By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 25, 2023.

OTTAWA—Protests and counter-protests on the rights of children to use their chosen pronouns were held across the country last week.

New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh led a counter-protest in Ottawa, and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took to X (formerly Twitter) to condemn “hate and its manifestations,” and reiterate his support for the 2SLGBTQ+ community across Canada.

Not surprisingly, Conservative Members of Parliament were silent on the issue, with the Canadian Press reporting that the leader’s office had told them not to discuss the protests with the media or on social media outlets.

A memo, shared with CP, was sent from the leader’s office claiming that protesters against LGBTQ education in the schools have a legitimate point to make about “parental rights.”

Heated clashes in cities across the country led to arrests in Halifax, Vancouver, Victoria, and Ottawa. The issue is heating up as governments in New Brunswick and Saskatchewan have introduced legislation requiring students to get their parents’ permission before teachers can address them in their preferred he/she/they pronoun.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s office may not be able to stop Members of Parliament from weighing in when so many of them were elected thanks to support they received from social conservatives who do not support LGBTQ education in schools. The fact that the opposition leader is trying to keep a lid on comments shows that he understands the issue is a political hot potato that will win his party no new supporters.

As his party’s numbers climb, Poilievre has to be very careful to appeal to voters who are leery of social conservatism. Chances are the solidarity of potential power will not be enough to silence those in the caucus who got their political feet wet on recruiting social conservatives.

It is no coincidence that when Leslyn Lewis first ran for her party’s leadership in 2020, she was the first choice of Saskatchewan Tories. She swept the province where the premier and his government have recently enacted legislation to prevent minors from changing their pronouns without their parents’ permission.

Anti-trans rallies were organized across Canada last week by a group identifying itself as the “One Million March For Children,” which said it stood against gender ideology. But the marches were countered by groups defending the rights of 2SLGBTQ+ youth. Some are concerned that adolescents should not be outed to parents, and others wanted to support those teenagers who have self-identified as trans or gay.

Hate crimes against the gay community are on the rise, according to a report by Statistics Canada released last December. The report stated that police-reported hate crimes increased by 60 per cent between 2019 and 2021, reaching their highest level in five years.

Meanwhile, Ontario Premier Doug Ford promised to change the sex education curriculum when he was courting socially conservative voters during his leadership campaign. However, while in government, he was accused of re-introducing a sex education curriculum that was virtually identical to the one he had criticized during his campaign. Ford learned quickly that modifying sex education is probably not a top-of-mind priority for most Ontarians.

Poilievre is likely discovering the same challenge at the federal level. But how is he going to be able to stop his right-wing caucus members from aligning themselves with the thousands who rallied across the country against sex education involving the 2SLGBTQ+ community? The temperature is rising on both sides, so it is difficult to see how the Conservatives are going to be able to stay out of the fray.

And when the leader of the New Democrats makes it his business to lead the counter-demonstration, he obviously understands the political issues at stake.

Most Canadians don’t really involve themselves in the adolescent pronoun debate. However, they do support rights for the LGBTQ community. With the advent of same-sex marriage and support for choice in sexual orientation, most people appreciate the wave of equality that has evolved in the past two decades.

But the small percentage of people who oppose transgender teaching in schools has unleashed the wrath of the silent minority. The number of parents and grandparents who showed up last week to support their transgender progeny could translate into a significant voting bloc in the next election.

If the issue provokes enough interest, it will actually move votes in the next election. Therein the reason why the Tories don’t want to be on the record with any comment when it comes to transgender policies in local school sectors.

Their political silence is golden. But it may not be sustainable.

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

But it certainly has not captured the public’s imagination.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 31, 2022.

OTTAWA—Not too many people seem to care about the current inquiry into the government’s decision to invoke the Emergencies Act to end the trucker occupation.

Even the hero of most anti-trucker locals did not reap much benefit in the Ottawa municipal election held last week.

Most pundits were predicting a tight race between long-serving councillor Catherine McKenney and newcomer Mark Sutcliffe in the run to replace outgoing Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson.

Many believed that the appearance by McKenney in the opening days of the inquiry would give their campaign a boost. Their testimony coincided last week with the mayoral race and reminded voters of their very public stance against the occupation in the weeks when the city was under siege.

But that past did not seem to affect the city election outcome. Sutcliffe sauntered to victory, with media decision desks declaring his win within minutes of the polls closing.

McKenney is not the only one who did not reap benefits from anti-convoy visibility.

The opposition in the House of Commons has been silent on the inquiry with no questions directed at the government.

The inquiry has held a number of public hearings, but is currently entertaining secret testimony from the Canadian Security Intelligence Service.

The judge leading the inquiry approved the secrecy provisions sought by the government last week, acceding to the request that the CSIS information is classified.

Police testimony on multiple sides has simply left people confused.

City police appeared to be experiencing crossed communication lines and infighting. As for other levels of policing, the testimony thus far has yet to get to the bottom of the story.

The Ontario Provincial Police were highly critical of city police performance, but it remains unclear how much help they were prepared to offer.

According to inquiry testimony, even provincial ministers were misinformed about the nature and strength of the provincial participation.

We may never get to the bottom of that story because Ontario Premier Doug Ford is declining to participate in the hearing, claiming it is a federal matter to assess federal involvement and therefore the provincial politicians have no business participating.

Ford also clings to the claim that the decisions made around the provincial policing participation were strictly limited to police authorities and had nothing to do with Queen’s Park.

It appears as though Ford had little interest in breaking up the Ottawa convoy. He only got involved when the borders were shut down and automotive jobs were suspended because of the supply chain problems caused by the blockade in Windsor, Ont.

The opposition’s original narrative that the legislation was simply a “just watch me” moment for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau doesn’t seem to have gained much traction.

At the time, the prime minister and his team were criticized for not stepping in earlier to put an end to the local economic paralysis caused by the occupation.

Those who have a hate-on for Trudeau will find a way of blaming him for the occupation.

Some feel he overstepped his authority, but in the context of the occupation, it appears as though he tried hard to work with the relevant police authorities, to little avail.

What is surprising is the level of dysfunction that has been exposed during various police testimony.

For those who think that police are well-equipped to protect us, it is scary when they don’t even have the authority to compel private tow-truck operators to remove vehicles parked illegally for weeks.

It is also clear that an element of the police was sympathetic to the occupiers, determined to assist the occupation instead of breaking it up.

In the end, the inquiry has already exposed a major failure of local police leadership, and perhaps that is not surprising.

Police are constantly encouraged to work with protesters in an effort to de-escalate violence. Their hope to dialogue with the occupiers is not surprising.

They should have understood from the beginning that this was no normal occupation. The occupiers themselves were claiming they planned to take over the government.

A normal protest group arrives on Parliament Hill, spends a few hours hearing speakers and making points, and then moves on.

The Ottawa police ignored intelligence received very early on, anticipating an occupation that would last for several weeks, not several hours.

The occupation was like nothing the nation’s capital had ever witnessed. The local police force appeared woefully ill-equipped to deal with the protesters.

The post-mortem on the Emergencies Act continues apace.

But it certainly has not captured the public’s imagination.

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

If he doesn’t connect with the truckers who are promising weeks of disruption, he runs the risk of being outed as a non-supporter. If he does stand with the truckers, he runs the counter-risk of facing the ire of citizens in the Ottawa region, including those in his own Ottawa riding, Carleton.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 27, 2022.

OTTAWA—Pierre Poilievre’s Canada Day celebrations may blow up in his face.

If he doesn’t connect with the truckers who are promising weeks of disruption, he runs the risk of being outed as a non-supporter.

If he does stand with the truckers, he runs the counter-risk of facing the ire of citizens in the Ottawa region, including those in his own Ottawa-area riding, Carleton.

They handed him a healthy plurality in the last election but just last week, Mainstreet Research published some interesting data about how the trucker-Pierre tango was viewed by voters.

Amongst 555 constituents polled by Mainstreet between June 13-14, Poilievre enjoyed a healthy 10 per cent majority over his closest opponent in the last election.

If that same election were held today, Poilievre would still be in the lead, but his margin of victory would shrink by half.

According to respondents, the single biggest factor in their dissatisfaction was Poilievre’s support for the Ottawa convoy blockade.

Forty-nine per cent of those polled said they would be less likely to vote for the Conservatives if the riding representative was Poilievre.

It appears as though the trucker occupation played a huge rule in Poilievre’s fall from electoral grace.

The Mainstreet question was clear: “During the trucker occupation … Pierre Poilievre met with and encouraged the freedom protesters. How has this impacted your opinion of your Member of Parliament?”

Fifty-six per cent of those interviewed said they had a “much less favourable” opinion of Poilievre because of his blockade support. An additional 10 per cent said they had a “somewhat less favourable opinion.”

By contrast, only 15 per cent said they had a “much more favourable” opinion, while three per cent claimed a “somewhat more favourable” opinion.

In the next month, the truckers have vowed to return to Ottawa to disrupt Canada Day and remain in the capital throughout the month of July.

They may be pleased to return to the scene of the crime, but Poilievre and the Conservatives can’t be too thrilled.

So far, Poilievre’s support of the truckers has not made much news beyond the nation’s capital.

It really is an “inside the beltway story.” But inside the beltway is Poilievre’s own constituency, and he could vault to the top of the Tories, only to be spurned by local voters in the next election.

Most party leaders are supported by their constituents. It is only when the party faces dire straits that the leader is defeated. Witness the rejection of Liberal Leader Steven Del Duca in his own riding the recent Ontario election.

But being a representative in the nation’s capital is not the same as other ridings across the country.

There, people do expect you to stare down the Freedom Convoy and support the residents, not vice versa.

Last January and February were brutal times for the 30,000 people who live in Ottawa’s downtown core.

According to a friend who lives there, the only dialogue that happened between truckers and residents was a volley of epithets that started with “f” and ended with “u.”

The city is bracing for the same nastiness next week. And Poilievre has to make up his mind whether he represents his constituents or the freedom convoy, because, if the Mainstreet poll is accurate, it cannot be both.

It remains to be seen whether Poilievre can translate his obvious internal popularity into votes across the broad spectrum of Canadians.

But the early signal from his riding sounds a warning bell.

Swinging so far right may win support within Conservative party circles.

But that swing also alienates the majority of mainstream voters.

With the crash of crypto-currency and the pushback on his view of the governor of the Bank of Canada, Poilievre appears to be resonating within his own party.

His situation is so strong that, not only did Patrick Brown’s co-chair bolt, as referenced in last week’s column, but also Brown’s campaign manager quickly followed Michelle Rempel Garner, abruptly leaving Brown’s campaign to work for her potential Alberta leadership entry. Rempel Garner has since decided not run for the UCP leadership.

Jean Charest continues to insist publicly that “I will win this.” He is pumping up his supporters with audacious declarations of victory. But his own numbers do not appear to back up those words.

Poilievre and Brown membership sales allegedly amount to 75 per cent of the total, so it is tough to see how Charest will win.

Poilievre is definitely ahead.

How he handles the Canada Day convoy will signal much about his capacity to win an election.

Like Icarus, flying too close to the truckers might burn him badly.

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

As the details of who these people are emerge, any person who was associated with their cause is going to suffer residual damage. The ‘Freedom Convoy’ will roll out, but in its dust, Ottawa is left in political chaos.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 21, 2022.

OTTAWA—At the end of the day, from city hall to Parliament Hill, there is no winner coming out of this so-called “Freedom Convoy.”

The truckers will claim victory, because several premiers announced a relaxation of their vaccine requirements at the height of the tension.

But when the dust settles, the story of Canada’s trucker siege is going to cast them in a very negative light.

One leader of the siege fled just as the new emergency law was announced, claiming his work had been done and he needed to move on to the Maritimes.

Another organizer went to YouTube, tearfully announcing she expected to be imprisoned because of her involvement, but claiming she was not afraid.

As the details of who these people are emerge, any person who was associated with their cause is going to suffer residual damage.

And the effect on the body politic is even more profound.

The Ottawa police chief was fired and a new one chosen by the Ottawa Police Services Board without consultation with city officials. That prompted city council to implode as board chair Diane Deans was voted out of her position by a 15-9 council vote.

Councillors were calling for the immediate resignation of Mayor Jim Watson, even though he has already announced that he will leave city hall at the end of this term.

Ottawa residents are not the only ones who have lost confidence in the capacity of politicians to protect them from harassment as they are left to their own defences.

But with the state of hooliganism reigning in an area inhabited by more than 30,000 citizens, the city was hardest hit by the occupations.

A friend of mine, who is 80 years old and recovering from cancer, was out for his daily constitutional near the grounds of the University of Ottawa when he was accosted by three roving hoodlums demanding that he remove his mask. He politely declined, telling them he had pre-existing conditions and they responded by telling him that he was full of shit and that they wanted the mask off.

He turned away from the confrontation by reversing his path, shaking in fear and wondering what has happened to the city he has called home for more than 40 years.

Another friend is the head of a major Canadian non-governmental organization. One of his organization’s members posted some of the “Freedom Convoy” links to international white supremacist groups on social media.

My friend’s address and unpublished personal phone number were found by the supremacists, and then linked to the posted research. He started receiving hundreds of death threats on his cell phone. Police were contacted. At press time, the investigation has not been concluded.

In Alberta, two Edmonton police officers were suspended after participating in the international blockade at Coutts. Near the site, police uncovered multiple assault weapons and four people have been charged with conspiracy to murder after a raid on the blockade.

While politicians prognosticated, citizens acted. Ottawa residents are suing convoy organizers and participants for $306-million and counting, with an additional $15-million in personal harm and charges every day it continues.

At Queens’s Park, it was revealed that a senior member of the solicitor-general’s staff was one of thousands who funded the convoy. Director of communications Marion Isabeau-Ringuette was fired without further comment.

As the donation list becomes public, there will definitely be more questions around support for occupiers from senior politicians and law enforcement officials.

Interim Conservative Leader Candice Bergen embraced the protesters and then claimed the prime minister was at the divisive centre of this debacle.

The prime minister waited far too long before making the decision to invoke special authorities to quell the violence and mayhem.

According to Toronto Star reporter Robert Benzie, recent polling shows that two-thirds of Canadians support the imposition of the Emergencies Act. But that isn’t the end of the story. Eighty-two per cent said the protest has gone on too long, and seventy-one per cent say that Canada’s handling of the situation was an international embarrassment.

Fifty-six per cent also say that premiers caved by lifting vaccine passports and other mandates at the height of the occupation.

So, the prime minister and the premiers have all been damaged by this debacle.

When the dust settles, Canadians will not forget one thing.

Only one party embraced the protesters. And who could forget the image of Conservative Michael Cooper, smiling away for photographs in front of a swastika on an upside-down Canadian flag?

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

The time has come to move as a herd.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 1, 2020.

OTTAWA—Surgical sterility is great for an operating room. But it does not work in the real world.

The notion that after almost three months in lockdown people are expected to either stay home or go to places where they are not allowed to sit down for fear of transmitting COVID is unworkable.

In Calgary, people gather in bars and restaurants in a convivial atmosphere. In Ottawa, you cannot even sit down on picnic tables at the Dairy Queen for fear of an infection outbreak.

In the olden days, Hogtown had another nickname, Toronto the Good. It was based on laws with a distinctively Presbyterian flavour that restricted drinking, dancing, and all things purportedly sinful.

The new normal has unleashed a wave of righteous caterwauling the likes of which we have not witnessed since the seventies (of the last century).

The blowback on the Trinity-Bellwoods park exuberance, was a case in point.

Everyone from the premier to the mayor jumped on the finger-pointing bandwagon, instead of realistically assessing why there was only a postage-stamp park in an area of multiple, low-income high-rise dwellings.

Not everyone has a private backyard to COVID in. In Toronto, the possibility of having your own personal space is even more remote.

So, on a sunny Saturday in May, when the province had announced the loosening of rules to stage two, people came out in droves.

On the fish-eye lens shots that immediately circulated on social media, it looked as though thousands were elbow to elbow.

But when the television cameras arrived, it was clear that people were trying their best to ensure social distancing.

But the armchair critics jumped in to attack millennials, claiming their irresponsibility was putting lives at risk.

At one point, a COVID-commentating doctor was almost in tears on television because he could not understand why people would be undermining the contribution of health-care workers in this thoughtless romp in the park.

Across the pond, critics are vicious in their attack British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s top aid for defying lockdown rules and driving to his mother’s home to drop off his four-year-old with grandma. He claims he and his wife were sick, and therefore the trip was about necessary childcare while they convalesced.

Without drilling down into the details of his explanation, the revelation rocked the country. People are stuck at home and obviously hurting when the rules that apply to them do not apply to others.

But the COVID epidemic has also unleashed the vitriol of unhappy people who normally keep their acidic worldview to themselves.

In today’s world, the COVID police are everywhere, ready to pounce on someone who veers too close on a walking path or accidentally steps in the wrong spot in a grocery store.

The old nosy parker, who was into everybody’s else’s business, is now doing it with impunity, as though their observations on everyone else are in the public interest.

In the condo in which I live, some dwellers have taken to counting the empty visitor parking spots every weekend to make sure that no interlopers are sneaking into the premises.

Last weekend, I hosted two family members for a dinner. It was within the rule of five, and we had covided in their backyard (with self-distancing) several times over the past few months.

To enter the apartment without neighbourly reporting, we made sure family entered through the underground parking, so as not to be outed by anyone looking out their window into visitors’ parking.

I have a friend who is struggling alone to support her husband, suffering with brain cancer. We have a weekly COVID meeting in the passageway between our apartments.

Last Friday, she broke down in tears, describing the loneliness of watching her partner slowly slip away, without the support that would normally attend a dying family member.

Horror of horrors, I hugged her. She needed a human connection and two meters of space just did not cut it.

Perfection may occur in hospital settings, but I think the public’s attention would be far better focused on eliminating risk in long-term care facilities.

With the high ratio of deaths in vulnerable populations, it is shameful that we need the military to expose germ-infested, understaffed conditions in health facilities.

But while we focus on not touching each other, the death rate numbers are largely driven by long-term care neglect.

Canadians have been very supportive of the new normal. But enough is enough. The time has come to move as a herd.

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 July 2, 2018.

OTTAWA—What if you threw a party and nobody came?

That is exactly what might happen to the annual Fourth of July bash at the U.S. ambassador’s official residence in Rockcliffe.

Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson is not known as a big risk-taker. Throughout his time in politics, as a Parliament Hill employee, a provincial minister, and then mayor, he has usually managed to keep all sides happy.

So when the mayor of Canada’s capital city decides to boycott the American ambassador’s annual Fourth of July picnic, you know the jig with the Yanks is up.

Unlike the federal and provincial scene, civic politics is most successful for leaders who try to find middle ground. They must appeal to all sides of the spectrum in order to secure support and usually win by making few enemies.

Watson’s publicly-announced boycott is an indication that millions of Canadians are feeling the same angst.

A no-show party list would be a clear indication that the trade war launched by United States President Donald Trump has no support in Canada.

Watson’s decision is a reflection of just how most of us are feeling in the wake of an unprovoked and scurrilous attack on our prime minister by the man who purports to be the leader of the free world.

Some might argue that missing the party is bad manners. The ambassadorial invite is billed as the biggest Independence Day bash outside the U.S. But this certainly is not politics as usual.

The current ambassador is a Trump-friendly appointee and the situation has gotten so tense that even her own predecessor is throwing grenades at the president.

Barack Obama-appointed ambassador Bruce Heyman weighed in on the fight last month when he demanded that Trump trade adviser Peter Navarro apologize to the Canadian people for stating on an American news show that “a special place in hell for any foreign leader” has been reserved for Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau because of his “stunt press conference” after the G7 meeting in Quebec.

Canadians thought Trump was joking when he referenced the war of 1812 as the starting point for warring relations between the country. They didn’t realize that that sally was a precursor of the war he was starting on the trade front.

Trump supporters have been fed fake memes and elaborate online charts purporting to show how Canada is clobbering the United States with unfair tariffs. The only problem: the numbers are wrong, but that means nothing to Trump collaborators who care little for news truth.

Even when confronted with the falsity of the facts, multiple-pro-Trump supporters have refused to edit them. Some have even been created by Russian agents. And while the American president trashes his closest friend and ally, he is busy playing footsy with Russian and North Korean despots and dictators.

The world order has, indeed, been upended, and it has been carried out by deliberation, not chance. Heyman told The Globe and Mail last week that Trump “is purposefully evoking a fight against Canada right now. He has an agenda to demonize the relationship.”

Mentions of the Trudeau name provoke hisses and boos at Trump rallies, at the same time the White House is finalizing details for a bilateral tête-à-tête with Vladimir Putin. The summit will confer special status on the Russian leader in the midst of ongoing investigations into his meddling in the American election.

Based on Trump’s recent actions, we can only assume that he is more comfortable building relationships with leaders who regularly threaten their enemies with nuclear attacks or engage in subterfuge to despoil elections.

Trump the bully is actually more comfortable with his own kind.

His campaign manager has already been charged with criminal activity, his family members are under investigation, and his own behaviour has reinforced the fact that the television caricature of Trump is actually the real deal.

But Canadians do have a few arrows in our own quiver. On Canada Day, our retaliatory efforts against unfair U.S. tariffs commenced.

Some are suggesting we should also target coal, blocking its shipment to Asia via the Port of Vancouver.

Ordinary people are changing their summer travel plans. Why visit the United States when there are so many beautiful destinations in Canada and elsewhere?

Even people booking international flights can do their best to avoid transiting in American airspace.

And then there is the ultimate rebuff, which may happen at the American ambassador’s residence on July 4.

You throw a party and nobody comes.

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.