Two confidence votes, two near misses in two weeks prepares voters for the fact that an election will come sooner rather than later.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 22, 2020.

OTTAWA—The nail-biter vote in the House of Commons on Oct. 21 is a precursor of things to come.

Two confidence votes, two near misses in two weeks prepares voters for the fact that an election will come sooner rather than later.

A national campaign might be a nice break from the onslaught of bad news prompted by the coronavirus.

Held on the first anniversary of the minority Liberal government win, the vote came on the heels of another close call. In both instances, the New Democratic Party voted with the Liberals. But NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh was obviously frustrated about having to prop up the government. Singh risks alienating his base if he is too close to the government.

Confidence vote fatigue will soon set in. It won’t be too long before a House of Commons money bill is defeated, triggering the election that nobody allegedly wants.

The Liberals would be the most likely beneficiaries.

Just recently, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern was re-elected with her party’s largest popular vote in the past half-century. Since the country adopted proportional voting, she was the first leader who managed to secure a majority government with 49 per cent of her fellow citizens supporting the Labour Party.

Just a few months earlier, Ardern was facing certain defeat. But her handling of the pandemic, quickly locking down borders and isolating the island, saw her popularity soar.

Three Canadian premiers have called an election during the pandemic, and it appears the trio will all be rewarded with majority governments.

Lockdown fatigue is also creeping into the equation. With the second wave rolling across Canada, citizens are starting to ask more questions.

In the beginning of the pandemic, it was comforting to see public health officials and politicians appearing together in a daily briefing to update a nation reeling from the worldwide viral transmission.

But now people don’t even bother to tune in. And the comfort that came from the solid science of public health officers is being replaced by ridicule.

Halloween is cancelled in one province but not in another.

Movie theatres are closed down in the hot zones, despite a lack of evidence that a single case of the virus has been transmitted in cinema.

The gradual erosion of confidence in the overall public handling of the crisis probably began when Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam veered into the world of sex advice.

On coupling, she suggested that if you don’t know your partner very well, you should wear a mask. Why not a paper bag?

The question of transmission is not the only thing on people’s minds when they hop into the sack together, especially if they are relatively new partners. Instead, it is all about getting as interconnected as possible, and that could be quite difficult if they are both wearing masks.

Then came the Thanksgiving advice, or lack thereof.

At first, Ontarians were informed that a dinner within your bubble with up to a maximum of 10 people was permitted. Then the advice was altered a few days before the blessed event, and we were told to dine only with those we live with.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford tried to explain the confusion by saying the 10-person rule was supposed to apply only to that number of people who lived in the same household. But in Canada, there are not too many 10-member families living under one roof.

The province recently shut down gyms and restaurants in the hot spots. The City of Ottawa issued a new ruling that outdoor tennis would only be allowed for singles players. All doubles matches were verboten.

That happened without a scintilla of evidence that a single tennis player had contracted the coronavirus while on the court.

As for gyms, there was a reported case of a super transmission at a spin class, where the owners claimed to be following the guidelines, but the bicycles were too close together. But why punish all clubs for the mistake of one. And how did dance studios secure an exemption?

Nobody expects science to have all the answers. But people do expect government lockdowns based on facts.

Instead, we are seeing different approaches across different provinces, and public support for pandemic efforts is eroding.

On balance, Canadians are happy to join queues and follow rules. We have willingly integrated hand-washing, masking, and social distancing into our daily routines. But the cancellation of Hallowe’en was the tipping point.

A snap election would actually be a welcome diversion.

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

Why would the Parliament of Canada endorse a leadership summit that limits participation on the basis of religion?

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 6, 2019.

OTTAWA—Christians only need apply.

According to the Canada Prayer Breakfast website, the annual parliamentary event held last week included a 100-person youth summit.

The National Christian Youth Summit (formerly known as the National Student Forum) was held in the Parliamentary Precinct. It was billed as the Canada Youth Summit but the recruitment and travel subsidy material said only Christians need apply. While its Facebook page says the event is open to all faiths, its website invites those who are “passionate about bringing your faith in Jesus Christ.”

Why would the Parliament of Canada endorse a leadership summit that limits participation on the basis of religion?

It is more important than ever to share stories with multiple religions viewpoints, especially among young people.

Perspectives of Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Sikhism, and Buddhism should also be reflected in any government-supported event that purports to increase the influence of religion in Canada’s political life.

Many Members of Parliament attend the annual National Prayer Breakfast, sharing a common desire to include spirituality in public decision-making.

When the country came together in support of the victims of the New York World Trade Centre attacks, 100,000 people gathered on Parliament Hill to hear prayers from diverse religious leaders.

In Canada, we have had a proud history of religious diversity. The Prayer Breakfast has been held annually since the time of prime minister Lester Pearson. The Member of Parliament who chairs a regular, informal parliamentary prayer group organizes the program.

Other religious events are often held on Parliament Hill, focusing on the special days for specific religions, like Eid, or Diwali.

Any not-for profit group can host an event on Parliament Hill, as long as certain conditions are met.

But, the Canada Prayer Breakfast is unique because it is offered under the combined authority of the Speakers of the House and the Senate.

Should the Speaker’s Office be sponsoring a religious summit that is exclusionary in nature?

The Christian youth summit is held to “meet, worship, pray and dialogue with Christian Parliamentarians, public servants, NGOs, and ministry leaders.” Would it not be important to meet with all parliamentarians, not just those who share the same religious beliefs? What happened to separation of church and state?

The choice of speakers makes it clear that this is more than a religious event. It is a gathering with decidedly political overtones.

Keynote advertised speakers for a dinner preceding the event and the prayer breakfast included a speaker from Samaritan’s Purse and a director of the Zacharias Institute.

Samaritan’s Purse, an international relief organization headed by the son of televangelist Dr. Billy Graham, has been criticized in Canada and abroad for tying its relief efforts to religious conversion attempts.

Just last week, CEO Franklin Graham called on U.S. President Donald Trump, to declare the Council on American-Islamic Relations a terrorist organization. He characterized CAIR as a mouthpiece in Washington for radical Islam.” CAIR has denied the allegations and has said it condemns terrorism.

According to a 2017 article in The Atlantic, Graham has called for a total ban on Muslim immigration into the United States. He also considers gay Boy Scouts a major threat to children but believes that God is at work in the Donald Trump White House.

“He did everything wrong, politically,” Graham said. “He offended gays. He offended women. He offended the military. He offended Black people. He offended the Hispanic people. He offended everybody! And he became president of the United States. Only God could do that.” Now, there’s “no question” that God is supporting Trump, Graham said. “No president in my lifetime—I’m 64 years old—can I remember … speaking about God as much as Donald Trump does.”

Three years ago, the Canadian arm of the organization, featured in last week’s event, fired Newfoundland volunteer Kay Cossar from Burgeo when she refused to sign an updated faith statement denouncing same-sex marriage and abortion.

She had been regional co-ordinator of Operation Christmas Child for eight years.

Samaritan’s Purse spokesperson Jeff Adams defended the firing, saying the organization’s faith statement had been amended because “the world’s view on these has changed”… “The amendments include a specific mention that ‘human sexuality is to be expressed only within the context of marriage,’ that a marriage by Biblical definition is between ‘a genetic male and genetic female,’ and that ‘human life is sacred from conception to its natural end.’”

The second speaker was Vince Vitale, a director of the Zacharias Institute. The institute bills itself as a training centre for Christian apologists. An American educational facility it offers courses on how to argue the case for Christianity, and against other religious options.

The time has come to revisit the Canada Prayer Breakfast status as a religious convention sponsored by Parliament.

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 17, 2018.

OTTAWA—If only the walls could speak.

Stories emanating from the mothballed Centre Block chart the history of a country and the warring political parties that have made it work.

The final parliamentary debate for at least a decade was held last week in a building that has borne witness to the greatest political moments in our history.

Decisions to go to war, vigorous disagreement on whether the country should even stay together—all have provided emotional raw material for building Canada.

But many of the key battles were not between parties, but between factions in a single party.

John Diefenbaker became prime minister in 1957 and within a year in a snap election he was returned with the largest majority in the history of the country. The charismatic Progressive Conservative leader stumbled in the following two elections and was ultimately ousted by his party in a leadership convention that brought Robert Stanfield to power in 1967.

Dief the Chief, as he was affectionately known, was bitter about the ousting and spent the rest of his time in Parliament seeking to destabilize his own party.

As a gesture of respect, the former leader secured an office directly across from the new leader’s digs, which include multiple offices and a caucus room for important private meetings.

One of the jobs of Diefenbaker’s assistant was to keep a diary of everybody who stepped across Robert Stanfield’s hearth. The assistant kept detailed notes and reported weekly how long visitors stayed and, when possible, the subject matter of the meeting.

Oftentimes, positioning of an office would actually give the occupant direct insight into some of the deeper secrets hiding within the inner sanctum of Parliament.

Prime minister Pierre Trudeau was the first leader to move his office to the third floor.

Prior to that move, all prime ministers were housed on the fourth or even the fifth floor.

Mackenzie King occupied personal offices on the fifth floor, where he commissioned a fresco featuring a portrait of his mother as an angel, and his beloved dog Pat. Both bore daily witness to his work.

At one point, the fresco colour was going dark. Someone sent in to clean it, started the work with an abrasive that managed to scratch his mother’s face. A halt was quickly called to the cleanup.

When prime minister Pierre Trudeau relocated from the fourth to the third floor, he created a unique problem for those coming in and out of his office. In those days, most of Parliament was open to the media, including the third floor corridor.

It was almost impossible for caucus members to meet privately with the prime minister, as every move was usually overseen by a reporter stalking the halls of power.

When I was planning to resign because of the government’s refusal to replace the hated goods and services tax, I received a call to attend the PM’s office. A crowd of journalists were gathered there waiting for news on the breaking story. Instead of attending, I arranged a private phone meeting.

That kept pundits guessing on what was happening until an announcement on my resignation was made the following day at a weekly caucus meeting.

Some of the most salacious stories were not restricted to Centre Block.

Probably the most notorious was the story of a backbench Member of Parliament who went running through the halls of West Block stark naked after a cleaning lady broke up a twosome with his assistant.

He was hiding behind a potted plant, begging for help, when a colleague came to his rescue. The dalliance with his secretary was allegedly consensual and nothing other than wild rumours ever came from the event.

Sex in the corridors of power was a sideshow. The real game was politics.

The move to the newly renovated West Block will be a place to make new memories.

Future leaders and parties will continue to plot against each other, both within their caucuses and between.

Government officials are suggesting the politicians will return to Centre Block in 10 years.

I suspect it might take a little longer. The plan to renovate Centre Block was presented to cabinet by Public Works minister David Dingwall back in 1993. It took 25 years for the reality to unfold.

New memories will no doubt be made in the new power centre.

Most stories will remain behind closed doors. The times have changed since a Member of Parliament hid behind a potted plant.

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

But the secrets of Centre Block are over.