Connect with us
[bsa_pro_ad_space id=12]

Opinion

Preston Manning: Three Wise Men from the East, Again

Published

7 minute read

Preston Manning's avatar Preston Manning

Many years ago, a Liberal Prime Minster, Lester Pearson, failed to secure a majority government after several tries and prepared to retire. But before doing so, he wanted to inject new blood into the upper echelons of his government, and particularly to bolster its base in Quebec where support for secession was increasing. So Mr. Pearson recruited three impressive Quebeckers into federal politics.

Becoming known as the Three Wise Men From the East, they were Jean Marchand, a strong champion of labor rights in Quebec; Gerard Pelletier, a prominent Quebec journalist and intellectual; and Pierre Elliot Trudeau, another Quebec intellectual, constitutional scholar, and champion of individual rights and Canadian federalism.

Trudeau of course is remembered nationally as Canada’s 15th Prime Minster. He was the successful proponent of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and a fierce opponent of Quebec secession. In Canada West, however, he is primarily remembered as the instigator of the National Energy Program (NEP), a federal intrusion into the natural resources sector which transferred billions of dollars’ worth of wealth from the western provinces and petroleum producers to the federal treasury and eastern consumers. More than any other federal initiative since WW II, the NEP laid the seeds of “western ‘alienation”.

Fast forward 60 years, and lo and behold, another Liberal Prime Minister leading another minority government needs to surround himself with strong lieutenants to bolster the ship of state as it sails into stormy seas. And who does he pick? Three Wise Men From The East, again.

This time it’s Marc-Andre Blanchard, formerly a senior executive with Quebec’s Caisse de Depot, appointed by Trudeau the Second as ambassador to the UN, and now selected by Mr. Carney to be his Chief of Staff; Michael Sabia, former CEO of Quebec Hydro and a deputy minister of finance in the Trudeau regime, now appointed Clerk of the Privy Council; and David Lametti, a less-than stellar minister of justice in the Trudeau administration, now appointed as Mr. Carney’s Principal Secretary.

Something obviously had to be done under Mr. Carney’s leadership to visibly improve the competence of the federal administration and only time will tell whether these latest appointments will do so. But many western Canadians will view these latest appointments with great trepidation for at least three reasons.

First, despite the ethnic, regional, and economic diversity of Canada, all three of these appointees are Quebecers with primarily public sector backgrounds and pre-conceived biases on the energy file. Thus the interests of Canada West – with its preference for private enterprise over public enterprise and strong support for the petroleum sector’s key role in sustaining and rejuvenating the national economy – are grossly underrepresented in Mr. Carney’s inner circle.

Secondly, Mr. Carney, in the recent federal election, went to great lengths to distance himself and the Liberal party from the Trudeau administration and its fixations with wok-ism, identity politics, and climate change extremism. But now that the election smoke has cleared, what is the composition of the Carney administration? One third of the current cabinet were Trudeau ministers just six months ago, singing off a very different song sheet. And every one of the Three Wise Men just appointed were once Trudeau appointees and loyalists. Can the leopard change its spots, and even if it could, is it still not a leopard?

Thirdly, and most worrisome of all, as columnist Lawrence Martin has observed, “They (the three appointees) are about as populist as you can’t get.” Or put in plainer English, Mr. Carney and his closest associates are about as elitest as you can get. They are therefore most likely to mis-understand and oppose populist sentiments and expressions at home and abroad in an era when democratic populism versus aristocratic elitism is becoming the defining political axis in much of the western world.

Why is this a worry, especially for western Canadians? Because populism – these bottom up surges of political energy which occur from time to time in freely democratic societies, usually in rection to top down policy prescriptions imposed by political elites – is as much a distinguishing feature of the politics of Canada West as nationalism is the distinguishing feature of Quebec politics. For example, the current increase in support for western secession is fueled in part by populist sentiments. Visibly strengthening the influence of political elites in Ottawa, insensitive or even opposed to western concerns and aspirations, will only further fuel that smoldering fire.

Of even greater concern – a concern which should be shared by all Canadians – is the inadequacy and unpreparedness of an elitist administration in Ottawa to deal with an American President brought to and sustained in office by the recent surge in American populism. Carney cannot approach or deal with Trump on issues such as tariff protectionism or defense the way he approaches and deals with the elitist leadership of the European Union. If he does so, relying heavily on the counsel of the Three Wise Men and other likeminded members of his elitist inner circle, all Canadians will suffer from the inadequacies of that approach.

There are Canadian leaders, in particular several western Premiers, who do understand American populism because populism is a prominent feature of their own political constituencies. Mr. Carney would do well to take counsel from them on dealing with a populist President. Perhaps in doing so he will also discover a healthy and broadening corrective to the increasingly Quebec-centric, Trudeau-tainted, and elitist character of his current inner circle.

Subscribe to Preston’s Substack.

For the full experience, upgrade your subscription.

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

National

Canada’s free speech record is cracking under pressure

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy MediaBy Gerry Chidiac

Is a protest double standard eroding Canada’s values?

Free speech in Canada shouldn’t depend on which side of the Israel–Palestine conflict you support, but that’s what seems to be happening.

Canada’s continued success depends on political stability, shared standards and the freedom to speak up when something is wrong. But that only works when institutions apply their rules fairly. Recent cases raise concerns that this isn’t happening consistently, and the debate around the Israel–Palestine conflict shows how quickly that can slip.

After the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel on Oct. 7, which killed more than 1,200 people and led to more than 200 hostages being taken, Canadians expressed deep sympathy for Israeli civilians. Statistics Canada reported a 71 per cent increase in hate crimes against Jewish people in 2023, rising to 900 incidents. Police increased security around synagogues and community centres in response.

As the conflict escalated, Muslim, Arab and Palestinian organizations publicly described rising fear and anger in their communities. Police-reported hate crimes targeting Muslim people rose by 94 per cent to 211 incidents in the same period. Both communities faced real threats. What stood out was that institutions responded inconsistently to people who spoke out as tensions rose.

Civil liberties groups, including the Canadian Civil Liberties Association, warned that responses to pro-Palestinian demonstrations were sometimes uneven or heavy-handed. The size and aggressiveness of Palestinian protests may explain some of this, but questions about fairness remain.

The inconsistency becomes more apparent on campuses. In 2019, Jewish and pro-Israel students at York University said they felt unsafe when a protest by pro-Palestinian activists disrupted an event featuring members of an Israeli reservist group. Chants drowned out the speakers and clashes broke out. Toronto police were called, but many criticized the university for not doing enough to protect the Jewish and pro-Israel students who attended.

A recent case in Montreal shows the imbalance from another angle. An Indigenous high school student was suspended after posting criticism of Israel on Instagram. She told CBC she was commenting on government actions, not targeting any group. The school said the post violated its code of conduct, but the suspension, which drew national attention, raised concerns about whether schools apply the same standard to students who speak out on this issue.

When institutions treat people differently depending on their viewpoint, public trust suffers. Canadians who are Israeli, Palestinian, Arab, Jewish, Christian and Muslim all deserve to be treated fairly.

Canadian courts have been clear that political speech, including criticism of foreign governments, is protected under Section 2(b) of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Freedom of expression covers peaceful protest, speech and the press unless it crosses into hate. That protection applies to people who support Palestinians and to those who support Israel. The law does not take sides, and institutions shouldn’t either.

Canada also has obligations under international law, including the Geneva Conventions and the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. These agreements require Canada to uphold basic standards of fairness and humanity. When governments or institutions fall short, Canadians have a responsibility to speak up.

That expectation applies in schools as well. As an educator, I am expected to encourage informed discussion on difficult issues, including the Israel–Palestine conflict. Students need to rely on credible information, think clearly about ethical and legal questions and respect people who disagree with them. That only works when they know the rules apply equally.

Uneven decisions send the opposite message. When institutions respond differently to similar behaviour, they weaken the sense that the system is fair. That is how trust erodes.

Free societies do not promise agreement. They promise that everyone can speak, be heard and be treated the same under the law. The cases discussed here involving speech about the Israel–Palestine conflict suggest that Canada is not meeting that standard as consistently as it should. Addressing those inconsistencies is essential to maintaining trust in the institutions meant to protect our rights.

Gerry Chidiac specializes in languages and genocide studies and works with at-risk students. He received an award from the Vancouver Holocaust Education Centre for excellence in teaching about the Holocaust.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country.

Continue Reading

Bruce Dowbiggin

Carney Hears A Who: Here Comes The Grinch

Published on

It’s a big day for the Who’s of Whoville. Mayor Augustus Maywho is now polling at 62 percent approval. Cindy Lou Who and Martha May Whovier can barely contain their trans-loving heart that finally the Pierre The Grinch is done.

Okay it’s not WhoVille. It’s Canada and it is leader Mark Carney who’s zooming in the polls against Pierre Poilievre. But it might as well be the real nation that Carney commands today. As 2025 comes to a conclusion Donald Trump seems the least of Whoville’s perils. For example:

The NDP government in B.C. has now declared that future legislation must be interpreted through the lens of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. According to Chief Bent Knee (David Eby) this means that the province cannot act independently of the progressive diktats of Sudan, Nepal, Moldova and other international titans. Having been informed of Canada’s “genocidal” behaviour by Trudeau in the Rez Graves pantomime, the UN folk will no doubt look on Canadians as worthy of punishment.

The UNDRIP menace has been around since the days when Skippy Trudeau was wielding the mace in Parliament. On June 20, 2021 the federal government passed UNDRIP into law by a vote of 210 to 118. (The Liberals, NDP and Bloc all voted in favour.) The only party that opposed it were the Conservatives. In defence of those hapless boobs none of them voting yes ever expected a province to align itself with such legislation. That’s the Canadian way. Act on conscience. Retract on self preservation.

But on the heels of Eby’s unopposed capitulation to B.C.’s many “peoples” in recent land settlements, ones that threaten the legal right to properties of home owners, the wholesale framework for governing the province now will be determined by appeal to the UN.

The Carney crew — who act as though Canada’s indigenous communities are now equal partners in Confederation— assure Canadians that judicious lawyering by government savants has everything under control, but anyone trusting the Liberals after the past decade is in need of counselling.

The B.C. conundrum plays into another of the challenges (read: disasters) faced in B.C. by the Elbows Up brigade. Namely the much-heralded memorandum of understanding on energy policy between the feds and Alberta. Canadians were assured by Ottawa that this federal government sees pipelines as a priority, and getting Alberta’s product to tidewater as an urgent infrastructure need. Carney described the MOU as if it were a love-letter to the restless West. How is he going to get pipelines through to the B.C. coast when Eby and the indigenous said it was a no-go? Trust us, said Carney.

Before you could say Wetaskiwin dark clouds gathered on the deal. Smith took it in the ear from Alberta separatists for compromising anything to the feds. Carney, meanwhile, ran into the predictable roadblock from B.C. Eby talked of maybe allowing pipelines in the future, but the ban on shipping off the province’s shoreline was verboten.

To test the resilience of the MOU the federal Conservatives (remember them?) put forward a motion to build the pipeline from Alberta to the B.C. coast. Even though the motion used the same language of the MOU between Danielle Smith and Mark Carney, the Liberals and their hand maidens defeated the motion. Carney himself abstained because, hey look at that shiny object.

Immediately the Trudeaupian Deflection Shield was employed. Here’s Liberal Indigenous Service minister and proud Cree operative Mandy Gull Masty “Today’s motion that’s being put on the floor is not a no vote for the MOU. It’s a no vote against the Conservatives playing games and creating optics and wasting parliamentary time when they should be voting on things that are way more important.”

Robert Fife, the highly rated G&M scribbler who just won some big award, led the media pack, “Conservatives persist with cute legislative tricks, while the government tries to run a country.” Run a country? Into the ground?

Let’s not forget the $1.5 billion bloviators at CBC. They, too, say the vote is a big loss for the Tories. “It risks putting them offside, what is a very top priority and frankly, was considered a big win for Alberta Premier Danielle Smith.’” said Janyce McGregor. Here’s Martin Patriquin on one of the Ceeb’s endless panels. “It’s embarrassing, man. I don’t see any sort of political advantage to what happened today.”

Embarrassing? The Libs have committed to re-building gas pipelines in Ukraine, even as they stall on developing pipelines in Canada. Luckily CBC washrooms have no mirrors. And there’s always Donald Trump to deflect from the pantomimes of Canadians Laurentian debating club.

Here, CTV hair-and-teeth Scott Reid is nursing a Reuters poll that has Trump’s approval at historic lows of 36 percent. Reuters is a firm that predicted Kamala winning the presidency. Until she didn’t on Nov.4. Meanwhile Rasmussen, which correctly had Trump ahead the entire campaign, has his current approval at 44 percent while the RCP average is 43.9.

But corrupt data to make Trump seem odious is no sin in WhoVille Ottawa. Keep feeding the Karens bad data.  At least Canadians have their beloved healthcare to fall back on. Or maybe their beloved MAID. A Saskatchewan woman suffering from parathyroid disease has revealed that she is considering assisted suicide, because she cannot get the surgery she needs.

“Jolene Van Alstine, from Saskatchewan, has extreme bone pain, nausea and vomiting. She requires surgery to remove a remaining parathyroid, but no surgeons in the province are able to perform the operation.  In order to be referred to another province for the operation, Van Alstine must first be seen by an endocrinologist, yet no Saskatchewan endocrinologists are currently accepting new patients.

The pain has become so unbearable that she has been approved for Canada’s euthanasia and assisted suicide program, with the ending of her life scheduled to take place on 7 January 2026.”

Well. Happy New Year, Canada. May no one offer you MAID in the next twelve months.

Bruce Dowbiggin @dowbboy is the editor of Not The Public Broadcaster  A two-time winner of the Gemini Award as Canada’s top television sports broadcaster, his new book Deal With It: The Trades That Stunned The NHL And Changed hockey is now available on Amazon. Inexact Science: The Six Most Compelling Draft Years In NHL History, his previous book with his son Evan, was voted the seventh-best professional hockey book of all time by bookauthority.org . His 2004 book Money Players was voted sixth best on the same list, and is available via brucedowbigginbooks.ca.

Continue Reading

Trending

X