaret Thatcher’s handling of the miners strike in the United Kingdom, a violent year-long conflict, as a laudable example of leadership), Trudeau’s government can’t be absolved of its duty to safely end this standoff as quickly as possible.

On Friday, Trudeau said that the government’s focus was on “dialogue” and “constructive outcomes.” A day earlier, his government announced that Carolyn Bennett, the minister of Crown-Indigenous relations, was being dispatched to British Columbia, while Marc Miller, the minister of Indigenous services, will get involved in trying to resolve the blockade in Ontario.

But in the post-conflict analysis, there will be questions about whether the Liberals should have intervened directly sooner. (CBC) 

 

Thursday February 6, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday February 6, 2020

One step forward, another one back: What the Trans Mountain ruling means for Trudeau

In sports, you win some and you lose some. In politics, it’s possible to win and lose at the same time.

Pipeline cartoons

Take, for example, yesterday’s Federal Court of Appeal ruling on the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project.

The court ruled unanimously that the federal government had fulfilled its duty to consult meaningfully with a handful of First Nations opposed to the project, clearing a major hurdle in the drawn-out battle to build a second line to carry bitumen from Alberta’s oilsands to Burnaby on the B.C. coast.

The federal and Alberta governments immediately claimed victory, putting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Premier Jason Kenney on the same side for once.

“This project is in the public interest,” federal Natural Resources Minister Seamus O’Regan told reporters shortly after the decision was released.

“We also know that this is a project that can deliver significant economic benefit to Alberta, to Canadians across the country,” added Finance Minister Bill Morneau. “And more importantly, we are going to put that economic benefit back into the environment.”

Their sense of relief was palpable. Ottawa spent around $4.5 billion in 2018 to buy TMX — a last-ditch effort to ensure the pipeline would be built after its owner, Kinder Morgan, announced plans to step away.

That price, hefty as it is, doesn’t include construction costs or any overruns the project has incurred because of the various stop-work orders that have put construction well behind schedule.

But with the victory comes a major setback in relations with those Indigenous groups who continue to oppose the $7.4-billion project, and will no doubt seek to appeal the decision to the Supreme Court of Canada.

“Reconciliation stopped today,” said Rueben George, of the Tsleil-Waututh, his voice cracking with emotion.

The band was one of four Indigenous groups behind the court challenge. It argued that the second, court-ordered round of consultations also failed to respond adequately to their concerns about the impact the project would have on marine life.

“This government is incapable of making sound decisions for our future generations,” George said. “So we will — even for their children — we will take those steps to make sure Canada stays the way it is.” (CBC)

 

 

Thursday January 30, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday January 30, 2020

U.K.’s plan to deal with Huawei 5G provides an uncertain course for Canada to consider

By cautiously allowing Huawei into only select parts of its 5G cellular networks, Britain is charting its own course in cybersecurity, while seeking to appease both China and the U.S.

December 12, 2018

But the unique nature of the British strategy means it is untested and could yet prove impossible to carry out.

And as Canada moves closer to its own decision on whether to allow the Chinese telecom manufacturer into this country’s 5G systems, Britain’s plan will serve as an example to either follow or avoid.

“They are putting together a policy for themselves which, on paper, is logical,” said Catherine Rosenberg, the Canada research chair in future internet at the University of Waterloo. “But is it going to work the way they want? It’s unclear.”

The U.K.’s announcement on Tuesday amounts to letting Huawei halfway in the system.

Identified as a “high-risk vendor” by British officials, the Shenzhen-based telco will only be allowed to provide equipment used in the outer layer of Britain’s 5G networks, such as transmission facilities. Huawei gear will be banned from the brains of the operation, known as the core components.

January 29, 2019

With current 4G technology, only the core equipment processes user information. The outer tier — known as the edge — beams cellular data between devices.

But here’s where it gets complicated — and potentially cumbersome for Britain. Higher-speed 5G is designed to cut down on latency by integrating some processing functions on the edge of the network, effectively blurring the line between core and edge.

Rosenberg said U.K. mobile networks could indeed choose to only purchase Huawei equipment to perform transmission functions in 5G networks.

But she questioned whether the plan would achieve its intended goal. The next-generation cellular technology is “more and more software-oriented” and “edge-based,” said Rosenberg, who also holds the Cisco research chair in 5G systems.

In vehicle terms, it’s like banning a certain manufacturer’s parts from being used in a car’s engine, only to buy tires from the same company. And with 5G, it’s as if engine parts are now being installed in the wheels.

June 17, 2017

The U.S. has long contended that China could access Huawei’s technology to spy on — or even shut down — foreign telecommunication services. China has always denied these claims.

The fifth-generation technology raises the stakes, as it’s not only expected to provide higher speeds on new 5G-enabled smartphones and other communication devices, it’s also set to form the basis for a deeper presence of the internet in everyday life. A 5G-enabled “internet of things” is meant to allow for more smart devices, self-driving vehicles, as well as tech-based solutions in health care and beyond.

Despite 5G’s projected ubiquity, the thinking behind Britain’s plan is this: if Huawei doesn’t supply core system components, then it won’t have access to sensitive data. But from country to country, the perception of the technological reality of 5G seems to vary based on political considerations. (Source: CBC)