Tag: Trudeau

Categories
News

Liberal Party wins the federal election: results unchanged since 2019

Meanwhile, Concordia University witnessed a rather smooth voting procedure on both campuses

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will continue to lead the country with a minority government, as the Liberal Party won 159 seats on Sept. 20, coming 11 short of a majority. The Conservative Party, led by Erin O’Toole, remains the official opposition with a total of 119 seats.

Costing Canadians an estimated $610 million, the 2021 federal election ended up more expensive than any other in Canadian history, surpassing the 2019 election costs by $100 million. Despite winning two additional seats, the Liberal Party was unable to reach a majority — an objective that pushed Trudeau to call a snap election just two years into his term.

“You are sending us back to work with a clear mandate to get Canada through this pandemic, and to the brighter days ahead, and my friends, that’s exactly what we are ready to do,” stated Trudeau in his victory speech at the end of the election night.

Going forward, the Trudeau government promises to develop a national childcare program, increase the supply of affordable housing, enforce vaccine mandates for federal workers, make clean water more accessible for Indigenous communities, and cut greenhouse gas emissions by 40 to 45 per cent by 2030.

Although voter turnout dropped to 59 per cent this year, mostly due to the COVID-19 pandemic, hundreds of thousands still took part in the election on the Island of Montreal.

Home to the Loyola campus, the Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount borough reelected its Liberal MP Marc Garneau with 54 per cent of the vote. In the same riding, Concordia graduate Mathew Kaminski came in third place as a Conservative candidate with 14 per cent of the vote.

Voting at the Loyola Chapel has been an overall success with almost no queues on election day, according to the station’s central poll supervisor (CPS) Nevena Jeric. She told The Concordian there were many efforts to inform all students of the voting rules on campus, especially when it comes to their residential address.

“Many students received an email that, as long as they lived in the riding, they could vote on campus. […] We had maybe one or two people who were turned away, but they weren’t surprised either since they were on campus anyway and tried to vote with their friends just in case,” said Jeric.

The supervisor added that, although the younger generation did not have as strong of a showing as expected on election day, many students had likely cast their ballots during the four days of advanced polling. Nationwide, Canadians set a new record for early voting: nearly 5.8 million citizens selected their candidate before election day, representing an 18 per cent increase since 2019.

However, the voting situation was slightly different at the SGW campus downtown.

Charles*, serving as the supervisor of two polling stations in the EV and LB buildings, noted that there was an impressive engagement from young voters. Having supervised federal and provincial elections at McGill University in the past, he observed “a much stronger participation” from the student population at Concordia’s downtown polling stations compared to those at McGill.

During advanced polling, some students had to wait for as long as two hours to cast their ballots due to a high volume of participating citizens. Experiencing major delays was the most common complaint addressed by downtown voters.

To improve the voting process, Charles said that out-of-province students were allowed to leave their mail-in ballots in a designated box at the downtown station. This additional measure was implemented for the first time on campus, making the election process more convenient for those who recently moved to Montreal.

Polling stations closed at 9:30 p.m. on both campuses, and CBC News announced the projected winner of the federal election just an hour later.

Montrealers showed strong support for the Liberal Party, which won 16 out of 18 ridings on the island. One of them is the Dorval-Lachine-LaSalle borough, where Fabiola Ngamaleu Teumeni — a 20-year-old Concordia student representing the NDP — managed to place third with 13 per cent of the vote.

In Quebec, more voters supported the sovereignist Bloc Québécois (32.6 per cent) than the Liberal Party (31.9 per cent). With 33 seats in the House of Commons, the Bloc has achieved its best results since the 2008 federal election.

Nationwide, the Conservative Party won the popular vote by nearly 200,000 ballots. However, since Canada’s electoral system works on a first-past-the-post basis, the winning party was determined by the number of ridings — and therefore, seats — it has won.

This election’s outcome was almost identical to that of 2019, when the Liberal Party also earned over 155 seats and secured a minority government. As the voting took place in the middle of the fourth wave of COVID-19 and broke records for government expenses, many have questioned the urgency and timing of this snap election.

Nevertheless, Justin Trudeau now begins his third term as Canada’s 23rd prime minister.

*Charles requested his last name not be disclosed.

 

Graphic courtesy of Maddy Schmidt.

 

50 years of a multicultural Canada

After 50 years since its first official recognition, does Canadian multiculturalism conserve its relevance in the 21st century?

The Multiculturalism Policy was first announced to be an official policy of Canada at the House of Commons in 1971 by Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. In his speech, Trudeau stated that no official culture would define the Canadian identity but its cultural diversity that makes the country whole.

Since then, this policy has been contributing to the recognition of cultural and ethnic diversity in Canadian society. It also preserves all civil rights for Canadians of all origins. Canadians from different backgrounds have since been able to share and enhance their cultural heritage while enjoying a guarantee of equal treatment, respect and protection under the Canadian Multiculturalism Act.

This year marks the 50th anniversary of this policy. What does multiculturalism represent to Canadians with immigrant backgrounds nowadays? Does the Multiculturalism Policy still play an important role in 21st century society?

In the documentary Multiculturalism in Canada debated, broadcasted in 2004 by the CBC, host Adrian Harewood had discussions with guests directly related to multiculturalism.

Harewood spoke with the Tandava, a band from Vancouver, whose members include people from various ethnic backgrounds. Prashant Michael John, the Bangladeshi-Canadian guitarist of the band, was asked to share his thoughts about the word “multiculturalism.” He said, “To me it means going beyond traditions, beyond conditioning; in fact, it means not narrowing itself to a peer group but having the whole world as a huge thing that you can draw from.”

Lan Tung, a Taiwanese-Canadian member of the band, mentioned that living in Canada gave her an opportunity to play a multicultural kind of music that she could not play elsewhere.

Harewood emphasized in the documentary: “The Canada of the 21st century is a dynamic meeting place of people of diverse cultures and traditions.”

This perception seems to remain the same in the present time, especially since Justin Trudeau, the incumbent Canadian Prime Minister, is often seen as a pioneer in Canadian advocacy for multiculturalism.

“Multiculturalism is one of Canada’s greatest strengths and a vital component of our national fabric,” said Trudeau in a statement published on last year’s Canadian Multiculturalism Day. “All Canadians — regardless of ethnicity, religion, culture, or language — have the right to be true to who they are, and to live peacefully as friends, neighbours, and colleagues.”

However, shortcomings are completely unavoidable. The desire to preserve and respect cultural diversity can be stated in words but the question of how to do it by action has never been easy to be answered. Racism is the case. As stated by StatCan, 21 per cent of the non-Caucasian population in Canada has reported that harassment and attacks are often based on race, ethnicity, and skin colour. The discrimination is even terribly increased since COVID-19, which mainly targets Asians and Canadians of Asian descent. Thus, this situation clearly indicates the inequality when it comes to the safety of different groups of ethnicities. While dealing with such an incident, the government’s anti-racism strategies seem to be unthorough and slow-effectuated.

As for Canadian youth, the topic of multiculturalism is also supported and of interest. Anthony Issa is a Canadian Concordia student with Lebanese family background. Since his grandfather and father are immigrants, Issa has a certain knowledge regarding this specific topic. He points out that multiculturalism nowadays is even included in the curriculum at the high school level; he learned that Canada is a nation formed by different groups of people, including immigrants and Indigenous people.

Although the Multiculturalism Policy seems to be symbolic to him in a sense that it does not have any influence on his family’s interests, Issa agrees that it still recognizes that all Canadians have the right to affirm their own cultures. He believes that the policy should be more applicable in society nowadays than it was before, since immigrants gradually occupy a larger percentage of Canada’s population in the 21st century. According to StatCan, the result of the 2016 Census shows that the number of immigrants accounted for more than one-fifth of Canada’s total population. This number is not only much higher than it was in the figures of previous years but also shows a growing sign over time. It is even expected to reach at least 24.5 per cent in 2036.

As a Canadian who tends to support global unity, Issa shows his concurrence towards the policy in terms of its equality: “We’re all from different backgrounds but everyone has the right to live in Canada and be treated fairly and equally.”

 

Feature graphic by Taylor Reddam

Categories
News

Poli Savvy: Canada seeks seat on UN Security Council

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau had been travelling the world last week seeking approval from African countries in his campaign for Canada’s hope of a permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC).

The UNSC is comprised of five permanent members–China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States–and 10 non-permanent members elected for two years, which currently includes Belgium, Germany and South Africa. For the remaining countries, they are allowed to participate in debates, though without the benefits of having a vote.

The UNSC is the principal body of the United Nations with the goal of maintaining international peace and establishing what is a threat to international security. In a situation where two states are in conflict, for example Israel and Palestine, the security council is in charge of setting the terms of settlement.

But would Canada, a non-council member state–i.e. doesn’t have a vote–actually get a permanent seat on the security council?

It is important to note that all permanent member states are nuclear powers. Now, whether the UNSC represents an international distribution of power is up to a political science debate, but Canada is not a nuclear state because it doesn’t have nuclear weapons. In fact, it is reliant on US anti-missile systems. Furthermore, if Canada was to launch an all-out nuclear buildup, the country would lose all international credibility as it signed and ratified the Non-Proliferation Treaty, an international treaty that prohibits countries from developing nuclear weapons. After all, there are many countries with nuclear power who would have the lead on attaining a spot on the UNSC before Canada does like India, Pakistan or Israel.

Being a member state also holds big responsibilities since they become the main actors of international peace. Is the US’s little northern brother really going to make a difference and stand its grounds on certain issues when it cannot even address its own? I’ll let you be the judge of that.

 

Graphic by Victoria Blair

Categories
News

Poli SAVVY: Petty high school gossip or world leaders making fun of Trump?

Well, Christmas has come a bit early this year, thanks to Saturday Night Live!

Anything with Paul Rudd, really anything, feels like a gift from Santa. Over the weekend, the late-night comedy show produced a skit portraying the world leaders as cool kids teasing the black sheep of the gang, U.S. President Trump.

While Paul Rudd was impersonating a bad boy-version of French President Emmanuel Macron, Jimmy Fallon took the role of an over-apologetic Justin Trudeau and James Corden was U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

The skit was a recollection of a conversation from the NATO summit that took place a week ago at Buckingham Palace, in London. Trudeau was caught on hot mic by a CBC producer venting to the other leaders about Trump’s lengthy 40-minute press conference from earlier that day.

As much as the skit was delicious to watch, some people were quick to point out that such comments could hurt the Canada-U.S. relationship. “At a time when Canada needs strong relationships more than ever, Justin Trudeau’s poor judgment, lack of professionalism and love of drama continues to weaken Canada’s position on the world stage. We saw this just yesterday at the NATO Summit,” said Opposition Leader Andrew Scheer on Parliament Hill.

You might wonder what all the fuss is if the entire world is already laughing at the guy…

Even the U.S. president’s leading political rival, Joe Biden, used the footage of Trudeau’s comments for one of his Democratic Party’s presidential nomination ads on Twitter. The post read “The world is laughing at President Trump.”

Does this give a free card for bullying? No. Will it affect Canada’s relationship with America? Well, I would hope that this precious relationship is strong enough to survive high school gossip, Andrew.

 

Graphic by Victoria Blair

Categories
News

Poli SAVVY: Environmentalist Steven Guilbeault slipped away from the Ministry of Environment

Last week, Justin Trudeau named his new cabinet, which includes 36 MPs. Most of them are coming back for a second mandate, but there are new surprising faces at the table.

One of these new nominations, which created a political bombshell, was elected here in Montreal. His nomination might not be a surprise, but the department he was given probably was. The newly-elected MP of Laurier Ste-Marie, Steven Guilbeault, was sworn-in as Minister of Canadian Heritage, when he was expected to be handed the Environment department.

The reason why many were seeing him as the Environment Minister is that well-known, long-time activist Guilbault is the founder of Equiterre, and has been fighting for the environment for the last 25 years.

Trudeau’s decision led many, such as former Mayor of the Plateau Mont-Royal Luc Ferrandez, to claim Guilbeault’s popularity was used to win the election.

“We did not elect him to have this role. Trudeau even said we need to vote for Guilbeault if we believe in the environment’s protection. I was asked 10 times to fight Guilbeault in the Plateau, but I said no I will let him try, he wants to change things from the inside…I was really disappointed when I heard his new role,” said Luc Ferrandez, on 98.5 FM. 

But was he used?

Last week, in an interview with Radio-Canada, Guilbeault said there was no promise made to him and he is happy about his new role.

Guilbeault also said that many people in his surrounding thought it was good for him to learn the role of being a politician, before jumping into the Environment Ministry.

Yet, in an interview with Le Devoir, Karel Mayrand from the David Suzuki Foundation said that Guilbeault was not named as the Environment Minister because he is an environmentalist, claiming it was a political move by Trudeau in order to please the people in the Western provinces.

It is fair to say that his nomination to another department other than Environment was a political decision. Even if Guilbeault has more expertise and knowledge pertinent to the Environment, putting him in the department ended up not being the first choice for the Liberal Party of Canada.

 

Graphic by Victoria Blair

Categories
News

Political Analysis: Will Trudeau’s black and brown face scandal swing youth vote?

“The picture does not change what he’s done during his tenure as Prime Minister. It will not really change my vote,” said Michel Maginzi, a 22-year-old student from Sherbrooke University.

“The first time I saw it, I was shook,” he said, admittedly. “Because that’s not something you expect to see from the Prime Minister, who’s the head of the government, head of the country. It’s very offensive. It’s racist, and I understand how people get offended. But at the same time, I’m personally not offended by it.”

“They found it and decided to use it as a weapon,” Maginzi continued. “It’s something that he’s done in the past. People are just trying to destroy his image.”

In an interview with the CBC, CEO of Abacus Data, David Coletto said that Canadians between the ages of 18 to 35 could make up 37 per cent of the electorate this federal election.

But, most Canadian youths have a tendency not to vote. Though the youth vote in the last federal election went up by nearly 40 per cent since 2011, they were still the age group with the least amount of votes according to Elections Canada.

Daniel Weinstock, director of the McGill Institute for Health and Social Policy, said no matter the public youth opinion of Trudeau, it will probably not make much of a difference come election time.

“Younger demographics tend to have markedly lesser participation rates in elections,” said Weinstock. “That might have a dampening effect on whatever contribution the youth vote might make, to swing the election.”

“Right now it doesn’t seem like the effect is that huge,” he continued. Weinstock said the last poll he saw from a reputable source showed a small movement away from the Liberals, but within the margin of error, between 1 to 2 per cent.

“The news cycle doesn’t seem to be dominated by it anymore,” said Weinstock. “We’re still almost four weeks until the election I think that if it stays where it is now, I don’t see it as a major factor, more of an embarrassment than anything else.”

Weinstock does admit Trudeau’s numbers as a leader have taken a hit but said it could be due to any other of his scandals.

“SNC-Lavalin, the infamous India trip,” said Weinstock. “His personal leadership numbers have really gone down, but I think a lot of voters here are mature enough to distinguish between the leader and the party. They might say well, he may not have the best judgment, but as I compare platforms, I think the Liberal support, looking at the party as a whole, is not taking a hit.”

Jean-François D’Aoust, an assistant professor at McGill and a postdoctoral fellow at the Center for the Study of Democracy Citizenship reflects this sentiment. D’Aoust said the controversy may have affected Canadian votes, but in a minor way, and explained that this event was not the only affair to have tarnished his image.

“There were already other scandals, such as SNC-Lavalin, which damaged his integrity image,” said D’Aoust. “Other scandals damaged his First Nations-friendly image.”

Could vote splitting between NDP and Liberals lead to a Conservative win?

Weinstock said Canadian voters know how the political system works and that they know what happens when there is vote splitting, so he doubts it could happen. In 2011, ridings, where voters were split between the NDP and Liberals, saw how the Conservative won because of it.

”I think a lot of people might say, you know what, I’d be inclined to vote for the NDP if they were a bit higher in the polls,” said Weinstock. “But four weeks is a long time. A bandwagon effect could happen, but right now I’m not seeing it in the numbers.”

 

Collage by Alex Hutchins

Categories
Student Life

Thousands rise for justice

The Montreal Raging Grannies is a non-profit organization that has been active in Montreal for 25 years. Through songs and other political demonstrations, they bring attention to a variety of social justice and environmental issues. Photo by Alex Hutchins.

Action against climate change and divestment is needed, now.

With signs held high and voices ringing clear above the blaring traffic on Commune St. E. in the Old Port on Saturday Sept. 8, more than 200 protesters united against the climate change crisis. Rise for Climate was supported by non-profit organization 350 Canada, in collaboration with a handful of local grassroots initiatives such as Leap Montreal, Rap Battles for Social Justice (RB4SJ) and the Montreal Raging Grannies. The gathering was one of more than 900 rallies simultaneously taking place across 95 countries worldwide, all demanding divestment from fossil fuel industries, among other things.

“Indigenous women and girls are three times more likely to experience violence, and six times more likely to be murdered than non-Indigenous women,” said Beatrice Dimaculangan, an activist, rapper, and community organizer with RB4SJ.

“We’ve already passed the point of no return,” said Sally Livingston, a Concordia alumna and member of the Montreal chapter of the Council of Canadians. “We do not want our tax dollars going to any more fossil fuel investments.” Toward the end of August, according to Global News, the Federal Court of Appeal quashed the Trans Mountain Pipeline plans due to insufficient consultations with Indigenous communities. However, according to the same article, Trudeau has not yet ruled out appealing the court’s decision, and “is maintaining that it will get built.”
“The fact that [the federal government] is pushing the Trans Mountain Pipeline through […] shows us that they haven’t changed their ways,” explained Nicolas Chevalier, one of the founding activists of the non-hierarchical organization Leap Montreal. “They don’t understand what it means to be in a climate crisis.”
“I think the Kinder Morgan Pipeline is totally retrogressive,” said Carole, a protester. There are three things Trudeau has shown us by spearheading this project, she explained: “He has broken his primary election promise, he has ignored consensus, and he is going backwards – just like Mr. Trump.”
Rise for Climate was attended by people from all walks of life: activists from various backgrounds, patrons, both young and old, families with children—all united as a community trying to salvage this planet we call home.

“The same system (capitalism) that drives climate change is the same system that drives inequality,” said Bianca Mugyenyi, a member of Leap Montreal. “At the end of the day, we want to do more than just avoid catastrophic climate change,” she said. “We want better lives.”

But the window for avoiding catastrophic climate change is quickly closing; we are and will continue to experience the effects of rising global temperatures throughout our lifetimes, albeit with regional variances. During a press conference on March 29, Amina J. Mohammed, secretary-general of the United Nations, explained that, unless accelerated action against climate change is adopted by 2020, the 2016 Paris Agreement goals will become unattainable. According to the 350 Canada website, 97 per cent of scientists agree that climate change is caused by human greenhouse gas emission. “So then why do our politicians keep making the wrong decisions?” asked Mugyenyi. “They’re moving in the wrong direction.”

Bea Dimaculangan spoke about how climate change disproportionately affects marginalized communities. Photo by Alex Hutchins.

Capitalism benefits from the existence of systemic oppression: from racism, from sexism, from violence against Indigenous communities. Capitalism is rooted in the mass exploitation of resources, and exponentially increasing profit margins somehow justifies the further exploitation of those resources and the political violence directed to already marginalized communities.
“Indigenous women and girls are three times more likely to experience violence, and six times more likely to be murdered than non-Indigenous women,” said Beatrice Dimaculangan, an activist, rapper and community organizer with RB4SJ.
“When Indigenous girls are trafficked into sex trade […] where is left for these girls to turn to when the very system meant to protect them proceeds to exploit and neglect them?” Dimaculangan held back tears as the power of her voice kept the crowd locked in to her every word. “These women are not solely victims of violence, but also of a justice system that doesn’t seem to give a shit about them.”

We have a responsibility—as Canadians, as allies, as human beings—to speak up. Not after the next major environmental catastrophe; not after coastal cities are completely underwater; not after the next oil spill wreaks havoc on another Indigenous community. The time for change is now. “The science is indisputable,” said Mugyenyi. “Enough is enough.”

Feature photo by Alex Hutchins

Categories
Opinions

OPINION: The scary use of the “R” word

Photo by Katelyn Thomas.

Today, we can’t be just not racist––we must be anti-racist

If you feel like you have to explain why something isn’t racist, a) it probably is and b) you’re on the wrong side of history. At an event organized by the Federal Liberal Association in St. Jean on Aug. 16, a woman interrupted Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s speech by incessantly yelling his name until he had no choice but to acknowledge her.

“I want to know when you will give us back the $146 million that we paid for your illegal immigrants.” Those are the words that Diane Blain shouted at the top of her lungs (and into my ear) in a corn field off Highway 133 in Sabrevois, Que. Surrounded by flabbergasted Liberals who were just there to have a good time, Blain threatened to throw a punch at any person who asked her to calm down.

In the midst of the madness, Trudeau attempted to appease the woman by outlining a few ways the government is giving back to Quebecers. Once Trudeau felt he had given her an appropriate amount of attention, he resumed the speech he had come to give. But she wasn’t satisfied. “You didn’t answer my question,” Blain said. As she repeated it, a man found his way to her side to chime in with, “We are not on Mohawk territory.” (We were, in fact, on Mohawk territory).

So, Trudeau put aside diplomacy and called it like he saw it. “This intolerance regarding immigrants does not have a place in Canada,” he said. “Canada was built by waves of immigration that were welcomed by First Nations, who showed us how to build a strong society, and the people who come here, generation after generation, to build stronger communities, this is what makes us stronger as a country. Madam, your intolerance does not have a place here.”

The crowd erupted in cheers, and Trudeau exited stage left. But later, the internet exploded. I was shocked to find that even some Liberals felt Trudeau’s reaction was a little uncalled for. I later realized this reaction was largely due to the footage that circulated online shortly after the event. The video conveniently begins later than the kerfuffle did, meaning you don’t hear Trudeau’s initial level-headed response.

Some say Blain’s question was valid and that Trudeau called her racist to avoid having to answer it. I call bullshit. Trudeau called her racist because he, like any compassionate person, doesn’t believe the borders of our country are where we should draw the line between which humans we care about and which ones we don’t. Article 14 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the right to asylum, reads: “If you are persecuted at home, you have the right to seek protection in another country.” It saddens me that this concept continues to be questioned today.

Racism isn’t always blatant; it manifests itself in many different forms. Trudeau recognizing and denouncing an instance of subtle discrimination means he has an awareness that we should expect from all our leaders as well as ourselves. Being non-racist simply isn’t enough. We have to be anti-racist. We have to actively denounce everyday racism in our thoughts, speech and behaviour. The first step in doing so is calling it by its name.

Racism has always been racism. People aren’t taking things more personally than before. We’re just reaching a point in time where people feel empowered to demand better. And they should.

If there’s one thing I was left with after the bizarre evening I spent in a corn field, it was immense faith in the leader of our country and a sense of hope that change is on the horizon.

Photo by Katelyn Thomas

Categories
News

Resistance forms against Trudeau’s approval of two pipelines

More than a hundred people gathered in Phillips Square to protest the Liberal government's recent approval of Trans Mountain and Line 9 pipelines. Photo by Adrian Knowler.

Mobilization erupts against Liberal government’s approval of Kinder Morgan and Enbridge pipeline projects

A crowd gathered at Phillips Square in Downtown Montreal Saturday afternoon to oppose Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s approval of two out of three pipeline projects: the Trans Mountain expansion and Line 3.

Roughly just more than 100 people cheered in solidarity as various speakers took to the stage to call for unity and mobilization against the decision made by the Liberal government to expand and construct two pipelines. The event was initiated by Montreal community member Shane Thompson, who organized the protest by creating an event page on Facebook.

“We see what’s happening, we see the injustice and we get angry,” event speaker Jamie Nicholls said to the crowd. He said while the approval of the two pipeline projects has made people upset and aggressive, we must look to our neighbours to the south of us as a good example of strength.

Event speaker Jamie Nicholls discusses mobilization against pipelines. Photo by Savanna Craig.

“We look at our brothers and sisters in Dakota––every time the police come they’re not taking up arms, they’re not fighting,” said Nicholls. “They’re standing there strong like a mountain, like a rock in front of this power,” Nicholls shouted as the crowd cheered.

“We have to go in love, we have to be strong, but not aggressive,” said Nicholls. “We are going to change this country and we are going to build a better momentum for our children––together we’re going to do it,” Nicholls said, concluding his speech.

Protesters resist Liberal government’s approval of Trans Mountain and Line 3. Photo by Adrian Knowler.

The Trans Mountain Pipeline was built in 1953. The proposed expansion involves a twinned pipeline adjacent to the original pipeline carrying crude oil between Strathcona County, Alta., and Burnaby, B.C., according to the Trans Mountain website. This expansion will allow the Trans Mountain pipeline to transport 890,000 barrels of crude oil per day, an increase from its current amount of 300,000 barrels, according to the same website.

The newly approved Line 3 project by Enbridge intends to replace line segments between Hardisty, Alta. and Superior, Wis., including construction of associated facilities, according to Enbridge’s official website.

The group of people cheered on as speakers expressed their disapproval of the pipelines, followed by a performance of traditional indigenous drumming.

Concordia Socialist Fightback Association participated in Phillips Square. Photo by Savanna Craig.

“The liberals are, in our view, a ruling class party––a party of the rich, a party of the oil barons, the party of wall street, bay street––just like the conservatives are,”  said Nick Payne, Concordia computer science student and member of Concordia’s Socialist Fightback Association. He said many people have compared Trudeau’s first term as an extension of Stephen Harper, former Conservative Prime Minister.

“There’s truth in that expression because when you serve the interest of capital, you have to carry out its economic and political program––which is to exploit and oppress working people and indigenous people and exploit the land without a plan,” said Payne.

“We’re here to talk to people who are radicalized by these events and trying to draw the connections to the system that produces environmental destruction,” said Payne.

“People are fundamentally coming to terms with the limits of capitalism as a system––it’s inability to care for the environment, it’s inability to avoid war, it’s reliance on racism and sexism––all these struggles are connected,” said Payne.

Jed Lenetsky has been very active over the past month towards Kinder Morgan protests in Montreal. Photo by Adrian Knowler.

“Even though Justin Trudeau has approved the pipeline, it doesn’t mean anything,” Jed Lenetsky, spokesperson for the event and organizer with Divest McGill told The Concordian.

Lenetsky said when the National Energy Board (NEB) approved the Northern Gateway Pipeline, many thought it was a finalized deal, however, many indigenous peoples went to court and won their cases, resulting in the rejection of the Northern Gateway Pipelines.

The Northern Gateway Pipeline, imposed by Enbridge, proposed to build a line running from Bruderheim, Alta., leading to Kitimat, B.C., according to Energy BC.

“If Canada is serious about being a climate leader and taking climate change seriously then the bottom line is that we cannot be building any tar sands infrastructure,” said Lenetsky.

Photo by Savanna Craig.

“The Kinder Morgan pipeline is going to lock us into more increased tar sands expansion for the next 30 years,” said Lenetsky. “We need to be moving off fossil fuels in that time and not burning more and sending them to other countries.”

“It’s also important to stand up against these pipelines because they are directly violating the rights of indigenous peoples who are concerned about their water and the health of their land,” said Lenetsky. “That should be an important issue for all Canadians.”

In Trudeau’s announcement approving the two pipeline projects, he said indigenous peoples were consulted, said Lenetsky. “What is the value of consulting people if you’re not going to listen to them?” said Lenetsky.

“As privileged people living in urban areas it’s our duty to show up and stand up in every way we can to support people on the front lines,” said Lenetsky. “This fight is not over, people are going to put their bodies on the line to make sure it doesn’t get built, people will go to court to make sure it doesn’t get built.”

Categories
Opinions

Trudeau: pro-choice is the only choice for liberals

The Liberal Party forces their members to vote pro-choice, and frankly, that’s really okay

The Liberal Party of Canada does a Liberal move, and for some reason, everyone is upset.

It’s, admittedly, a bit more complicated than that. Justin Trudeau, Leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, has decreed that any and every Liberal MP, regardless of their own moral compass, will never be allowed to vote against a woman’s right to have an abortion. For a supposedly left-leaning party, this shouldn’t come as much of a surprise. You would think its members would applaud such a move, if anything.

Not so.

Six former members of his own caucus wrote an open letter to Trudeau, demanding that he rescind his position on forcing MPs to support a woman’s right to choose. This has raised an interesting question for the Liberals: what’s more important? An MP’s right to vote according to their conscience? Or the right to have an abortion?

Some MPs are firmly in the former camp. “I have had a lot of Liberals come up to me and say, ‘I don’t quite understand, isn’t the Liberal party about freedom and about defending people’s rights?’” admitted Trudeau, speaking to CBC’s The Sunday Edition with Michael Enright.

“The firm position of all previous Liberal Leaders, including Pierre E. Trudeau, has been that, on moral issues, Liberal Members of Parliament were able to vote according to their respective consciences,” wrote the former MPs, who — to their credit — managed to include a low-blow reference to Trudeau’s deceased father in the process. (Class act, fellas.)

However, Trudeau has remained steadfast. “If [Liberal MPs] vote in favour of restricting women’s access to abortion, that’s taking away their rights. And that is something that we will not accept in the Liberal party. We are the party of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and that’s a serious, serious position that Liberals have to defend.”

Which brings us back to the ultimate conundrum: is the trampling of the rights of a very small group (Liberal MPs, a current grand total of 37) justified if it defends the rights of a much larger majority?

It’s worth noting that what Trudeau is trying to do is not revolutionary. The New Democratic Party (NDP) has long held the pro-choice view, and it was announced back in May that the NDP caucus will never include an anti-choice MP.

This kind of “subjugation” is, for better or for worse, a part of our political system. On many issues — particularly sensitive ones — the MPs are forced to toe a party line. There’s a role in Parliament devoted to making sure your MPs vote a certain way: the party whip, named because they “whip” their MPs a certain way.

Party discipline is, simply, a part of Canadian politics. If you think that’s unfortunate, then ask yourself: when was the last time you voted for your borough candidate, and not for the party they represented? Did you ask your borough MP their opinion on abortion, environment, or foreign policy? Or did you see what their party’s position was? How would you have felt if they ended up voting against the very position you elected them for?

Everyone should have the right to their conscience, of course. But if you sign up under a political banner, then you damn well better carry it.

Categories
Opinions

Trudeau-o-meter


Last Tuesday, Justin Trudeau announced his bid for leader of the Liberal Party of Canada at a rally held in his riding of Papineau. The position has been vacant since former leader Michael Ignatieff, stepped down following the 2011 federal election. The Liberals lost a devastating 43 seats, leagues behind the New Democratic Party which is now the official opposition with 103 seats.

The Liberal Party may be depending on Trudeau to seize the youth vote in Quebec, which has the second-highest percentage of voters aged 18-24 of any of the provinces, following Prince Edward Island, according to Elections Canada.

In a survey done by The Concordian, students were polled about the current political landscape, including their opinions on Trudeau, the federal political parties, and the party leaders themselves. The results would either support or refute the claims that Trudeau is affecting the youth vote, and whether the NDP was at risk of being unseated in the next federal election.

The answer was overwhelmingly positive. A total of 62 per cent of respondents said they are likely to vote Liberal in the next federal election, and 34 per cent said this was directly influenced by the fact that Trudeau could be the next leader of the party. It would seem that the senator-punching, Comic-Con-attending MP has struck a chord with Concordia students.

While they might have faith in him to run the party, it seems not quite as many have faith in him to run the country. Only 30 per cent of respondents believe he is suitable to be Canada’s prime minister. While this is ahead of other leaders (Stephen Harper has 14 per cent, and Thomas Mulcair has 16 per cent), 20 per cent thought that none of them were suitable for the job.

Political science students seemed to have more faith – 44 per cent of them said they believe that Trudeau would make a good prime minister. However, not a single one polled believed that Harper is suitable to lead our country.

Among women, the faith in Harper is also on a sharp decline. While 20 per cent of men think that Harper is doing well, only 7 per cent of women agreed. This may be due to the fact that several members of Harper’s cabinet – including the women’s affairs minister – voted for a motion to study fetus rights, which would have re-opened the abortion debate.

This does not mean the NDP is losing steam. Of those who said they won’t vote Liberal, 50 per cent of them said they will vote NDP (64 per cent coming from political science students). Behind Trudeau, Mulcair is in a solid second place as a prime minister pick.

It should be noted that the next federal election is still three years away – plenty of time for Trudeau to soar as the poster-child of the party, or to crash and burn clinging onto his father’s coattails. Whether this popularity is a sign of a rising trend or a blip on the radar in the wake of his hype, is anybody’s guess.

Categories
Opinions

Second generation of Trudeaumania

This past week, Justin Trudeau announced he had changed his mind and would throw in his hat for the Liberal leadership race.

Hundreds of Liberal supporters leapt to their feet and cried, “Arise! For our time has come to vanquish our foes from of old! The reincarnated man lives in on in the image of his son!”

I clearly exaggerate, but the rhetoric often bandied about by Liberal supporters of the young Trudeau is often sweeter and more dangerous than high-fructose corn syrup, and I say this as a Liberal member myself.

Don’t get me wrong; Trudeau is an exemplary Canadian. His work with Katimavik, a registered charity that educates Canadian youth through volunteer work, is indicative of that. He chaired the program from 2002 to 2006. Then add his work with relief efforts in Haiti in 2010, his previous work with Canada Reads, and you’ve got an exemplary citizen.

But does that make a great leader? Potentially, a great prime minister?

The biggest issue with Trudeau’s candidacy is his lack of a track record within the political realm.

“He studied this and that at university,” said writer Dan Gardner in a column for the Ottawa Citizen. “He spent a little time as a high-school teacher. He sat on the boards of various good causes, as those born with wealth and connections often do. He tried his hand at a various opportunities — acting in a miniseries, host of the Giller Prize — which were offered to him because he’s famous and nice to look at.”

And that’s the problem. Simply being famous and “nice to look at” does not equate to great leadership. This isn’t American Idol or a Twitter popularity contest. This is our country.

People seem to be overcome with a second-generation of Trudeaumania when speaking about Trudeau. However, the parallels between generations are limited the familial bond, and don’t actually mean anything more than that.

Former Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau had experience prior to throwing his hat in the ring. He earned a law degree at the Université de Montréal, studied at both Harvard and the London School of Economics, and had a brief session at the Institut d’Études Politiques de Paris.

He also worked in the Privy Council Office of Prime Minister Louis St. Laurent and, later on, became minister of justice. All of these are indicative of a great education, intellectual policy-making, and leadership potential.

When Trudeau spoke, people cared because he did it with a vigor and charisma that could only have stemmed from knowledge, experience and passion. When his son speaks, the passion is present, but the message is meaningless, due to the overuse of cliches and lack of real experience.

The truth is that people want something to believe in. The economy is in dire straits; people are generally unhappy with Ottawa’s administration, and they want to see some radical change. At the end of the day, you need someone who can make tough decisions, not someone who will try to appease you with empty promises.

The truth is that the answer doesn’t lie in making Trudeau a leader. It comes with fundamentally changing the very essence of the Liberal party, to rediscover the policies that worked for them, the new policies that the future needs, and engaging voters of every age by finding the commonality that makes us proud to be Canadians.

Could Trudeau be the answer in a few years, if he took on more responsibilities than being the party’s critic for Post Secondary Education, Youth and Amateur Sport? Definitely. But the first priority for him should be to become a contender.

Exit mobile version