Politicians don’t get credit for very much most days. So, credit where credit’s due: Federal leaders have acquitted themselves well in the days since the Parti Quebecois unleashed its bigoted “charter.”

They could have remained quiet. They could have maintained what Brian Mulroney once amusingly called “a courageous silence.” But they didn’t.

Federal Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau was the first to denounce the PQ’s scheme, which will see the wearing of religious symbols outlawed in public places. Despite the fact he has been dismissed as a policy lightweight — despite the fact he represents a francophone Quebec riding, where the broad outlines of the charter arguably remain popular — Trudeau roundly condemned the hateful proposal. He even met with Quebec’s loathsome premier, Pauline Marois, to express his opposition face-to-face.

NDP boss Thomas Mulcair at first seemed intent on avoiding any comment on the charter. When pressed, Mulcair — who, like Trudeau, knows a deep vein of nativism runs through Quebec politics — would only say the charter was a “trial balloon.”

But when the foul document was unveiled, Mulcair did not hide. Speaking from a New Democrat caucus meeting in Saskatchewan, Mulcair roundly condemned the PQ plan. Calling it “worse than we feared,” Mulcair, whose caucus is made up with more than a few who have voted for sovereignty in the past, said he, too, would oppose the Parti Quebecois charter.

And Conservative Leader Stephen Harper, the prime minister of Canada? Initially, he was completely mute on the subject, which has the potential to preoccupy national politics for months. Harper admitted he was being cautious, because “the separatist government in Quebec would love to pick fights with Ottawa.”

He went on: “Our job is making all groups that come to this country — whatever their background, whatever their race, whatever their ethnicity, whatever their religion — feel at home in this country and be Canadians. That’s our job.”

Indeed it is. After the full putrescence of the PQ’s ethnic jihad became clear, Harper sent out one of his key ministers, Jason Kenney, to warn a constitutional challenge — which Ottawa would win easily — is likely. Kenney went even further, calling the PQ plan something out of Monty Python. And, amusingly, Kenney even made certain to be photographed wearing the sort of head covering Marois’ cabal wish to render illegal.

So far, so good. What will happen next?

Early indications are that things are not going swimmingly for the Parti Quebecois. A Bloc Québécois MP denounced the plan, and then was expelled from the party exposing a nasty rift within separatist ranks along the way. Public enthusiasm for the proposal has seemingly dissipated in Quebec.

Premiers in British Columbia and Ontario have said they welcome all people, of all ethnicities. Municipal leaders have made appeals for Quebecers to move to Alberta and Ontario.

Meanwhile, in the rest of Canada, folks have responded in clever, effective ways. A former Dalton McGuinty staffer developed a popular ad campaign for an Ontario hospital, advising Quebec medical professionals that Ontarians value what is in one’s head, not what is on it.

The battle for a diverse, united Canada never really ends. But it has been encouraging to see our leaders (and our citizens) respond with one voice to racism and bigotry.

Comments (15)

Too many Liberals hate Stephen Harper. I’m not one of them. I oppose many of his policies, to be sure. I get mad at him sometimes, for sure. But I do not regard him as evil, and you shouldn’t either.

To my surprise, my family’s very personal experience with Stephen Harper has showed up in Mark Kennedy’s extraordinary profile of the Conservative leader. A snippet is here, along with the link to his story, which you must, must read.

“…Despite his stiff public image, Beardsley pointed to a warmer side of Harper that Canadians rarely saw. Even before he was prime minister, Harper had once called Liberal political strategist Warren Kinsella and his mother to express condolences on the death of Kinsella’s father.

“It provided a revealing glimpse into Stephen Harper’s character,” Kinsella later wrote. “Because it suggested to my family and me — die-hard Alberta Liberals, which is about as die-hard as a Liberal can get — that Stephen Harper was, at the end of the day, a nice person.”

Opposition New Democrat MP Paul Dewar also got a glimpse at the private Harper.

He and Harper were strong opponents on policy. But at the rink, where their sons played on the same hockey team, they were fathers. They sat in the stands and cheered their boys Ben and Nathaniel, who played on the same line.

“To those who talk about him in extraterrestrial ways, I quietly just say, ‘No, he’s not the devil incarnate,’” said Dewar.

Tom Flanagan, who ran both of Harper’s leadership campaigns and one election, said it took him years to understand the “two Harpers.”

“There’s the one – suspicious, secretive, ruthless, sometimes very temperamental, arbitrary. And then there’s the rational, funny, sometimes kind, thoughtful person. You just sometimes wonder, ‘Who’s showing up today?’”

Comments (80)

After 23 years, I have see them again. I can die now. Good bye.

Comments (5)

Because of this.

Comments (8)

It’s a mutually-reinforcing conceit, former Bill Clinton advisor Dick Morris once observed. Politicians and their staff pride themselves on their ability to manipulate the media and – through them – the public. And the media revels in the fact that their journalism is “worthy of the skills of great manipulators.”

You can see this dynamic at work on the Parti Quebecois’ racist “Charter,” whose much-publicized propaganda poster would have read better in its original Bavarian dialect.

Many media are now shaking their heads in admiration at the separatists’ clever manipulations. If people outside Quebec object to the Charter – which bans religious symbols like crosses and kippahs in the public sector – well, then, it’ll whip up pro-secession sentiment, and the clever Parti Québécois will benefit. And if they don’t object? Well, it shows that Canada is a paper tiger, and the clever PQ will benefit.

Except this: politicians and their advisors misjudge all the time. Despite their clever manipulations, things can go dramatically wrong for them. Here’s ten:

1. Private sector votes with its feet: Already, this seems likely. Many Quebecois remember what happened the last time the separatists sought to divide civil society – they propelled businesses, people and capital down the 401 to Toronto. If PQ storm troopers start arresting or fining people for wearing turbans, an exodus is unavoidable.

2. Americans object: Quebec, like Canada, is unduly preoccupied with U.S. opinion. When President Bill Clinton expressed disapproval about a sovereign Quebec during the 1995 referendum, it helped turn the tide against the separatists. Now, the New York Times has taken note, in a story headlined “Quebec Calls for Ban on Wearing Symbols of Faith.” Other Americans will too.

3. International community objects: The United Nations – with which Quebeckers have greater affinity than others – will be petitioned to intervene. The “Charter” inarguably violates section 18 of the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights: that section promotes religious freedom, and “manifesting” one’s religion “in public or private.”

4. Famous people object: Actors and rock stars – as Fort McMurray learned this week – command headlines. They get more coverage than politicians do. If Stephen Spielberg refuses to film his next blockbuster in Quebec because public policy is possibly being lifted from der Sturmer, it’ll hurt the PQ – big time.

5. Religious figures object: PQ ministers are presently indifferent to what garden-variety clergy have to say – but what if every priest, minister, rabbi, imam and Sikh pathie condemns the scheme from the pulpit? What if revered figures, like Bishop Desmond Tutu or Pope Francis, do likewise?

6. Friendly fire: To the surprise of many, one (former) Bloc Québécois MP expressed serious reservations – and was expelled for saying the law will do “grave” damage to the separatist cause. And big-name PQ advisors, like Josee Legault, called it “incoherent and absurd.” Given the half-baked nature of the Charter’s rollout, more friendly fire is likely.

7. Leaks: Where there are governments and controversy, there are leaks. It’s inevitable that memoranda will seep out of Quebec City, showing officials – elected and otherwise – objecting to the xenophobic plot.

8. Litigation lags: The PQ is counting on the Supreme Court finding their intended law unconstitutional, to provoke a Quebec-versus-Canada confrontation. But the PQ posses only a minority – and they may be defeated before the desired constitutional challenges ever take place.

9. Extremist flare-ups: Inevitably, there will be demonstrations and counter-demonstrations – and a pro-PQ activist will say something that is wildly racist, impolitic, or both, on-camera. It’s happened before, as when a PQ minister made her condescending “Yvettes” comment during the 1980 referendum. It’ll happen again.

10. Public opinion changes: More and more, pollsters are getting it wrong – in Quebec, too. Public opinion is wildly in flux, all the time. What is popular now can be less so in weeks.

Will any of these come to pass? You can count on it.

And the Parti Quebecois’ clever manipulators won’t look so clever then, will they?

Comments (32)

Comments (21)

On the Magnificent Mile in the Windy City for Riot Fest. Note my headgear, which no government here has yet made illegal.

Comments (3)

Comments (22)

Chicago-bound for Riot Fest to see Against Me, Pennywise, Bad Religion, Joan Jett, Public Enemy, Violent Femmes, Flatliners, Blondie, Pixies and – of course – the Replacements.

That’s if Porter figures out how to be an airline again, that is. Which is a big if.

Comments (1)

Everyone is talking about Lakeridge Hospital’s brilliant response to the hateful Parti Quebecois “Charter.” The news stories – one of them is here – don’t tell you who came up with the concept, however.

Well, I can tell you that a certain former Dalton McGuinty  guy (who is rather brilliant, but don’t tell him I said that) works there.  And I can also tell you that, if you hover your mouse in the right way, the answer will become clear.

P.S. In a related-but-not development, today is the tenth anniversary of “Reptilian Kitten Eater.” Robert Loney told me. He knows, because it’s his birthday! Happy birthday!

P.P.S. I am not GritChik. Or GritGirl.

Comments (17)