The federal decision not to strike a medal was a lost political opportunity. In every riding in the country, there are individuals and organizations who would appreciate receiving recognition by way of a royal honour.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 6, 2022.

OTTAWA—The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee should be a time of celebration.

After 70 years as monarch, Queen Elizabeth is much admired and beloved.

She has survived the 21st century with the same warts that mar most families. From Prince Charles’ divorce to the lascivious behaviour of Prince Andrew, her children are not the same role models that she has proved to be.

In-laws appear to be much more beloved by the public than the Royals themselves. And the more the descendants distance themselves from the family, the happier they seem to be.

The decision by Prince Harry and his partner Meghan Markle to detach themselves from monarchical duties is just one example of a changing dynasty.

Couple that with an insider allegation of racism, levelled by the first racialized spouse of a Royal, and you have trouble.

Meghan and Harry seem to have survived their relocation to the United States.

Just last week, media reports claimed that Markle was considering a run for public office in the United States, with a potential eye on future presidential ambitions.

ITV’S Good Morning Britain hosted U.S. President Joe Biden’s sister, Valerie, who predicted that Markle could run on the Democratic ticket as early as 2028.

While the future of some exiled Royals seems bright, the same cannot be said of the institution itself.

The jubilee has offered an opportunity to celebrate the Queen’s longevity, but it also highlights the debate about terminating Canada’s relationship with the Queen’s successor.

Based on media coverage, there has been more interest in getting rid of the institution than in embracing it.

Even Prince Charles’ successful Canadian trip did not get much attention.

At the end of the day, the majority of Canadians are not seized of the issue one way or another.

Even ministers don’t seem to have that much interest in rendezvousing with the Royal family, as evidenced by the paucity of public Canadian Platinum Jubilee activities.

The federal government did not even strike a medal for the seventieth regal anniversary.

Instead, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia have done it on their own. They are seeking permission to include their medals in the order of precedence to be worn along with other commemorative medals in the Canadian Honours System.

Not surprisingly, Quebec did not join those provinces who are striking a medal. But the absence of Ontario was surprising, given the evidence of United Empire Loyalist history throughout the province.

The federal decision not to strike a medal was a lost political opportunity. In every riding in the country, there are individuals and organizations who would appreciate receiving recognition by way of a royal honour.

The decision was likely a political one, with the government not wanting to draw too much attention to what can be a controversial subject. But it was a mistake not to strike a medal, if only to give Members of Parliament a chance to honour active volunteers in communities across the country.

Say what you like, very few people turn their noses down on a personal recognition.

For Members of Parliament, the medal award process is an opportunity to reach out to multiple constituents, with zero political risk.

It is one of the simplest ways of turning a former political enemy into a friend.

Those who dislike the Queen don’t need to be involved or invited, and those who support the monarchy will be forever grateful for the Canadian recognition.

Sometimes a Member of Parliament can actually build personal support by reaching out to Royal Canadian Legions and others in a medal ceremony.

In a sense, the missed medal opportunity is reflective of the country’s ambivalence toward the monarchy in general.

There are some avid supporters of the monarchy, but most Canadians do not feel strongly about the issue. The biggest question is what would happen if the monarchy were to become redundant.

In most instances, the governor general has become a respected representative of the Queen, in carrying out duties on behalf of the royals across the country.

Mary Simon, as Canada’s first Indigenous Governor General, is particularly impressive.

Even those who ruminate about abolition following the passing of Queen Elizabeth, have no idea what to replace her with.

Republicanism does not curry much favour with most Canadians.

Abolition poses more questions than answers, which is why a heated Australian vote rejected it.

It is much easier to support a 1,200-year-old monarchical system than to blow it up.

Canadians may not enjoy a platinum celebration this month. But the monarchy is here to stay.

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

When the law is an ass, it should be amended.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 1, 2021.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau needs to move quickly to deny any pension or remuneration to the disgraced former governor general of Canada.

Notwithstanding government claims that the law requires payment, when the law is an ass, it should be amended.

When the initial post-retirement pension was introduced, no one foresaw the removal of an office-holder for malfeasance or bullying. However, given the situation that we are facing with the departure of former astronaut Julie Payette, all bets are off.

If there is one thing I know from politics, it is this kind of situation that rubs people the wrong way.

Here we are in the middle of a pandemic, with people losing their jobs and somehow, the nation’s titular head of state gets away with harassing employees. The vast majority of people interviewed for the independent report prepared for the Privy Council Office spoke of a “toxic” or “poisoned” work environment.

The report was heavily redacted but now that the governor general has stepped down, there will be further interest in how she ended up in the job in the first place.

There were certainly enough backstories to ensure that the prime minister should not have named her in the first place.

Two previous Payette leave-takings from high-profile positions were not exactly grounds for a glowing recommendation.

Trudeau’s appointments’ secretary Hillary Leftick should have rung an early warning bell to stop the government from naming Payette.

It is one thing to be impressed by her credentials: a multilingual former astronaut who spoke both official languages with ease and several others as well seemed to be perfect.

But the deeper dive into her background, both private and public, should have set off enough warning bells to stop the appointment. Allegations of spousal abuse, a previous, albeit, exonerated car accident that resulted in a death, two high-profile jobs where she left in a hurry, were just some of the warning signs.

But they were ignored because, on the surface, she seemed like an ideal choice.

That genie could not be put back into the bottle, but the prime minister needs to acknowledge that a mistake was made, and he also needs to cut off all future funding to the abuser.

The opposition parties would be quite happy to join in an all-party amendment to current law, to ensure that Payette receives neither a pension, nor a stipend for future travel obligations that stem from her work as governor general.

It is hard to imagine who would want to invite her to the usual conferences of former heads of state that involve the participation of retired GGs.

The government should also make sure that the next appointment is not chosen for symbolic reasons. It would be ideal to see Canada’s first Indigenous governor general and there are several capable nominees.

And it is also important that the proper due diligence is done in advance of the appointment and that the chosen candidate does not necessarily come with a narrow agenda, but rather a global view of their role as Canada’s head of state.

Some say the position is unnecessary. Past Parliaments have even entertained resolutions to see the role abolished.

But in reality, especially in a minority Parliament, the governor general has the power to keep a government in office even when the prime minister does not have the confidence of the House.

More than 12 years ago, former prime minister Stephen Harper was able to extend his time in government by six years when he convinced then governor general Michaëlle Jean to prorogue Parliament, thus deferring an imminent confidence motion where he would have faced certain defeat. The opposition vowed to form a coalition and vote against the fiscal update that was presented six weeks after the election. Jean’s decision killed that early confidence vote. Six weeks later, coalition momentum waned, and the government stayed in power.

Without the intervention of the governor general that would not have happened.

The position also requires someone who has a broad knowledge of Canadian politics and the law.

It is popular today to choose the anti-politician, someone who has no association with any political party, especially not the party in power.

But again, the governor general is a political position and should he held by someone with substance over style and who has broad political knowledge.

Canada can’t afford another astronautical mistake.

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

The Governor General’s appointment, while generally time-limited, is always ‘at pleasure,’ which means the office-holder can be let go at any time. After Julie Payette stepped aside, the prime minister quickly replaced her with acting Governor General in the person of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Richard Wagner.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on January 25, 2021.

OTTAWA—To sack or not to sack, that is the question.

Three current cases, two federal and one provincial, give us some insight into differing approaches to a firing offence.

Derek Sloan tossed

Conservative Member of Parliament Derek Sloan was tossed out by a majority vote of caucus, allegedly for accepting a donation from a white supremacist.

His toxic party status was pretty clear. Sloan has been a negative distraction to the Conservatives since his leadership bid against Erin O’Toole. O’Toole should have dumped him earlier following his racist attack on Canada’s Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam, because of her Chinese roots.

Instead, according to Sloan, O’Toole defended him vigorously in front of the caucus. Sloan also claims that O’Toole won the leadership because of the second-choice support of the Sloan followers.

Sloan is gone but has encouraged his followers to remain in the party and continue to influence their policy processes.

That could spell ongoing trouble for national Conservatives as they try to reposition themselves in the moderate middle to build electoral appeal.

A party that includes membership by anti-gay, anti-choice, and pro-conversion therapy supporters will not pass muster with the Canadian public.

While the departure of Sloan has helped to close the door on social conservatives, they still have an in-house leader in the person of Leslyn Lewis, a star Tory candidate whose social views mirror those of Sloan.

Governor General Julie Payette stepped down

The second federal departure is that of Governor General Julie Payette. After reviewing an independent report on allegations of bullying by Payette and her secretary Assunta Di Lorenzo, the Privy Council concluded the claims of a toxic work environment were true.

Faced with irrefutable evidence of harassment, Payette moved quickly to step down. That was the right thing to do.

Otherwise, the government would have had no choice but to dismiss the Queen’s representative in Canada. And the Queen would not have had to personally approve any firing.

The Governor General’s appointment, while generally time-limited, is always “at pleasure,” which means the office-holder can be let go at any time. After Payette stepped aside, the prime minister quickly replaced her with acting Governor General in the person of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Canada Richard Wagner.

Multiple news reports underscored the message that the governor-general’s alleged history of staff maltreatment was an issue in previous work environments. She departed hastily with a large severance from the Montreal Science Centre following similar allegations and left the Canadian Olympic Committee under a cloud.

Throughout the Rideau Hall investigation, the prime minister mounted a vigorous defence of his appointee. However, he had no choice but to sack her, based on the devastating report findings leaked to the media last week.

Ontario’s MPP Roman Baber dismissed

On the firing front, a third dismissal took place last week when Ontario Premier Doug Ford fired MPP Roman Baber for publishing an open letter characterizing the provincial lockdown as “deadlier than COVID.”

Baber has also been told that he cannot run for the Conservatives in the next election.

There is no doubt that Baber should have aired his grievance internally. His statement was a direct attack on the government’s use of the lockdown as a tool to limit the spread of COVID.

But this firing may actually do more harm than good by providing fuel for those who believe the current full lockdown is unsupported by science.

After Baber’s dismissal, a former Ontario chief medical officer of health penned a similar public letter, claiming “lockdown was never part of our planned pandemic response nor is it supported by strong science.”

Dr. Richard Schabas, who held the post for a decade, was also chief of staff at York Central Hospital during the SARS crisis.

He addressed the specifics of the Baber claim and also alleged that the modelling used to support the lockdown is misguided.

Schabas is not the only voice to claim the current approach is ineffective. Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson, who usually goes out of his way to support provincial initiatives, publicly questioned the decision to include his city in the lockdown, even though its daily COVID numbers were in the single digits.

Ford is between a rock and a hard place. He is following medical advice. But not all medical advice is based on science, especially counsel on this new and emerging virus.

Had Ford simply noted his colleague’s objection and supported caucus free speech, he probably would not have provoked the public backlash caused by the firing.

Instead, this dismissal gave oxygen to the growing anti-lockdown movement.

A decision not to sack might have been smarter.

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

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.