Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler
In the midst of a pandemic, combined with a period of civil unrest and political uncertainty, it is easy to take our eyes away from some of the fundamentals that define a democratic society. But it is dangerous to do so.
One of those fundamentals is freedom of speech, the right to express yourself and say what you believe. There are limits of course. Hate speech is not only wrong, it is illegal. Libel and slander can cost you a lot of money. But to have an opinion contrary to the status quo, to express viewpoints that may not be currently popular, to stand for things that you believe in, is not illegal and is not wrong. In fact, in a democratic system it is necessary.
Recently, a friend of mine, a former journalist, an accomplished writer, and very much in the centre when is comes to politics, said this to me: “Whatever happened to freedom of speech in this country? And where are their supporters? Obviously (they are) afraid to speak up because of social media and left-wing crusaders.”
In this instance, my friend was referring to the removal of Stockwell Day, a former right-wing politician, as a commentator on CBC television’s Power and Politics. Neither of us are particularly a fan. He expressed the opinion that while there was racism is Canada, he did not believe that most Canadians were racists and he did not think it was a systemic issue here. He may well be wrong but it is also wrong, in my view, to say he cannot express his opinion.
In recent weeks, three other individuals with media connections have been suspended or fired for speaking out in a manner that was considered politically incorrect under current circumstances. These include Wendy Mesley, a veteran and highly respected news commentator for the CBC, who apparently used an inappropriate word when meeting with her editorial team. It also included that well-known curmudgeon, Rex Murphy, who questioned whether racism in Canada was at the level of being systemic, and Jessica Mulroney who got into an email argument about white privilege with another journalist.
It is true that, with the probable exception of Wendy Mesley, these people are to the right of centre. But while my friends on the left of the political spectrum (and thankfully, I do have friends on the left), may not be too upset with these folks being shuffled out of the way, I urge you to remember that the pendulum swings both ways. What goes around comes around.
The issue here, in my view, is not whether these people were right or wrong in what they said, but rather whether they had the right to express their viewpoint. As the well-known phrase attributed to Voltaire goes, “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”
Because we are, for a variety of reasons, living in fragile times, it is important for people to guard against the erosion of basic rights and freedoms as we go about the business of change and reform. Freedom of speech and the right to express an opinion are chief among those things that must be protected.
When we allow the fundamentals of democracy to slip or to be eroded, we risk autocratical government. Autocrats have come from both the left and the right when society is vulnerable. People who are interested in understanding history, rather than rewriting it, will know this.
That is why, especially during the period of turmoil we are going through, it is important that Parliament be in full session. Accountability and oversight are essential in ensuring that full democratic. principles are adhered to. The prime minister himself has said this but he is not practising it. That is a concern.
Recently Justin Trudeau stated that politics got in the way of actually helping Canadians and that he thinks we need to reflect on that. While that can be taken as a bit of a threat and when you think about it, is a little scary, we certainly should reflect on it.
The prime minister is upset because Parliament did not rubber-stamp a bill he wanted to push through Parliament. He did not want oversight. He did not want accountability. He just wanted them to do as they were told. That is not their job, it was not what they were elected to do, it is not helping Canadians and it is a clear indication of what the prime minister really thinks of Parliament. We need to reflect on that.
Parliament is an important forum for free speech, for an ability to speak to power and for guarding against an erosion of democracy. It is well past time to bring it back.
I have reflected long and hard on this article. I recognize that the issues are sensitive, and many people will disagree with what I have written. I respect that. But I also think it is an important perspective that we need to think about if we value a democratic and free society.
To be clear, I believe we have traversed to a point where change is necessary in attitude and substance in many areas. There are serious racial problems in Canada. Black lives matter. Indigenous lives matter. We all should have equal opportunity and equal rights.
But as I have said before, we must not throw out the baby with the bath water. I do not believe that democratic principles like free speech, accountability and oversight need to be diluted or sacrificed in order to do what needs to be done.
Canadians are better than that. We must not let it happen.
Hugh Mackenzie
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
The swinging of the pendulum has always gone too far one way or the other in every instance in history. The really sad part is that we now have “players” who know how to gain ground for themselves using this swing. We now continually read of one person commenting on a remark (or seemingly apparent action) spoken out of the bounds of another individual. Calling that person out on the apparent breach initiates mega comments from the often completely uninformed public readers and the proverbial poop hits the fan, especially in the eyes of the employer of speaker number one, who now has his/her employment terminated! Meanwhile the accuser smiles and walks away, secure in the knowledge that he/she is now closer to their own personal goals or ambitions, as a result of the elimination of one stepping stone to that goal. Beware the pendulum INDEED, and the ability it has to inflame the reader. Before reacting, let the contestants duke it out, while we each follow up on the accusations and make up our own minds as to which player is justified, then comment The potential for good people lost to us, the readers, is avoidable, if only we take a breath and do a bit of research.
The Cenators play in the Canadian Tire Center in Ottawa. It will accommodate 18,000 plus fans.
If Seating Parlaiment in existing government facilities is actually not possible due to public health criteria for social distancing then a mil or two spent to equip the sports venue with the necessary electronic facilities to enable Parliament to meet and function there is a drop in the bucket.
Me thinks Trudeau rather likes the daily Trudeau Hour where he has complete control of the venue and content rather than face the riskier question period where the opposition has the opportunity to hold his feet to the fire and gain more exposure.
It is well past time to end the Trudeau Show and get on with holding the government to account in Parlaiment.
Well said, Hugh. I believe the government should be accountable and that parliament should be in session.
They are in a temporary facility now while the main house is being renovated, and refurbished. Perhaps they should relocate to the Senators arena and sit one person per section for all of them to be present. If we can afford 9 billion dollars to support students during the summer, maybe we can afford the expense of relocating to a large facility that will allow proper social distancing and proper accountability.
This would allow for proper procedures to be adhered to and the public to have a better idea of what is going on.
Brevity is a virtue: well said, Karen.
I agree with virtually everything that you said, Hugh; especially about autocracies. We need not look very far to see the would-be fascist dictator beyond our southern border. I also agree that JT was wrong in trying to make a power grab during the early days of the pandemic.
The problem now, however, is that both leaders MAY declare martial law; Justin to crawl out of the large shadow cast by his father, and Donald just because he’s Donald (and Bush Sr. used it after all).
I was happy that you made a passing reference to our indigenous community. Nevertheless, you fell far short of equating Canada’s aboriginals to America’s blacks. We have systemic racism in this country, and should drop our “holier than thou” attitude.
ALL lives matter!
Yes “it is important that parliament be in full session” in trying times. But in this case, given the seating arrangements in parliament, that would be a clear and hypocritical violation of the distancing rules governments and public health officials are asking everyone else to comply with. MPs themselves would be more exposed and could become spreaders. How smart is that? Everyone else is doing their best to carry on via virtual meetings. What is wrong with MPs doing the same?
Certainly, in principle, everyone has the RIGHT to say what they think, buy it is not always WISE to do so. Quite often its better to bite your tongue. If Andrew Scheer has the right to express his opinion that Justin Trudeau is a liar and a fraud, does the PM not have the right to express his opinion that other parties are “playing politics”? Which one is it that is really playing politics? It all depends on your point of view.
If Opposition MPs are frustrated because they are not getting enough “air time”, why not give them one or two days a week to announce “mutually agreed” measures and have the pleasure of politely answering the endlessly repeated questions from the media?
People are free to speak their opinion, and private or crown corporations are free to employ, meaning they are free to dismiss, who they choose. If these corporations should *not* have that freedom, who will decide who they may employ or dismiss?
Thank you for your thoughts. I take issue with how opinions are expressed, the words chosen to express our ideas and perspectives. When I speak in the heat of a moment, I do not choose the best words. Yet the issue at hand can mean a great deal to me. So if I really want someone to listen and understand, then thinking and choosing my words can help my cause . Words are powerful; civil discourse can further an idea/position with more power than a frustrated, angry rant. Angry rants may feel good at the time, but they mean someone else has to first deal with the emotional packaging, before they can hear what is said. An example of this was the “lock her up” rhetoric used in the last provincial election; the issue the email writer identified was lost to me by the vitriol which accompanied it! I don’t recall the point of view, I do remember the rant.
Civil discourse on the campaign trail and in any political sphere, I believe, can foster thoughtful dialogue. What do you think?
As usual, sir, your thoughtful comment is right on. Often, I have had to remind someone, that I am entitled to my opinion. You have the right to disagree.
These are very difficult times.
With regard to the journalists who were shown the door, they may or may not have deserved the heave ho. Unfortunately, feelings are running very sensitive these days. I’m not sure it is a bad thing for all us us to think, carefully, before we speak.