Most confused Canadians received the payment with no explanation. If they already receive direct deposit payments, the climate bonus arrived with a simple annotation: Climate Action Incentive Plan. Talk about a missed opportunity.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on January 22, 2024.

OTTAWA—Last week, 80 per cent of Canadians found a new year’s bonus us in their bank accounts.

The surprise deposit came from a quarterly rebate which is part of the federal government’s pollution pricing program to tackle climate change.

The numbers are impressive.

According to Environment and Climate Change Canada, the average family of four in Alberta received $386, followed by Saskatchewan with $340, and Newfoundland and Labrador at $328.

Manitobans received $264, with Nova Scotia, Ontario and Prince Edward Island netting $248, $244 and $240 respectively. New Brunswickers received $184.

That was a quarterly, tax-free payment from the Climate Action Incentive Program destined to buffer the adjustment to the price on carbon prompted by an effort to reduce greenhouse gases.

Most confused Canadians received the payment without any explanation.

If they are already receiving direct deposit payments, the climate bonus arrived with a simple annotation: Climate Action Incentive Plan.

Talk about a missed communications’ opportunity. Most Canadians don’t have an idea what CAIP is. Somebody in government should have been able to come up with a sexier moniker to explain the new price on pollution.

A name like POP, price on pollution, would have served to refute the Conservative claim that this is a carbon tax.

Most Canadians don’t make money from a tax.

But the rollout was so quiet that many people were calling their banks to find out whether a mistaken deposit had been made.

The silent deposits were a missed moment to refute the narrative that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has been peddling all year on his carbon tax.

He may be using unorthodox methods like YouTube videos and other social outreach measures, but compare that to the work of the government.

Why did nobody even write a letter to all climate action recipients explaining the basics of why they were getting the money, and how it would help them offset increased costs associated with the price on pollution?

The supply chain is facing hikes in transportation costs which ultimately get transferred to the consumer. Fuel, especially home heating, is also facing a hit.

But a payment that in some cases will amount to more than $1,500 a year should ease the pain. Poilievre has promised to cancel this payment should he form government.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau brought some new faces into cabinet last fall, with the specific aim of upping the communications game.

He also brought in a new director of communications, which some saw as a signal that he was finally going to get serious in combatting the Conservative storyline.

Some new faces have been very successful in getting out their individual messages, but when a government is floundering in the polls, ministerial announcements simply won’t be enough to turn the tide.

Instead, the government needs to invest real cash in explaining to Canadians what is at stake.

We have a planet that is burning itself up by the use of fossil fuels, and governments around the world are working to try to reduce carbon consumption.

A price on pollution is the way that the Canadian government has chosen in an effort to move the dial toward carbon reduction.

The quarterly rebate is an attempt to protect more vulnerable Canadians from the financial hit they could face because of pollution pricing.

Everyone needs to do their part, but getting a quarterly cheque from the government is not a bad political move.

If a tree falls in the forest, and nobody hears, did it really fall?

If a payment goes into your bank account with no explanation, did the government really send it?

The fact that people had no idea how this money ended up in their bank accounts is proof positive that the Liberal communications strategy needs an enema.

Either the government gets serious about using paid means, including major advertising and direct communication with each taxpayer, or the Liberals might as well cede the next election.

They have a great story to tell. But the old way of ministerial announcements is outdated and ineffective.

In the last century, when families received the baby bonus cheque to help with family expenses, the payment went directly to women and was clearly marked “Baby Bonus.”

Pretty hard to mistake that payment. That was a program that people still remember.

Now is the time to POP the question. Are Canadians ready to help in the battle to put a Price on Pollution?

The answer is yes. But the question has not even been asked.

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

Let’s hope it does not fall on deaf Canadian ears. Dose two should mean freedom.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 17, 2021.

To mask or not to mask, that is the question.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in the United States just issued a directive that fully vaccinated people do not need to wear a mask or practise social distancing.

The directive had immediate repercussions in the United States with politicians in the nation’s capital appearing maskless for the first time in more than a year.

Even the president emerged for his first mask-free press conference since the beginning of the pandemic. He vaunted his country’s aggressive vaccination strategy, revealing the country delivered 250 million shots in 114 days. Almost 60 per cent of the American population have already received at least one vaccine.

So, the president was celebrating the chance to be mask-free indoors and outdoors.

The directive has also led to some confusion, as the issue of masking has created a difficult political divide between pro and anti-maskers.

Some of those who have been promoting masking believe the new directive is erring on the side of COVID 19, not caution. But the CDC has backed up their directive with a simple message.

People who are fully vaccinated are safe. And vaccinated people are extremely unlikely to pass the infection along to others.

In Canada, our government is still waffling on what vaccinated Canadians can expect. The government is waiting for advice from Health Canada on the protocol in the post-vaccine world. They could be waiting for a very long time.

In the past 14 months, Canada has refrained from introducing national guidelines on vaccination so the story changes from province to province.

And even though there is absolutely no scientific reason to do so, the government requires fully vaccinated travellers to quarantine for 14 days upon their return to the country.

However, if you refuse to go to a COVID hotel in Ontario or British Columbia you face a fine of $3,000 while in Alberta, there is no fine.

Why? Because Alberta did not adopt the federal act for hotel quarantines. Even though Alberta announced tougher restrictions to fight soaring disease rates last week, that province and Saskatchewan have refused for more than 14 months to sign on to the Contraventions Act.

You can go golfing or play tennis in Quebec. In Ontario you can do neither as the provincial government is moving to extend a full lockdown into the month of June.

In the National Capital Region, an Ontarian is barred from hiking in the Gatineau Park which is about 10 minutes from Parliament since it is on the wrong side of the river. All this notwithstanding the fact that there is not a scintilla of evidence to support outdoor viral transmission.

The outdoors is our friend when it comes to the virus. That is where people can exercise, take in some fresh air, and return to sporting activities that keep them healthy. Sitting inside comes with its own set of health problems, especially for older people who need to keep moving in the fight against arthritis, diabetes, heart issues and many diseases that affect the aged.

Ontario has also decided to suspend all first doses of the Astra-Zeneca vaccine, citing paucity of supply and potential health issues related to blood clots. Meanwhile the United Kingdom, vaccinating at the rate of 600,000 a day mostly with Astra Zeneca, announced last Monday there were no COVID deaths in England, Scotland, and Northern Ireland for the first time since the beginning of the pandemic.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is talking about a one-dose summer and a two-dose fall, claiming that all Canadians will be able to be fully vaccinated by the end of summer.

The country is moving ahead on accelerating the vaccination rollout, now jumping to the head of the line in vaccinations for all countries in the G7.

But a vaccination system without post-vaccination guidelines leaves people wondering just what is the point of vaccines?

And in the absence of clarity, confusion reigns.

There is still no national decision on the use of a vaccine passport.

Yet it stands to reason that if we want to return to normal life, a vaccine record can help guarantee safety and security of all.

In the workplace, vaccinated employees should be able to throw away their masks, especially in environments like packing plants and food processing companies where masks have been doubly challenging.

No doubt the CDC announcement will resonate around the world. Let’s hope it does not fall on deaf Canadian ears. Dose two should mean freedom.

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

The COVID-19 crisis has actually encouraged many cyberspace luddites to start using their computers instead of their cars to go shopping.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 13, 2020.

OTTAWA—The Paris runway just featured virtual models. The good news was that they looked a little heavier than usual because the camera has a tendency to add a few pounds. The bad news is that this may not be the only year for COVID haute couture.

With the unrelenting rise in Americans testing positive for the Coronavirus, we won’t be getting out of the COVID bubble any time soon. Masks have become a new fashion statement in Canada, while in the United States, they have taken the place of guns in the geopolitical divide marking that country.

The only difference between gun lovers and the growing number of anti-mask “freedom fighters” is that the latter cannot hide behind the constitution to defend their right to spread infection.

At the end of this COVID saga, Americans will have to look in the mirror and ask themselves why individual freedom is more important than collective safety in a pandemic.

One startling statistic should be all they need: as of last week, Americans suffered 24 per cent of global pandemic deaths with only four per cent of the world’s population. Why would a country as developed as the United States be unable to rally around a national pandemic strategy?

It may sound ridiculous, but President Donald Trump and his followers simply do not believe in collective responsibility. They are so enamoured of the notion that each American is responsible for his own Manifest Destiny, that they cannot fathom or support any measure that would restrict their individual choices. So, they ignore national health distancing guidelines, reopen economies too soon, and refuse to even don a simple mask as a gesture of concern and protection.

Someone should tell Trump that the mask is not for him. It is to ensure that he does not spread infected droplets to others. Why not use the mask as a tool in the fight to protect his citizens?

Instead, in our country, the wearing of masks has taken on a designer look. In his much-awaited fiscal update, finance minister Bill Morneau traded in the usual shoes for a wine-coloured COVID mask, complete with an understated Canadian maple leaf embroidered into the upper corner.

Many not-for profits are using masking as a fundraising opportunity. Canadian Geographic partnered with Roots to launch a reusable face mask last week. Within hours, it became the hottest selling item on their virtual store site.

As Canadians are becoming more comfortable with virtual journeys, their shopping habits are changing with them. Grocery chains have seen an unprecedented hike in online purchases. While retail giants are falling like dominoes across the economic landscape, Canadians are spending more online than ever before and there is no sign that trend will end in a post-COVID space. The savings attributed to virtual versus in-person shopping are enormous. It is no surprise that the list of the world’s billionaires is topped by people who got into the internet world early, like Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Jack Ma. The COVID crisis has actually encouraged many cyberspace luddites to start using their computers instead of their cars to go shopping. That change in consumer habits could have a long-term, positive impact on our environment, cutting down our transportation footprint, as people stop driving to do their shopping.

The same can be said for renewal of our neighbourhoods. With more Canadians COVID-ing outside, we are now using front porches in the way our grandparents intended, as a gathering place to enjoy the community.

Travel habits will also change. With the southern border still closed, and most air travel relatively limited, Canadians are being encouraged to take staycations by visiting sites within their own communities and provinces. That will not staunch the hemorrhaging of the airline industry, but it may help those tourism providers on the ground by encouraging the rental of motels and campsites.

It will also have the added benefit of encouraging Canadians to get to know their own country. You would be surprised how many of us have not been outside of our own province, preferring instead to vacation in warmer southern destinations or exotic European locations. I was at a cocktail party once with a well-travelled Montrealer, who knew every stop on the Paris subway line but had never taken his family to Toronto.

COVID-forced separation has also included a greater appreciation of the outdoors, because this is one place where we feel relatively safe. How ironic that a pandemic helps us rediscover Mother Nature!

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

The only way that the United States can take back its streets and its dignity is by making sure that Donald Trump is thrashed in the November presidential election. Even then, the damage done to America may be irreparable.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 8, 2020.

OTTAWA—Stockwell Day made a costly mistake last week. On a television panel he denied that systemic racism exists in Canada.

Day was quickly the subject of a social media groundswell that ended up costing him a board position at Telus and his strategic counsel job at McMillan LLP.

Day paid dearly for his mistake. But there are many Canadians who believe what he said. “Canada is not a racist country and most Canadians are not racist and our system, which always needs to be improved, is not systemically racist.”

I daresay millions share the viewpoint expressed by Day.

Most of them are not in the public domain so we don’t hear their perspectives. Even when the evidence is irrefutable, they simply don’t want to stare truth in the face.

I have known Stockwell Day for years, and he is basically a decent, fair-minded individual. However, by making the statement he did on television, he unwittingly aligned himself with those who are currently using race as a wedge issue in the next American election.

The facts on systemic racism in Canada are clear.

The last census demonstrated a clear and present racial difference in how employees are paid.

On average, second-generation Black Canadians were paid 28 per cent less than their white counterparts. The average pay of racialized and Indigenous workers was 30 per cent less than the earnings of their white colleagues.

On a personal level, that meant an average loss of income of $14,000 compared to Caucasian Canadians of the same age and education background.

We see the same wage discrimination against women.

According to Statistics Canada, in 2018, women aged 25 to 54 earned an average of 13.3 per cent less than their male colleagues for doing equivalent work.

Looking at what is going on south of the border, it is easy to see why Canadians could believe that our situation is not as grim.

But to completely ignore the reality of pay rates, disproportionate incarceration rates and all the other evidence in Canada is to turn your back on the truth.

But Canada is not facing the horrendous situation of a national leader who is doing his best to stoke the flames of racism for personal base electoral ends.

Trump is banking on the fact that the silent majority in the United States actually supports his view. There are millions who back his inflammatory approach, although it appears as though the combination of COVID-19, unemployment, and civil unrest are taking their toll.

Recent polling shows that Trump has the support of only one-third of Americans for his bellicose response to the death of George Floyd.

Cracks are also appearing in his Republican wall of support, with Senator Lisa Murkowski saying she may not support him as the party standard bearer. Murkowski, the second most senior Republican woman in the Senate, spoke out in support of the comments of former defence secretary Jim Mattis criticizing Trump’s “false conflict” between the Armed Forces and ordinary citizens.

Murkowski echoed Mattis’ viewpoint, saying, “I felt like perhaps we are getting to a point where we can be more honest with the concerns that we might hold internally and have the courage of our own convictions to speak up.”

Former U.S. president George W. Bush called on his countrymen to “examine our tragic failures.”

But the current president seems oblivious to all critics, doubling down on his view that multiple peaceful protests across the country were organized by thugs.

In Canada, Day immediately recognized his error and tweeted that “I ask forgiveness for wrongly equating my experiences to theirs. I commit to them my unending efforts to fight racism in all its forms.”

That statement was quite an about turn from his refusal to recognize systemic racism only a few short hours earlier.

Systemic racism is alive and well in Canada and, unfortunately, supported by millions of Canadians who blindly believe there is no problem.

By recognizing his mistake, Day has a chance to do something about it.

In the case of the Trumpian racism of the American president, the whole country is undermined by his deliberate attempt to stoke the flames of racial hatred.

The only way that the United States can take back its streets and its dignity is by making sure that Trump is thrashed in the November presidential election.

Even then, the damage done to America may be irreparable.

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

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is getting an early shot at the new form of communication. Self-isolation has not prevented him from getting his message out.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 23, 2020.

OTTAWA—Social distancing to a politician is akin to a hand sanitizer ban for germaphobes.

Politicians thrive on contact with people.

But in the new normal, public figures may have to learn to campaign in a germ-free bubble.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is getting an early shot at the new form of communication. Self-isolation has not prevented him from getting his message out.

His government’s handling of the situation to date has the potential to enhance his political capital.

Daily press availability and the major national stimulus package could calm the growing fears of worried Canadians.

Trudeau’s new beard has been graying quickly, given the nature of the stresses he must be feeling at his wife’s side while she manages her infection. The graying has added a hint of gravitas to what is obviously a very grave situation.

I was a latecomer to the panic room. But I could not responsibly ignore the appeal of Canada’s foreign minister to get back home.

Last week, I was hoping to continue plans for a two-week anniversary cruise, but the request by the Canadian government to get back home could not be ignored.

My husband and I managed to get wait-listed on one of the last international flights still landing in Ottawa, and after traveling for two days, arrived to a ghost town last Tuesday.

It is worth mentioning that Canadian border officials appear a lot more prepared to manage this crisis than our American counterparts.

En route to Canada, we transited through two American airports, landing first in San Francisco and next in Washington.

In neither airport was there a single reference, verbal or written, to the coronavirus. We were not asked whether we had experienced a cough, or any symptoms. Nor were we warned to self-isolate when we reached our final destination.

It was a totally different story when we arrived in Canada. We were questioned at the border about health symptoms and travel history, and then given an information sheet with all of the contact numbers for reporting any potential infection.

We were asked to undertake a voluntary 14-day self-isolation plan, and signed a form agreeing to do so.

The Canadian message is clear. In order to stem the flow of the virus, we all need to limit social contact as much as possible. But the same warnings do not seem to have made their way to some parts of the United States.

An American friend just underwent a mastectomy operation in Houston and she actually went out to celebrate the surgery at an Irish bar with her family on St. Patrick’s Day. She seemed oblivious to the notion that her own health could be at risk by gathering in a bar.

Most Canadian bars and restaurants are closed but it seems to be business as usual in some parts of the United States.

An aggressive Canadian lockdown may limit the spread here, but the laissez-faire approach of some American states could have a negative rebound effect on our country. As of last Thursday, there were 736 confirmed cases of the coronavirus in Canada, while in the United States, the reported number of infections surpassed 11,000.

The difference in infection rate may be partially explained by the capacity of a public health system to respond in a coordinated fashion. Many Americans have no health care, and they are obviously at risk when it comes to curbing the transmission curve.

China is now in recovery mode but, according to media reports, hospitals across the United States have been asking health professionals to reuse single-use masks.

Beaches in Florida are still packed with young people who appear to be generally ignoring the warning to stay home. And bars in New York are still operating, with state governor Andrew Cuomo stating publicly that he will not exercise his legal options to keep people home.

At home, the prime minister is considering all options, including the implementation of a War Measures Act to ensure compliance with social distancing requests.

The thought of spending months in isolation is not something anyone looks forward to.

Netflix has been bending under the weight of millions of downloaders. The strain on their system has been so great that they just eliminated high definition transmission in favour of preserving bandwidth. Being restricted in close quarters can also be a challenge for families.

Puzzles and games have been flying off store shelves, purchased by harried parents looking to keep their children busy.

Isolation is the new normal.

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

Canadian Bruce Aylward is leading the World Health Organization team charged with stemming the spread of the virus. He warns us that this is not the common flu and is 10 times more deadly than that.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 16, 2020.

OTTAWA—Call me contrarian. But I refuse to join the wave of panic reacting to the spread of the coronavirus COVID-19.

Two women in Australia were arrested for fighting over the purchase of toilet paper.

People are crossing the street when they see anyone who looks a little different from them.

The price of hand sanitizers and hygiene wipes has skyrocketed as merchants exploit the law of supply and demand.

Members of Parliament go into voluntary lockdown. Planes are no longer flying to China, Korea, Italy, or Iran.

The Canadian government is introducing a stimulus package to help the country weather the storm, with targeted support for affected industries and workers.

Canadian Bruce Aylward is leading the World Health Organization team charged with stemming the spread of the virus.

He warns us that this is not the common flu and is 10 times more deadly than that.

But he also says that there are ways we can reduce the spread of the disease, the single most important being scrupulous handwashing. If no one with the virus sneezes on me, I am not going to be affected.

And even if I am, the chances of getting through it are good because I am a healthy sexagenarian.

I am a great believer that when my time is up, my time is up. I could get hit by a bus crossing the street in Ottawa. I cannot and will not stop living for fear of dying.

We could shut down the whole world and people still need to interconnect for work and sustenance.

The whole of Italy is now in lockdown and they are warning the worst is yet to come in other parts of Europe. But the world goes on and putting everyone into quarantine is simply not possible.

Not everyone grows their own food so a trip to the grocery store is inevitable.

Likewise, the decision to cancel sporting and entertainment events seems to be a huge overreaction.

I guess everyone is following the mantra, better safe than sorry.

If you don’t have to get out of your house, it is easier to stay there.

But what if you have already made the move?

I am currently half-way around the world, getting ready to embark on a 25th anniversary cruise of the South Pacific.

The cruise was booked more than two years ago, when nobody thought the coronavirus would be playing a role in people’s travel plans.

Canada’s chief public health officer Theresa Tam has issued a warning that people should cancel planned cruises, because of the risk of coronavirus contamination.

So why would I even consider ignoring her blunt warning?

Thus far, only two cruise ships have been reported to be affected. From the moment they were identified, the cruise industry heightened its boarding procedures. The temperature of every person is taken before they board the ship, and if there are any doubts, the passenger cannot board.

Staff from affected countries are not currently working the ships, and the companies have also cancelled the reservations of prospective passengers from certain targeted countries.

The cruise ship industry seems to have gotten its act together.

It is obviously financially motivated to do so because worldwide, the business is worth $126-billion. The cruise industry can’t afford to simply shut everything down.

Media have identified cruise ships as a Petri dish for disease. But ships are also a Petri dish for disease containment.

If a single new virus has not been found on a cruise ship in two weeks, does that not mean that the methods being employed to contain disease are working?

I must admit, I am thinking with my heart, not my head. Twenty-five years of marriage is a milestone and this voyage is symbolic of that celebration.

I am perusing the news vigorously to watch for reports of any new cruise contaminations.

Luckily for me, I have a first world cruise ship problem. Some dying Covid-19 patients around the world do not even have access to proper health care.

Italian medical staff are reported to have to ration available respirators based on triage, as their hospitals do not have enough to support all patients that might need them.

More than 4,000 people have already died, and more will because of this new super-virus.

During the same period, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 14,000 people have died from the ordinary flu virus.

Perspective, not panic, should be the order of the day.

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

Air crashes are so rare that few families have undergone the heartbreak of experiencing the loss of their dear ones to an aeronautical incident.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on January 13, 2020.

OTTAWA—It will likely be months before we know the true story behind the crash of Ukraine flight 752. Theories abound but given the suspension of diplomatic relations between Iran and Canada, grieving families will be dependent on third-party information as to the nature of the catastrophe. Last Thursday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said there was evidence indicating the plane was shot down by an Iranian missile, adding that it might have been an unintentional act.

Families wiped out, newlyweds gone, communities devastated. The long-term effects of this disaster will be felt by many on a very personal level.

Air crashes are so rare that few families have undergone the heartbreak of experiencing the loss of their dear ones to an aeronautical incident.

I happen to have been in one of those families.

My grandmother and her sister were killed back in 1957 in a crash in Issoudun, Que., where 74 Canadians lost their lives. Sixty-two years later, it is still ranking as the seventh-worst plane crash on Canadian soil.

Three other modern-day disasters had similar tragic trajectories. Two hundred twenty-nine people died in a Swissair crash off Nova Scotia. Air India lost 329 people including an unprecedented 268 Canadians in a crash in Ireland and in 1985, an American military charter crash in Gander, Newfoundland killed 256 people.

In the case of Swissair, the accident was ultimately attributed to a mechanical misfire, faulty wires causing the plane’s insulation to ignite.

The Air India crash was the single most egregious aviation terrorist act until the World Trade Centre attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. Separatist Sikhs planted a bomb on the plane. Only one man, Inderjit Singh Reyat, was ever convicted in the bombing and he was released from prison four years ago.

The judicial enquiries that resulted from the attack ultimately cost more than $130-million and pointed the finger at various police forces for botching the potential for other convictions.

In the Gander case, the crash was attributed to icy wings, but a minority report on the aeronautical investigation attributed the catastrophe to a bomb, leaving grieving families in limbo as to the burning question, “Why?”

In my grandmother’s case, there was never any real investigation by anyone. Times were different then so when her Maritime Central Airways flight went down, there were no major investigations.

The crash was attributed to bad weather, as the plane flew into a cloud during a storm while en route from London, England to Toronto.

It was rumoured that the plane ran out of gas, and that the pilot was undergoing psychiatric treatment for depression which had not been reported to his company.

The family never got closure, and even the insurance policy my grandmother purchased for the trip was not honoured, because it covered a flight time that had been exceeded when the plane left London several hours behind schedule.

More than 20 members of our family had gathered to greet my grandmother and her sister on their return from a trip to their hometown in Surrey.

We had a picnic planned to celebrate the moment. Saturday was gramma time and we had missed her so much during her two months away. Alice Guthro had come to Canada as a war bride in 1918 and this two-month trip had been her first visit home in 49 years. She was travelling with her sister and best friend.

To this day, I remember the howl of collective grief when we were all called into a room at the Toronto airport and it was announced coldly, that her flight had gone down and there were no survivors. I was only five and did not really understand why everyone was crying, so my older sister put her arm around me and said, “Gramma’s dead.”

There are dozens of families putting their arms around loved ones today and trying to make sense out of this senseless tragedy.

Answers won’t come immediately. In our case, they never came. Recognition may come. The crash never even warranted a monument of recognition until as minister, I ordered a plaque erected in the Issoudun church graveyard decades later.

At the time, my department warned me that I could be accused of conflict of interest for erecting a plaque commemorating a tragedy involving my own family. I agreed to take the risk. For years, we had gone to visit my grandmother’s gravesite in an overgrown forest where a local farmer had erected a simple wooden cross.

At the ceremony unveiling the plaque, dozens of relatives from across the country finally got the closure they deserved.

Without answers, the terrible loss suffered by so many families last week will never heal.

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 December 3, 2018.

OTTAWA—Premier Doug Ford’s French-language smack down has just begun.

And if he thinks his problem is going to go away any time soon, he does not understand the deep roots and the strength of the francophone community in Ontario.

The last time the provincial government moved to reduce services was when the government of Mike Harris vowed to shut down the only full-service francophone hospital in the province.

That decision spawned SOS Montfort, which is one of the legendary stories of survival in a community that had to fight tooth and nail for every right it achieved in the past century.

Ten thousand francophones and their supporters took to the streets of the nation’s capital, led by a diminutive dynamo Gisele Lalonde. Key organizers included the late Mauril Bélanger and journalist Michel Gratton.

Coincidentally, Gratton was also a close friend of prime minister Brian Mulroney who was a strong supporter of minority rights, having grown up as an anglophone in northern Quebec.

Most francophones thought we were past that. With Ontario Progressive Conservative Minister Caroline Mulroney as attorney general and minister of francophone affairs, observers were assuaged about the possibility of a potential attack on francophone rights.

The SOS Montfort movement also spawned a tightening up of the conditions where the Government of Canada sends transfers for minority language services to the provinces.

The federal government tops up the cost of minority language education and ancillary services through an agreement, known as the Canada-Ontario Agreement on Minority-Language Education and Second Official-Language Instruction, renewable every five years. The funding is based on the principle that offering services in a second language, including school board and curriculum development, is more expensive to deliver, based on economies of scale.

The theory behind the second-language action plan transfers is that the federal government assists in supporting development of minority language services vis-à-vis the action plan that is negotiated in the transfer package.

In some instances, that means expansion of the university system. The federal government has already announced its support for the south-western Ontario French language university, a project that has been in the making for more than two decades.

The other element that Premier Ford failed to understand in his hasty decision to cut French language services is that the francophone demographic has changed drastically since SOS Montfort.

The original supporters were primarily old-stock French Canadians, who fought for services even as their numbers dwindled as a result of intermarriage, decreasing birthrate and anglicization.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pictured with NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, Official Languages Minister Mélanie Joly, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer, and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May in his Centre Block office on Nov. 28, 2018, to discuss francophones in Ontario. Image courtesy of Twitter

That core has been buttressed in the last two decades by waves of immigrants from French-speaking countries who have made Ontario their home.

They live and work in French, and the Association des Canadiens Francais de l’Ontario has built strong links with the newcomer community.

ACFO has worked to integrate francophone newcomers into the support system of schools and hospitals, with the hope that dwindling local populations would be buttressed by an influx of immigrants.

Ford is now dealing with a monster of his own making. The francophone presence is felt in some 40 ridings across the province and they organized a Resistance rally in all of them Saturday to let the Conservatives know that they are hopping mad.

The only francophone in the Tory caucus, articulate, 29-year-old newcomer Amanda Simard, quit last week as a result of the cuts. That will put pressure on more to follow.

Ontario New Democratic Party Leader Andrea Horwath has mustered her troops to fight the decision and enlisted the support of her federal cousin NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who is calling on the federal government to do more.

In that regard, Singh is right. Canada’s federal Minister Responsible for La Francophonie, Mélanie Joly, needs to send a clear message to Queen’s Park that this decision is not without financial consequences.

It is not just a question of prioritizing the university. The most egregious mistake by the new Ford government was the decision to eliminate the Office of the French Language Services Commissioner.

The position of commissioner sends an important signal, not only to government ministries but also to the whole province. If minority rights are not respected in the delivery of language services, there will be consequences.

Folding that office into the ambit of the ombudsman is an absolute slap in the face to those who have spend decades fighting for minority rights.

Joly and Prime Minister Justin Justin Trudeau need to let the premier know that cutting back on minority language services will cost him dearly, and not just at the polls.

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 October 22, 2018.

OTTAWA—Canada made history last week, becoming only the second country in the world to sell legal cannabis.

And judging by long lineups on the first day of sale, the decision was a long time coming.

Marijuana distributers are predicting shortages for several months as product has been flying off the shelves in provinces with storefront points of sale.

In others, like Canada’s largest province of Ontario, the internet was deluged with orders. Shopify Inc. reported it had sold millions of units in the first 12 hours.

Government revenues will be robust from this new source of taxation and international business consortiums are already eying the export market.

All in all, the first day of legal pot sales could be qualified as a success.

So why were some politicians jumping over each other to stir the pot, as it were?

Ontario Premier Doug Ford, the only leader who is alleged to have peddled weed in his past life, took a huge public dump on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at a policing conference.

Ford got a round of tepid applause when he accused the prime minister of going into the witness protection program when it came to the launch.

Newly-minted Quebec Premier François Legault is sticking to his promise to hike the legal consumption age to 21.

Surveys show that, surprisingly, Quebec is the most conservative province when it comes to support for the legalization process.

Nova Scotia and British Columbia were vying for top pot consumption spot with the East Coast slightly edging out the West Coast in the score on regular use.

The figures, released on the eve of legalization, claim that almost one-quarter of Canadians in those two provinces are already regular consumers of the drug.

The province with the lowest level of regular consumption is Quebec. But judging by the lineups at the provincial pot stores, maybe they just don’t like to answer national surveys.

The most controversial future issues will be who gets to sell, rather than who gets to buy.

With players like former prime minister Brian Mulroney serving on cannabis corporate boards, the little weed has indeed arrived.

Notwithstanding Ford’s initial blowback, the financial benefits of legal pot will soon have him changing his tune.

With such a large portion of the population already engaged in cannabis consumption, legalization will get the drug out of the shadows.

No longer will buyers have to come up with medical reasons to avoid getting their recreational drug of choice from the local schoolyard pusher. The medical profession will be largely relieved of its dispensary responsibility.

The long arm of organized crime is about to be amputated, and that is a good thing. We can finally have a logical discussion in this country about how to manage the multiple challenges of drug use.

The opioid crisis, largely driven by the sale of illegal pills to unsuspecting young party-goers could be a thing of the past as consumers can now go to a legal distribution centre to purchase their regulated drug of choice.

Of course, we will now witness a spate of stories about the impacts of marijuana when consumed by young people whose brains are still being formed.

While that is undoubtedly a medical fact, the same statement could be made about alcohol consumption.

Any substance that alters your metaphysical state runs certain risks. But those risks can be mitigated by public information, discussion, and education.

It was pretty hard to have an informed classroom drug discussion when we were dealing with an illegal substance.

Canadian legalization will also unleash a vigorous international debate about new approaches to the failed war on drugs.

Warlords in Latin America and opioid manufacturers in Asia depend on clients in North America.

As long as weed was illegal, the lucrative business of importing and distributing was financially beneficial to crime syndicates.

Now Canada can be an incubator for a new approach to substitute for interdiction. We will witness firsthand whether legal sales can undercut the underground.

With the initial rollout behind us, the federal Liberals can also breathe a little easier.

The promise of legalized cannabis was one of the factors that encouraged droves of young people to get out and vote for Trudeau in the last campaign.

His success or failure in the next campaign will depend on just how many promises have been kept or broken.

Legal pot is one promise with benefits. Communities and government coffers will both prosper as a result of this world-breaking government decision.

Toke on, Canada.

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

OTTAWA—President Donald Trump’s free-range press conference last week simply confirmed the obvious.

He suffers from a narcissistic personality disorder that distorts reality and creates his own alternative truth.

The first sign of a potential disorder was his claim that world leaders were laughing with him when he told the United Nations that he was amongst the greatest presidents in the history of his country.

That claim prompted a collective guffaw from an astonished audience, to which the president sheepishly remarked that he did not expect that reaction.

But in a subsequent effort to explain away the embarrassment, he claimed that the group was actually laughing with him.

It was as though they were sharing a joke together, but instead they were laughing at him because the incredible pomposity of the president of the United States has made him a joke on the international stage.

He obviously believes his alternative truth. Trump has spent so much of his presidential energy preaching to the converted that he may have no idea of the negative world reaction to his bluster.

Politicians usually spend too much time in cocoons of their own making. The closer you get to the top, the less you are exposed to comments from those who disagree with you. Power has a way of shutting out genuine dissent, as people usually tell a leader what she or he wants to hear.

But a good politician will try and stay close to the people. In Trump’s case, that means the same people that got him into the White House.

Hillary Clinton referred to them as a “basket of deplorables.” That comment probably cost her the presidency but there is truth in the characterization of certain alt-right, neo-Nazis who support the president.

Trump’s press performance did not stop there. He moved on to personally attack key Canadian negotiators of the North American Free Trade Agreement. His focus zeroed in on Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland. He reiterated his annoyance by deliberately snubbing the prime minister at the UN luncheon.

The awkward moment when Justin Trudeau tried to shake Trump’s hand, was caught on camera. Trudeau tried to make the best of a bad situation, explaining away the obvious slight as simply a preoccupation with the papers Trump was reading. But the president’s continued personal attacks on Canada belied Trudeau’s calm exterior.

Trump holds most of the cards in the NAFTA game. And while public bravado is the only tack the Canadian team can take, internally the team must be roiling about the possibility of economic fallout from the absence of a deal.

Trump made a vocal threat to impose heavy excise taxes Canadians autos. That move would definitely send the Canadian economy into a tailspin.

But to hear Trump publicly attack Canada, at the same time he is extolling his relationship with Kim Jung Un is simply too much.

Trump’s numerous late-night tweets are vicious but short, but the press conference last week laid bare the thinking of a president who really does like North Korea more than Canada.

During the press conference, Trump said he would continue to support the Kurdish people because they fought side by side with Americans in Iraq.

But Trump’s knowledge of history must be limited. Canada fought beside the United States in two world wars, and has been a greater friend to that country than any other partner.

In addition, our defence forces have worked side by side in Afghanistan and other hot spots around the world.

As far as Trump is concerned, that pales in comparison to cows.

Trump has made it very clear from the beginning that the farmers in Wisconsin are waiting for a return on their election investment.

The Americans have their own forms of agricultural protectionism but they see Canada’s system of supply management as a NAFTA hill to die on.

Trudeau and Freeland will be loathe to ignore the signals. Their commitment to the Canadian dairy industry stands firm, but they certainly cannot afford to throw the rest of Canada’s economy under the bus.

So while the public posture is firm, negotiators need to put something on the table that will allow Trump to boast about his alternative win.

That may not be too hard to do. He has consistently claimed victory with North Korea even though most observers see little progress on the denuclearization front.

It is frightening to see Trump’s alternative truth exposed on the world stage.

But that is the world he lives in.