DOPPLER AND THE POLITICAL DEBATE
Most people who know me, know that I am a Conservative, not a right wing extremist, but a Conservative all the same. Because I have spent much of my life in political circles, I have made many friends of all political stripes. To many of us, it is as important that we have political opinions, as it is what they are.
I remember one family Christmas Dinner some years ago, where at the same table was the former Executive Assistant to Pierre Trudeau, the Chief of Staff to I believe, Audrey McLaughlin, then Leader of the Federal NDP and the Chief of Staff to Conservative Premier Frank Miller. (That would be me!) It was a dinner to behold and in retrospect had we sold tickets to it, we would have paid for the dinner! I treasure having friends on all sides of the political spectrum, like Ken Black, Andy Mitchell, Robin Sears and Hugh Segal.
And so, it was with some sadness last week, that I heard a couple of comments, one very polite, and the other downright nasty, to the effect that Huntsville Doppler, as a result of my commentary, was effectively a Tory Rag sheet. Not so!!
One thing that will separate Doppler from other mainstream periodicals is that our news and community pages will be completely neutral. As Joe Friday said in Dragnet, “Just the facts Ma’am.” Our stories will not be slanted to affect public opinion.
On the other hand, our Opinion Page is intended to provoke debate and discussion. It will not be neutral. Nor will it be one sided. Certainly, my commentary in Listen up, will carry my perspective, which most often will be right of centre. That is who I am. But the whole purpose of it, is to attract debate and other points of view as well. We will publish respectful opinion pieces on any topic as long as we know who it is from. We will encourage diverse opinion and new ideas.
And speaking of debates, I found The Globe and Mail’s Leaders Debate last Thursday…dull….. dull…dull! First of all, it took me 10 minutes to find it, finally on CHCH in Hamilton. The major TV networks boycotted the debate, probably in a sulk as they were not allowed to control it. I guess that self interest comes ahead of public interest.
Second the ambiance and backdrop was about as exciting as watching paint dry. No imagination went into this setting. In addition, the Moderator was terrible; inarticulate, argumentative and acting like a school teacher with his little bell going ding ding ding throughout the debate. As a senior Executive of the Globe and Mail, he should have recognized this was not his shtick and hired a professional to do the job
The debate itself was lack lustre and I didn’t really see a clear winner. There was a lot of over talking and finger pointing, especially by Trudeau and Mulcair when Harper had the floor. As to substance, it was same old same old, with Trudeau defending deficit financing, Mulcair promising all sorts of new programs as well as a balanced budget and both of them promising higher taxes. Harper defended his economic record especially the Government’s ability to keep Canada as the strongest economy in the western world during tough global financial times.
The problem with the debate is that it was all offensive and defensive with little substance to excite Canadians about the future. Canadians deserve better. They want to feel positive about their future. They want to hear about opportunities and not handouts. They are more interested in a positive vision for the future than a constant critique of the past. There is about a month left in this election campaign. All we can do is hope that we see that from at least one of the Leaders.
No political leader is perfect or without warts. Next week I will write about why I will vote for Stephen Harper in the Federal Election…warts and all. In the subsequent two weeks, I will invite guest writers from Huntsville who support other political parties to make the case for their leader to become Prime Minister.
In the meantime you can enjoy what I hope will be a better political discussion than the debate last Thursday, albeit on a much smaller scale. Tomorrow night (Monday) Ken Black and I will be guests of Mike Provan on Cogeco Cable TV. We will be discussing issues important to Parry Sound Muskoka as they relate to the federal election. Neither of us are known to be shy and retiring. It should be a good discussion. Tune in!
REFORM DISTRICT GOVERNMENT
Someone else who can never be accused of being shy and retiring is Bob Young, the Mayor of Lake of Bays. In fact he can be a maverick at times and never hesitates to say it as he sees it. By profession, he is an engineer but if he ever had to take one of those tests that helps to determine which jobs you would do best, a diplomat would be at the very bottom of his career choices! Because of all of that, he is also one of my favorite politicians!
This week, in concert with Georgian Bay Mayor Larry Baird, Mayor Young has called for a review of District Government specifically to reduce the number of elected representatives on that body and to provide equal representation between the Townships and the Towns. He is dead right on both counts.
The Towns in Muskoka, have the largest permanent populations and the Townships, because they have a large number of seasonal residents, have the largest assessment and therefore pay the greater share of District costs. I have long argued that assessment and population should be treated equally but in Muskoka the Townships have a total of 10 seats to the Towns 12. This effectively means that whenever there is a debate about the distribution of District costs, such as policing costs, the Townships lose by default.
On a personal note, as I was the only candidate for District Chair last year that promised to address this issue of equality, I am happy to see that an attempt is being made to do something about it. As to reducing the number of Councillors at the District level, this is also way overdue. We have more elected officials in Muskoka than the City of Toronto. Too many with too little to do…a recipe for incompetency.
I have little hope that Mayor Young can pull this reform initiative off. There are too many District Councillors (certainly not all) that enjoy the status quo and the double salary that goes with it. As well, he would have to get at least two votes from the Towns to succeed and that may be a cold day in Hell. It may be tilting at windmills but it is important to get the ball rolling and bring public attention to the need for electoral reform in Muskoka. And my maverick friend Bob Young, may be just the one to pull it off!
Hugh Mackenzie
Once again, the Federal Court has ruled in favour of the woman who refuses to uncover her face while taking the oath of Canadian citizenship. That ruling is based on her right to religious freedom. The judges pondered what would happen if a mute person wanted to take the oath, but being unable to speak is entirely different than refusing to speak. The Charter of Rights and Freedoms is a good thing. But every good thing has a limit; even religious freedom.
A religious belief that is so extreme that it will not allow a person to make this small accommodation to show respect for the country that is ready to accommodate her to a better life is in itself intolerant. Face covering is part of the package of extreme beliefs that also includes polygamy, Sharia Law, and the responsibility to harm “non-believers”. If there is no limit to religious freedom, how can the courts deny extreme Mormons their belief in polygamy?
Ironically, in the name of tolerance, the court would allow the importation of intolerance. The more we accommodate them, the more extremists will be encouraged to push for the other parts of their blatantly-publicized agenda, until in a few decades, Canada will be unrecognizable.
It is high time for us to stand up for the beliefs that have made Canada one of the best places in the world to live. The Conservative government is right to appeal the case to the Supreme Court.
Hugh Holland is a frequent contributor to this column.
Hugh, Great show on Cogeco on Monday. We have heard good comments that the show was informative and not too political. Thanks again.
Bob Young is on to something. Maybe a topic for another show?
Anyone who knows you even a little should know that you treat the opinion of others with respect and that you are willing to question your own ideas if a good argument is put forward. I wouldn’t worry unduly about a few people who may not be as open minded. I do think that it is a good idea to occasionally remind readers that an opinion section of a newspaper is just that – opinions and some of them differing.
Maybe I’m lacking excitement in my life but I enjoyed last week’s Globe and Mail’s Leaders’ Debate . I thought all three main candidates did well in presenting three very distinct visions for Canada. Some elections offer radically different choices like those that followed Meech and Charlottetown, which upended the old federal Progressive Conservative Party (how I miss it!) and birthed a new party out of the Reform Party (how I dislike it!) but this isn’t one of those elections. So we voters are going to have to think through our choices very carefully.
I felt that Mr. Harper offered the status quo and Mr. Mulcair offered old solutions to new problems while Mr. Trudeau (even while stumbling and stammering a bit) seemed to have a new, fresh vision of Canada that resonated with me. Prior to that debate I had strongly considered voting NDP but the debate put me pretty solidly back in the Liberal camp. You say, “Canadians deserve better. They want to feel positive about their future. They want to hear about opportunities and not handouts. They are more interested in a positive vision for the future than a constant critique of the past.” That sounds very much to me like the Liberal Party approach. Mr. Harper was all about the past with nary a thought for where we are – or should be – heading. I look forward to hearing your reasons for continuing to vote Conservative/Harper in next week’s opinion piece. I’d love to read what your second choice would be and why too. Think about it Hugh…:o)
I’m glad to see you supporting Mayor Bob Young’s initiative on District even while giving it little hope of succeeding. By virtue of the Huntsville mayoral results you didn’t get to push for change but Bob Young seems to be taking up the torch. Or perhaps he already had his own torch. At any rate, I hope he makes it a priority of his tenure as LOB mayor and that he can get some others on side. We are way overdue for change at District.
I’m really enjoying Doppler…what a great team you and Liz have put together!
Dear Hugh: I appreciate your comments – and I agree that you have always been very open about your connections to the Conservative bent. I respect that. Personally, I am conflicted at times as to whom I will support. I have never had a membership with any of our political parties, yet was a part of Trudeaumania in the late sixties. Once I asked my mother why she voted PC and she told me that it was because her parents had always voted that way. But she never once insisted that I, or any of my siblings, should follow her lead.
Over the years I have voted for whom I felt was going to serve the needs of the country and local constituency the best. My siblings have chosen as have I, to vote for different candidates for different reasons. My one son married into a provincial Liberal family (former MPP). One of my sons presently works for another political party. My daughter supports a third. I like to think I have influenced them to have their own minds.
I agree that the last debate was more of a fiasco than a debate – I expect more respect from anyone who wants and needs to be respected.
What’s different about online media such as Huntsville Doppler, is this ‘comments’ section you are reading right now. This enables people to present differing opinions or correct a seemingly one-sided commentary. The old days are gone, where commentary was printed, and perhaps the newspaper may select a ‘letter to the editor’ to print in a following newspaper edition…or not at all. We all have a voice now to create a fully balanced picture.
Hugh
I enjoy reading your opinion pieces.
I believe in your idea of greater depth re: local issues than the older local media have been providing.
I think your approach has balance and honesty, and a welcome touch of humour too!
Good for you sir!
Dave
Finally a voice to question Mr.Black, who has had a free ride for years advancing the Grit Agenda, both Provincially and Federally!!!!