By SHEILA COPPS

First published on Monday, November 6, 2017 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—Monday marks the 150th anniversary of the first meeting of Canadian parliamentarians.

Celebrations include the usual fanfare, with a declaration in the House of Commons, and a commemorative plaque unveiling.

But the real story of these 150 years is best expressed in how we govern ourselves.

Americans live by the credo of exceptionalism. They (falsely) believe that the country of opportunity shaped by the American Revolution is unique in the world. Their Congressional Pledge of Allegiance is overarching, laying claim to one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

In Canada, we would cringe at the notion of one nation. Our Parliament recognizes Quebec as a nation, stemming from the unique linguistic origins of one of our initial founding partners.

At last count, there are also 617 First Nations across the country, all party to the reconciliation discussions so high on agenda of the Liberal government.

The most common adverb in the Canadian vocabulary is ‘sorry’. It is an expression that defines us around the world. Along with our Scottish-purloined pronunciation of out and about (oot and aboot), the “sorry” status of Canadians is fodder for many late-night comedians.

This constant state of apologia is not accidental.

It stems from the origins of Parliament, when the founding fathers (and there were only fathers) created a Parliament based on the “Great Coalition” of two languages.

The stark difference between Canadians’ love for diversity and Americans’ belief in exceptionalism stems from very different political choices in the beginning.

Just last week, the Canadian government announced plans to increase its annual immigration level to one per cent.

Concurrently, in response to the New York cyclists’ terrorist attack, American President Donald Trump threatened to curb immigration. He blamed it for terrorism, as the terror suspect allegedly received his immigration papers in an American “diversity” lottery.

In recent weeks, Canadians have been debating the Quebec government’s decision to limit the face-covering niqab in provisioning of public services.

We have also been hearing more about the anti-150 anniversary movement, which led a Haligonian student leader to face a university disciplinary hearing because of her Facebook postings.

The hearing was eventually cancelled, but the controversy surrounding a Dalhousie Student Union cancellation of “colonial Canada 150 celebrations” continues.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau welcomed anti-colonial protesters to the lawn of Parliament during the Canada Day events. By so doing, he drew attention to their cause and dampened the vitriol that might have otherwise marred festivities.

Can you imagine American president Donald Trump even speaking to protesters at a Fourth of July anniversary event? He would be more likely to tweet that they should be deported to Guantanamo Bay.

While some would argue that the difference between the two leaders is one of personality or party affiliation, I believe it speaks to the larger differences in the founding tenets of both countries.

The United States of America was born out of bloodshed, both in its war of independence and bitterly fought civil war.

Canada was born out of compromise. In the spirit of inclusion, Parliament included a recognition of the inclusion of two languages.

That pivotal decision led to a Parliament that incorporated accommodation as a core value.

Some point the finger of differentiation at our specific decision to embrace a federal multiculturalism policy, back in 1971. But the roots for that decision began during the period of the Great Coalition that preceded the first Parliament, a linguistic and cultural coalition between English and French-speaking political leaders.

Our country was founded on the notion that two languages could thrive within a single state.

National cultural institutions, like the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the National Film Board, have never shied away from challenging the myth of monoculturalism.

The recent Quebec attempt to ban the niqab in certain public places may have been popular there and, surveys show, in other parts of the country. However, it mimics the American “exceptionalism” motto which requires that all others meld into a single, “exceptional” mold.

The Catalonian crisis is a jarring example of what happens when there is no space for two nations to coexist within a single state.

The Quebec niqab ban will be struck down by the courts. That is a good thing. Whenever the state promotes a view of national exclusivity, it dooms the nations within to assume the only way to survive is to leave.

Respect for diversity is the key to many 21st century challenges.

Back in the 19th century, the first Canadian Parliament got it right.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By SHEILA COPPS

First published on Monday, July 10, 2017 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—Thank goodness the sesquicentennial only happens every 150 years.

Nobody can pronounce it anyway, and the birthday hangover still has Ottawa buzzing.

A half million people descended on the capital to join in the Canada Day party and it was a blast. Contrary to media reports about the downsized crowd, there were about 100,000 waiting in line at the two entrance points one had to pass to get on to Parliament Hill.

I know, because I was one of them.

Given my advanced age, (64), I briefly contemplated watching the noon-day celebration from the comfort of my own living room. But I could not resist the lure of the real thing.

During my eight years as Heritage minister, July 1 was a heavy workday. With speechmaking, artistic programming and multiple important visitors, the team was always on high alert to make sure nothing went wrong. Inevitably, something always did.

One year, we festooned the VIP seats with paper flags sponsored by a national organization representing Canadian chicken farmers. We did not realize that the ink of Canada’s ruby red flag stamped on cheap paper had not set. So when every diplomat rose sing O Canada, I watched in horror as a ragged red flag outline was permanently imprinted on all bespoke diplomatic garb.

One year, Queen Elizabeth looked curiously bemused as two well-hung male circus performers wrapped in nothing but swaddling cloth, performed gyro technics that required the head of one to perch comfortably on the butt of the other. On the same occasion, Her Majesty was introduced to Inuit throat singing, which requires two singers to literally pass the music from one throat to another, again requiring unusual human contact.

Most Canada Days pass without too many hitches, as did our 150th.

Of course, the naysayers could probably point out that when the prime minister did a shout out to all parts of the country, he forgot, of all places, Alberta.

It certainly was not Freudian, as Justin Trudeau has made a special effort during his time in office to reach out to a province that has not always been so friendly to the Liberals.

Luckily, the program was long enough that Trudeau was able to recant his error and proclaim his undying love for the forgotten province in time for the closing song.

There were a couple of other snafus. In one instance, the king of Canadian broadcasting got a more fulsome intro than the real future King, The Prince of Wales, ever the diplomat, took it in stride, delivering a beautifully bilingual speech which sought to underscore the wonderful benefits of being Canadian.

During his visit, the future King was elevated to the highest recognition that Canada could offer, Extraordinary Companion of the Order of Canada.

But that honour was awarded in a private ceremony, which did not run the risk of further bifurcating the Canadian identity.

Amongst republicans, and many elites, our relationship with the monarchy is tepid at best and frosty at worst. Many believe that when the current reigning monarch passes on, the institution should follow suit.

Because of the schizophrenic connection to the Royal Family, Canada Day organizers are always balancing the challenge of honouring any Royal attendees while not appearing to be too obsequious. A tall order at best.

The retirement of Canadian Broadcasting Corporation icon Peter Mansbridge, timed to coincide with his final day of coverage at the 150th birthday, was the perfect frame to segue into an introduction of the Prince of Wales. Mansbridge received high praise in the program and his spouse, Cynthia Dale, even got to sing O Canada on the air.

No such warm welcome was offered to visitors from the Royal Family, with barely a nod given to the Duchess of Cornwall, who has always been overshadowed in life by the memory of the deceased Lady Diana.

All in all, the celebration of 150 years of togetherness was truly Canadian.

The prime minister embraced aboriginal protesters and even managed to bring them onside, mentioning their grievances at multiple turns in the ceremony.

Even the appearance of Irish singer Bono caused the crowd to thrill with his message that we are a welcoming nation, unlike the bridge burners that seem to be taking over south of the border.

All in all, it was a great celebration. We reflected on successes and the many mistakes Canada made in the first 150 years.

Learning from both, we are all the better for it.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By SHEILA COPPS

First published on Monday, July 3, 2017 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—In Canada, the 150th birthday bash seems to have taken on a double meaning.

Bash connotes a happy time when everyone joins together in an unforgettable party.

Bash can also mean a chance to take a dump on the very birthday celebration that drew hundreds of thousands of Canadians to Parliament Hill.

Some of the worst birthday bashers were the aboriginal naysayers who erected a protest teepee on Parliament Hill to protest ‘our home on native land.’

They achieved their goal, garnering headlines about legitimate aboriginal grievances that have not been rectified during the lifetime of Canada’s existence.

In so doing, they missed a huge opportunity to build a bridge instead of burning it.

How easy would it have been for the original fathers of Confederation to walk away from the agreement to create Canada because of differences of language and different religion? To welcome those differences into one political construct took courage, and a willingness to reach out.

Real leaders know how to step beyond divides and bring people together.

U.S. President Donald Trump has shown how easy it is to build walls. He nurtured a political base founded on racial and religious resentment.

That strategy was politically profitable in the short term. Demagogues and despots have always understood how easy it is to divide people on the basis of race, religion and colour.

It should be our collective responsibility to support bridge building and decry division.

That is why the decision of aboriginal protesters to try to undermine the nation’s celebratory mood on Canada’s birthday was a mistake. That is why the recent ban on police participation in the Toronto Pride parade was also a mistake.

The Black Lives Matter movement, that spearheaded the police ban, has legitimate beefs related to racial profiling, discrimination and biased treatment by police. So does the gay community.

Some of us are old enough to remember the horror of the Toronto bathhouse raids.

But to go from that unhappy period to a situation when gay supporters from the police join in celebration of diversity can only be viewed a huge step forward.

What does blocking police accomplish in the effort to eliminate bias and discrimination?

If anything, the Black Lives Matter movement is simply reinforcing reverse discrimination. Just like police should not be stopping people on the streets and randomly asking for proof of identity just because of their colour, so parade goers should not ban all police on the basis that some have been, and continue to be homophobic and/or racist.

Surely the intention of leaders in the black, white and indigenous communities should be focussed on bridging the gaps between races, not systemically reinforcing the notion that one group is an overlord of the other.

By attempting to pour cold water on the Parliament Hill celebrations of Canada’s birthday, some aboriginal leaders have done a disservice to their own history.

The indigenous peoples welcomed Europeans to our shores. Without the Mi’kmaq, Montagnais and the Innu, Samuel de Champlain would never have survived Canada’s cruel winters.

So why turn their backs on the very ancestors that their forefathers welcomed?

Some will argue that it is all about making a political point. The point that the birthday of an occupier nation is not worth celebrating.

Really?

After 150 years, Canada as a construct is actually worth celebrating. Is it a perfect country? Certainly not. Have mistakes been made in political and religious leaders decisions to displace children and wipe out indigenous languages in the name of civilization?

Of course, and rectifying the scandalous legacy of residential school deculturalization has preoccupied governments for the past quarter century. To be successful, reconciliation cannot be unidirectional.

All healing involves recognition that the aggrieved and the aggressor will set aside their rancour and reach out to accept the other.

It involves an understanding that supporting police who support minorities is a part of the healing process.

Assuming that the mistakes of the past can only be solved in a one-sided demonstration of guilt simply reinforces reverse prejudice and discrimination.

When those early leaders sat down in Charlottetown in 1864 to fashion a country, they were 153 years ahead of their time.

In today’s global world, different peoples, with different religions, and different languages need to find a way to live and work together.

The survival of the human race depends on it.

The creation of Canada was at the core of that diversity.

And 150 years later, it is time for all of us to celebrate.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By SHEILA COPPS

First published in The Hill Times on Monday, April 10, 2017.

OTTAWA—If one picture is worth a thousand words, a national portrait gallery trumps a television script any day.

As Canada moves through the celebration of our 150th birthday, the government is swamped with ideas for the celebration of our shared story.

History is seen through different eyes by different regions of the country. Throw in language polemics, and you have a potentially incendiary mix.

Such was the reaction to the first couple of episodes of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s television series entitled: The Story of Us.

The first episode provoked a quick response from Atlantic Canada, disputing the show’s claim that the first French settlement on the continent was in Quebec City in 1608.

The Acadians, who established a permanent presence at Port-Royal three years earlier, were particularly aggrieved, and Nova Scotia’s premier is demanding a rewrite of the miniseries.

In response to critics, CBC said that 75 historians were consulted on the project.

Producers also endured the challenge of trying to engage a modern audience, which necessitates some poetic licence.

The narrative of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham was recounted by none other than world-famous extreme fighter Georges St-Pierre.

After all, history has to be interesting enough for the millennial viewer to watch.

That might mean some liberties are taken with literal interpretation of the facts surrounding the formation of Canada.

Which leads me to the question of pictures.
 
Another “Big Picture” proposal which has been under consideration for the 150th birthday party is the National Portrait Gallery.

Much work on the concept started two decades ago, when then Liberal Senator Jerry Grafstein spearheaded a unique transformation for the soon-to-be-vacated American Embassy directly across from Parliament Hill.

U.S. president Bill Clinton opened the new American Embassy on Sussex Drive back in 1999. That relocation offered the possibility of a new vocation for the beautiful, Beaux-Arts edifice ideally located steps from the Parliamentary Precinct.

The portrait gallery project took the capital by storm and had unanimous support from all sides.

Capital construction began under Jean Chrétien’s Liberal government, which viewed the gallery as an opportunity to tell Canada’s story through pictures, drawing from the thousands of photographs and portraitures.

Thousands of portraits and pictures currently warehoused in Library and Archives Canada speak for themselves. They do not require modern interpretation by extreme fighters or anyone else. Curatorial work on exhibits have already been started, and the thousands of items hidden away could finally get their day in the sun.

More than 11 million dollars was spent, preparing for the gallery transformation when the government of prime minister Stephen Harper cancelled the project back in 2008. Many believed that the gallery would be resuscitated through the influence of senior cabinet minister and Ottawa heavyweight John Baird.

But that was not to be. For a decade, the Wellington Street site languished in obscurity, leaving visitors wondering what was happening with the forlorn frontage that appeared to be abandoned.

A portrait speaks volumes. How many millions of words have been written to explore the enigmatic story of Mona Lisa? And yet the simplest way of making up your own mind is by simply viewing the painting at the Louvre in Paris.

While the controversy surrounding modern interpretation of history through television series will, no doubt, continue, the opportunity is ripe to rejuvenate the gallery.

Grafstein has even passed the torch to Senator Serge Joyal, who is championing the initiative.

While other Senators are parsing grammar in an effort to derail the modernization of Canada’s national anthem, Joyal has been quietly working his extensive network in support of a relaunch for the National Portrait Gallery.

Somewhat of an amateur historian himself, Joyal began effectively lobbying the government some time ago, with the intention to celebrating the 150th through a permanent legacy showcasing the country’s stories.

The gallery project includes a significant online presence and a proposal for traveling exhibitions, which would mean that Canadians across the country could have a chance to view firsthand, the portraits of explorers like Samuel de Champlain and early First Nation leaders.

A television series, no matter how much it works to reflect reality, is a vehicle intended for entertainment. Liberties are taken with content, style and substance.

No such editorial licence is granted to pictures and portraits. They are what they are, and we each interpret them, based on our own vision of the country and the world.

A National Portrait Gallery would be a fitting, and less controversial way of telling The Story of Us.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

“This year also marks the 50th anniversary of the Order of Canada, one of our country’s highest honours,” said Governor General David Johnston. “Its motto, Desiderantes Meliorem Patriam (They desire a better country), is the source of inspiration for this one-of-a-kind speakers’ series. The diverse and compelling examples of excellence that it will showcase will inspire Canadians and invite them to imagine the Canada of tomorrow.”
    
The tour runs from March 1 to June 1, 2017 in 13 provinces and territories in just 13 weeks. The tour will connect members of the Order of Canada and Canada’s next generation of young leaders with communities across Canada on what our future as a country could and should be.

All of the events will be streamed live online and rebroadcast by CBC Radio and CPAC.

For tour dates and ticket information, visit www.thewalrus.ca/canada150.

The Governor-General’s office and the publisher, Figure.1, have brought together 50 stories of those who proudly wear the snowflake insignia in one book, They Desire A Better Country: The Order of Canada in 50 Stories.

This anniversary collection tells the stories of just 50 of the nearly 7,000 remarkable individuals who collectively hold Canada’s highest civilian honours.

Written by Lawrence Scanlan and translated by Daniel Poliquin, O.C., this book is about Canadians of every age, from coast to coast to coast, and celebrates the breathtaking diversity of Canadian achievements, all of which have made a lasting impact on our country.

This book will be available for purchase in February 2017. Every living member of the Order will receive a copy as will every high school and library system in the country.