OTTAWA —
Debuting a freshly-shaven face for the first time since before the pandemic, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau downplayed suggestions Wednesday that he’s gearing up to call a federal election despite a ramp-up in post-Parliament political posturing.
The Senate adjourned for the summer leaving two key Liberal bills unpassed on Tuesday: a bill to stamp out the harmful practice of LGBTQ2S+ conversion therapy, and a contentious broadcast regulation update. Those bills will die if an election is called before they make it through the Senate.
Asked whether he could commit to not calling an election until those bills become law, the prime minister couldn’t say yes, suggesting his government is angling to have the Senate recalled in the coming weeks instead.
With Parliament not set to resume sitting until the week of Sept. 20, the prospect of the government falling on a confidence vote has been taken off the table. That hasn’t quelled any of the inside-Ottawa speculation that the puzzle pieces are increasingly falling into place for Trudeau to decide it’s time to go to the polls.
The Liberals are experiencing high polling numbers, COVID-19 case counts are on a steady decline prompting more provincial reopenings, and the vaccine rollout is on track to have enough doses delivered by the end of July to fully vaccinate all who are eligible well before the end-of-September target.
Asked by CTV News during a funding announcement on Wednesday whether he could commit to not calling an election over the summer, Trudeau also dodged, drawing attention to the realities of being a minority government despite the makeup of the House of Commons having little impact on the summer political season.
He also signalled an intention to “take time this summer to consult Canadians,” in his first in-person press conference after his 14-day quarantine following his trip to the G7.
“We will continue to work hard every day for Canadians, continue to listen to Canadians, continue to talk about what we need to do all together to build back better and recover our economy, and that’s what I’m going to stay focused on,” Trudeau said, echoing a sentiment expressed by his deputy earlier in the day.
During a press conference expressing relief that the budget implementation bill was one of the pieces of legislation to make it out of the Senate, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland said that while there now seems to be “light at the end of the tunnel,” her focus remains on the “once in a generation” effort to drive an economic comeback.
“It feels very much like pre-election,” said Liberal strategist and Proof Strategies’ senior vice-president of government relations in an interview with CTV News.
“I don’t think you’re going to see a government that can push this off to the fall now, there’s so much expectation, the government’s own communications with the importance of passing certain bills within the last two weeks, speaks to the fact that they don’t seem to think that they’re going to be sitting this fall.”
The downplaying from Trudeau and Freeland of a looming election call isn’t convincing the Conservatives, who put out a pair of messages Wednesday that signal they too are preparing for an election call.
In a tweet, Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole posted a photo of himself out for a run, with the caption: “It’s in moments like this when everything is clearest for me. Now, more than ever, Canada needs a new government with a real plan to secure the future and get our country moving again. Hang on Canada; the recovery you deserve is coming.”
And, in a fundraising email from “2021 Conservative Campaign National Campaign Manager” Fred DeLorey, the party says: “The battle for the next election has already begun, and your support is more important than ever…. We know the Liberals are busy preparing for an election, and we need to show that we are ready to take on this fight!”
The Conservatives have already set up a studio inside the Westin Hotel in downtown Ottawa where O’Toole has recently been delivering his addresses from, which the party is ready to use during the campaign, pending the feasibility of resuming the usual campaign bus and plane tours.
Senior consultant with Crestview Strategy and Conservative strategist Andrew Brander said that throughout the pandemic, O’Toole has had “such a difficult time over the past few months resonating with Canadians in terms of introducing himself to them.”
From his perspective, O’Toole is trying now to define himself and who he will be as a leader in contrast to Trudeau, saying he thinks O’Toole is “really trying to show Canadians a different type of conservativism.”
WILL C-6 BECOME A WEDGE ISSUE?
Already the Liberals are fundraising off Bill C-6 being held up in the upper chamber, fuelling the prospect that the legislation will be used as a wedge against the Conservatives in the campaign, despite O’Toole’s personal support for the bill.
Less than 12 hours after the Senate adjourned, the Liberal Party sent out a fundraising email “from the desk of Justin Trudeau” touting the “progressive” legislation that managed to pass, while putting the blame for the conversion therapy bill not passing squarely on the Conservatives’ shoulders.
While O’Toole has recently voiced his support for the LGBTQ2S+ community, more of his MPs voted against the conversion therapy bill than there were Conservative MPs who supported it. And, it was Conservative senators who denied the unanimous consent needed to allow a committee to study the bill over the summer, according to the government, despite members of that caucus expressing a desire for a study so they could suggest potential amendments.
During his press conference, Trudeau said he didn’t think it was a “coincidence” that Bill C-6 didn’t pass given the Conservative opposition to it.
“Disappointed is too weak a word that the Senate did not see fit to get this one done,” was how Freeland responded to a similar question.
There is more to the story of the now years-long inability to outlaw conversion therapy than Conservative obstruction. While the government pushed the argument that LGBTQ2S+ folks should not be subjected one day longer to efforts to change a person’s sexual orientation to heterosexual or gender identity to cisgender, the bill and its aims have faced roadblocks before, including from the government.
When calls were made by then-NDP MP Sheri Benson in the last Parliament for the government to step up and do more to protect minors from the practice, the Liberal response was that while conversion therapy was “akin to torture,” it was essentially a provincial issue. Then in 2019, it became an election promise. The first iteration of the bill died with Trudeau’s 2020 prorogation.
While it was quickly revived in the current session, it moved slowly despite NDP saying they would have helped pass it quicker to avoid what ended up being attempts from Conservatives to delay the bill.
After coming back onto the government’s priority bill list at the start of Pride month, it reached the Senate by a vote of 263 to 63, with a day to spare before the House adjourned for the summer last week.
Also weighing in on the state of the conversion therapy policy, the NDP issued a statement noting that despite all of the “platitudes,” conversion therapy remains legal.
“The bill to ban the extremely harmful practice that has hurt thousands of Canadians has stalled in the Senate because the Liberals didn’t make it a priority,” read the statement from NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s party headquarters. “New Democrats had our hand out. Liberals simply weren’t interested in getting this done. If Justin Trudeau chooses to call an election to suit his own political agenda this bill may never become law.”
The 11-page bill proposes five new Criminal Code offences including advertising and profiting off, or forcing a minor to undergo conversion therapy. It leaves the door open to allow adults who willingly want to pursue what has also been called reparative therapy under limited circumstances.
MacEachern’s view was that as a wedge issue it will be a problem for the Conservatives as it casts his party as “exactly what Erin O’Toole said they weren’t going to be like.”
“There’s an old saying in politics that once you’re explaining, you’ve lost. If the Conservatives have to explain why they voted against banning conversion therapy, they’ve already lost,” MacEachern said.
Speaking against the bill on Monday, and suggesting it go to committee to examine how the “issues” with the bill can be resolved through amendments, Conservative Sen. Don Plett cast doubt that the Liberals’ motivations with advancing the bill were little more than “crass political manoeuvring.”
“Banning coercive conversion therapy is the right thing to do, but instead of drafting a bill which clearly articulates those parameters that could have passed unanimously, the government chose to try to make it a wedge issue by making this bill overly broad and ambiguous,” he said, repeating concerns about the bill that his party has been pushing for months.
In a tweet Wednesday responding to the pushback over what the Senate didn’t pass, Plett said “on the eve of a risky election that only they want,” Trudeau is “playing politics in the Senate.”
“The legislative agenda is the responsibility of the gov’t” he said.
While Bill C-10, the contentious Broadcasting Act bill, has also been held up at committee stage, there was widespread support across groups in the Senate to dedicate a more fulsome study to the questions over free speech and the regulation of users’ content, in the fall.
In rejecting calls from Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault to fast-track it, Senators have spoken about how “imperative” it is for the Senate to hear from those who this bill will impact directly and assess for themselves the effects of the proposed legislation. However, at this point the earliest that the committee is expected to resume study of Bill C-10 would be the week before the House is scheduled to resume in September, if an election isn’t called.
Trudeau said Wednesday that his government is now in talks with the Senate leadership to see what could be done to continue their work over the summer.
NEW YORK (AP) — In a new video posted early Election Day, Beyoncé channels Pamela Anderson in the television program “Baywatch” – red one-piece swimsuit and all – and asks viewers to vote.
In the two-and-a-half-minute clip, set to most of “Bodyguard,” a four-minute cut from her 2024 country album “Cowboy Carter,” Beyoncé cosplays as Anderson’s character before concluding with a simple message, written in white text: “Happy Beylloween,” followed by “Vote.”
At a rally for Donald Trump in Pittsburgh on Monday night, the former president spoke dismissively about Beyoncé’s appearance at a Kamala Harris rally in Houston in October, drawing boos for the megastar from his supporters.
“Beyoncé would come in. Everyone’s expecting a couple of songs. There were no songs. There was no happiness,” Trump said.
She did not perform — unlike in 2016, when she performed at a presidential campaign rally for Hillary Clinton in Cleveland – but she endorsed Harris and gave a moving speech, initially joined onstage by her Destiny’s Child bandmate Kelly Rowland.
“I’m not here as a celebrity, I’m not here as a politician. I’m here as a mother,” Beyoncé said.
“A mother who cares deeply about the world my children and all of our children live in, a world where we have the freedom to control our bodies, a world where we’re not divided,” she said at the rally in Houston, her hometown.
“Imagine our daughters growing up seeing what’s possible with no ceilings, no limitations,” she continued. “We must vote, and we need you.”
Harris used the song in July during her first official public appearance as a presidential candidate at her campaign headquarters in Delaware. That same month, Beyoncé’s mother, Tina Knowles, publicly endorsed Harris for president.
Beyoncé gave permission to Harris to use the song, a campaign official who was granted anonymity to discuss private campaign operations confirmed to The Associated Press.
Outside of sports and a “Cold front coming down from Canada,” American news media only report on Canadian events that they believe are, or will be, influential to the US. Therefore, when Justin Trudeau’s announcement, having finally read the room, that Canada will be reducing the number of permanent residents admitted by more than 20 percent and temporary residents like skilled workers and college students will be cut by more than half made news south of the border, I knew the American media felt Trudeau’s about-face on immigration was newsworthy because many Americans would relate to Trudeau realizing Canada was accepting more immigrants than it could manage and are hoping their next POTUS will follow Trudeau’s playbook.
Canada, with lots of space and lacking convenient geographical ways for illegal immigrants to enter the country, though still many do, has a global reputation for being incredibly accepting of immigrants. On the surface, Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver appear to be multicultural havens. However, as the saying goes, “Too much of a good thing is never good,” resulting in a sharp rise in anti-immigrant sentiment, which you can almost taste in the air. A growing number of Canadians, regardless of their political affiliation, are blaming recent immigrants for causing the housing affordability crises, inflation, rise in crime and unemployment/stagnant wages.
Throughout history, populations have engulfed themselves in a tribal frenzy, a psychological state where people identify strongly with their own group, often leading to a ‘us versus them’ mentality. This has led to quick shifts from complacency to panic and finger-pointing at groups outside their tribe, a phenomenon that is not unique to any particular culture or time period.
My take on why the American news media found Trudeau’s blatantly obvious attempt to save his political career, balancing appeasement between the pitchfork crowd, who want a halt to immigration until Canada gets its house in order, and immigrant voters, who traditionally vote Liberal, newsworthy; the American news media, as do I, believe immigration fatigue is why Kamala Harris is going to lose on November 5th.
Because they frequently get the outcome wrong, I don’t take polls seriously. According to polls in 2014, Tim Hudak’s Progressive Conservatives and Kathleen Wynne’s Liberals were in a dead heat in Ontario, yet Wynne won with more than twice as many seats. In the 2018 Quebec election, most polls had the Coalition Avenir Québec with a 1-to-5-point lead over the governing Liberals. The result: The Coalition Avenir Québec enjoyed a landslide victory, winning 74 of 125 seats. Then there’s how the 2016 US election polls showing Donald Trump didn’t have a chance of winning against Hillary Clinton were ridiculously way off, highlighting the importance of the election day poll and, applicable in this election as it was in 2016, not to discount ‘shy Trump supporters;’ voters who support Trump but are hesitant to express their views publicly due to social or political pressure.
My distrust in polls aside, polls indicate Harris is leading by a few points. One would think that Trump’s many over-the-top shenanigans, which would be entertaining were he not the POTUS or again seeking the Oval Office, would have him far down in the polls. Trump is toe-to-toe with Harris in the polls because his approach to the economy—middle-class Americans are nostalgic for the relatively strong economic performance during Trump’s first three years in office—and immigration, which Americans are hyper-focused on right now, appeals to many Americans. In his quest to win votes, Trump is doing what anyone seeking political office needs to do: telling the people what they want to hear, strategically using populism—populism that serves your best interests is good populism—to evoke emotional responses. Harris isn’t doing herself any favours, nor moving voters, by going the “But, but… the orange man is bad!” route, while Trump cultivates support from “weird” marginal voting groups.
To Harris’s credit, things could have fallen apart when Biden abruptly stepped aside. Instead, Harris quickly clinched the nomination and had a strong first few weeks, erasing the deficit Biden had given her. The Democratic convention was a success, as was her acceptance speech. Her performance at the September 10th debate with Donald Trump was first-rate.
Harris’ Achilles heel is she’s now making promises she could have made and implemented while VP, making immigration and the economy Harris’ liabilities, especially since she’s been sitting next to Biden, watching the US turn into the circus it has become. These liabilities, basically her only liabilities, negate her stance on abortion, democracy, healthcare, a long-winning issue for Democrats, and Trump’s character. All Harris has offered voters is “feel-good vibes” over substance. In contrast, Trump offers the tangible political tornado (read: steamroll the problems Americans are facing) many Americans seek. With Trump, there’s no doubt that change, admittedly in a messy fashion, will happen. If enough Americans believe the changes he’ll implement will benefit them and their country…
The case against Harris on immigration, at a time when there’s a huge global backlash to immigration, even as the American news media are pointing out, in famously immigrant-friendly Canada, is relatively straightforward: During the first three years of the Biden-Harris administration, illegal Southern border crossings increased significantly.
The words illegal immigration, to put it mildly, irks most Americans. On the legal immigration front, according to Forbes, most billion-dollar startups were founded by immigrants. Google, Microsoft, and Oracle, to name three, have immigrants as CEOs. Immigrants, with tech skills and an entrepreneurial thirst, have kept America leading the world. I like to think that Americans and Canadians understand the best immigration policy is to strategically let enough of these immigrants in who’ll increase GDP and tax base and not rely on social programs. In other words, Americans and Canadians, and arguably citizens of European countries, expect their governments to be more strategic about immigration.
The days of the words on a bronze plaque mounted inside the Statue of Liberty pedestal’s lower level, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free…” are no longer tolerated. Americans only want immigrants who’ll benefit America.
Does Trump demagogue the immigration issue with xenophobic and racist tropes, many of which are outright lies, such as claiming Haitian immigrants in Ohio are abducting and eating pets? Absolutely. However, such unhinged talk signals to Americans who are worried about the steady influx of illegal immigrants into their country that Trump can handle immigration so that it’s beneficial to the country as opposed to being an issue of economic stress.
In many ways, if polls are to be believed, Harris is paying the price for Biden and her lax policies early in their term. Yes, stimulus spending quickly rebuilt the job market, but at the cost of higher inflation. Loosen border policies at a time when anti-immigrant sentiment was increasing was a gross miscalculation, much like Trudeau’s immigration quota increase, and Biden indulging himself in running for re-election should never have happened.
If Trump wins, Democrats will proclaim that everyone is sexist, racist and misogynous, not to mention a likely White Supremacist, and for good measure, they’ll beat the “voter suppression” button. If Harris wins, Trump supporters will repeat voter fraud—since July, Elon Musk has tweeted on Twitter at least 22 times about voters being “imported” from abroad—being widespread.
Regardless of who wins tomorrow, Americans need to cool down; and give the divisive rhetoric a long overdue break. The right to an opinion belongs to everyone. Someone whose opinion differs from yours is not by default sexist, racist, a fascist or anything else; they simply disagree with you. Americans adopting the respectful mindset to agree to disagree would be the best thing they could do for the United States of America.
PHOENIX (AP) — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent proponent of debunked public health claims whom Donald Trump has promised to put in charge of health initiatives, said Saturday that Trump would push to remove fluoride from drinking water on his first day in office if elected president.
Fluoride strengthens teeth and reduces cavities by replacing minerals lost during normal wear and tear, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The addition of low levels of fluoride to drinking water has long been considered one of the greatest public health achievements of the last century.
Kennedy made the declaration Saturday on the social media platform X alongside a variety of claims about the heath effects of fluoride.
“On January 20, the Trump White House will advise all U.S. water systems to remove fluoride from public water,” Kennedy wrote. Trump and his wife, Melania Trump, “want to Make America Healthy Again,” he added, repeating a phrase Trump often uses and links to Kennedy.
Trump told NBC News on Sunday that he had not spoken to Kennedy about fluoride yet, “but it sounds OK to me. You know it’s possible.”
The former president declined to say whether he would seek a Cabinet role for Kennedy, a job that would require Senate confirmation, but added, “He’s going to have a big role in the administration.”
Asked whether banning certain vaccines would be on the table, Trump said he would talk to Kennedy and others about that. Trump described Kennedy as “a very talented guy and has strong views.”
The sudden and unexpected weekend social media post evoked the chaotic policymaking that defined Trump’s White House tenure, when he would issue policy declarations on Twitter at virtually all hours. It also underscored the concerns many experts have about Kennedy, who has long promoted debunked theories about vaccine safety, having influence over U.S. public health.
In 1950, federal officials endorsed water fluoridation to prevent tooth decay, and continued to promote it even after fluoride toothpaste brands hit the market several years later. Though fluoride can come from a number of sources, drinking water is the main source for Americans, researchers say.
Officials lowered their recommendation for drinking water fluoride levels in 2015 to address a tooth condition called fluorosis, that can cause splotches on teeth and was becoming more common in U.S. kids.
In August, a federal agency determined “with moderate confidence” that there is a link between higher levels of fluoride exposure and lower IQ in kids. The National Toxicology Program based its conclusion on studies involving fluoride levels at about twice the recommended limit for drinking water.
A federal judge later cited that study in ordering the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to further regulate fluoride in drinking water. U.S. District Judge Edward Chen cautioned that it’s not certain that the amount of fluoride typically added to water is causing lower IQ in kids, but he concluded that mounting research points to an unreasonable risk that it could be. He ordered the EPA to take steps to lower that risk, but didn’t say what those measures should be.
In his X post Saturday, Kennedy tagged Michael Connett, the lead attorney representing the plaintiff in that lawsuit, the environmental advocacy group Food & Water Watch.
Kennedy’s anti-vaccine organization has a lawsuit pending against news organizations including The Associated Press, accusing them of violating antitrust laws by taking action to identify misinformation, including about COVID-19 and COVID-19 vaccines. Kennedy is on leave from the group but is listed as one of its attorneys in the lawsuit.
What role Kennedy might hold if Trump wins on Tuesday remains unclear. Kennedy recently told NewsNation that Trump asked him to “reorganize” agencies including the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration and some agencies under the Department of Agriculture.
But for now, the former independent presidential candidate has become one of Trump’s top surrogates. Trump frequently mentions having the support of Kennedy, a scion of a Democratic dynasty and the son of former Attorney General Robert Kennedy and nephew of President John F. Kennedy.
Kennedy traveled with Trump Friday and spoke at his rallies in Michigan and Wisconsin.
Trump said Saturday that he told Kennedy: “You can work on food, you can work on anything you want” except oil policy.
“He wants health, he wants women’s health, he wants men’s health, he wants kids, he wants everything,” Trump added.
