fbpx
Connect with us

Opinion

GIEDE: British Columbians must stand up to the lockdown authoritarians

“Regardless of what Dr. Henry might say, the Queen’s road shall have no tolls.”

mm

Published

on

In 2019, if someone had said the world would be shut down and locked inside by a virus from China, I’d have of laughed. In 2020, if someone said that our border with the US would be closed and Canadian citizens coerced into quarantine “hotels” at their own expense, I’d have taken away your Kool-Aid. In January 2021, if you’d said BC Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry would order the RCMP to cosplay as roguish highwaymen, I’d have you certified.

No one is laughing anymore. Summer is here in British Columbia. A quick spring melt, temperatures climbing well into the teens and beyond means RVs are being cleaned out, motorcycles insured, and campfire foods are being purchased. After the last 15 months, people are ready to get outside and imbibe in some pale ales, canoe paddles, and perfect skies. But a cloud from Victoria looms over “The Most Beautiful Place on Earth,” oddly resembling the sullen, tired face of our provincial hall monitor.

As of this week, our leaders have declared a ban on travel for anything other than work or medical care. There have been threats of spot checks both on the highway and off into campgrounds, as well as the banning of RVs from going onto BC Ferries headed for the island. It reads like a pathetic sophomore’s attempt at dystopian fiction, but it’s all too real – our constitutional rights to freely move within our own country are being openly and unapologetically infringed. Behave, because Big Bonnie is watching you.

Neither our federal nor provincial courts are known for their expedient application of the law — even on questions of serious or timely concern that require test cases. However, I’m tempted to flaunt this latest provincial decree and have it tested by our justices. Constitutional freedoms are not optional, regardless of what Section One might say. What unelected health official has the authority to say what is or is not essential travel? Was that an elective course in medical school?

I’m planning on getting married in the near future. And I already knew that it would be a “COVID-wedding.” I had mentally prepared for an empty church with my bride, priest, and perhaps a choir all streamed live to the family far away. Whatever the reception might look like, ultimately everything would be small and intimate. To be honest, that actually appealed to me as I hate the garish and irreverent actions at most weddings I’ve seen — it’s about the sacrament, not the pictures.

But the tradeoff was that I would get to show off my beloved (and she to show off me) to all our far flung family members through this summer as payment in lieu of being able to come and witness our union. At least the right people had the chance to meet the respective future spouse — at least they got to cast their vote or give their blessing as to our future together. That is the definition of essential in the faith we both hold: that the community and Holy Mother Church approves of our matrimonial intentions.

Now that’s threatened by a school marm who has the audacity to tell me what’s appropriate behaviour. I finally understand what totalitarianism is — it’s the state of life where you can concede all that is demanded — even with courtesy — and when it comes time to be given your small lot, the pittance of your birthright, even that is taken from you. The authoritarians will stop at nothing.

I for one will not be curtailing my travel plans because the people who’ve been wrong for more than a year say so. I already go on my motorbike in our fair weather to neighborhoods that aren’t mine, for reasons that are none of Big Bonnie’s business. I plan to continue interacting with my community as often as I please, and when the time comes, I will show off my beloved to all welcoming family members. I never believed this could be an act of rebellion.

I have no intentions of passing on the virus. I already observe dozens of precautions by force of habit after the year of indoctrination provided to us by nearly every media outlet on the planet. But I’ll not have my most fundamental physical freedom — to travel — restricted. There’s an ancient law which declares the Queen’s road shall have no tolls. That remains on the books, regardless of what Dr. Henry might say.

Nathan Giede is the BC Political Columnist for the Western Standard and the Host of Mountain Standard Time

Nathan Giede is the British Columbia Political Columnist & Host of Mountain Standard Time for the Western Standard. Nathan was the Right-of-Centre Columnist for the Prince George Citizen where he wrote about B.C. politics and First Nations issues. ngiede@westernstandardonline.com

Continue Reading
1 Comment

1 Comment

  1. Left Coast

    April 29, 2021 at 3:55 pm

    Dr. Bonnie, Horgan & Dix have learned absolutely nothing in the last 13 months . . . still doing the same Chinese Style Lockdowns over and over while expecting a different result.
    Einstein said that was the definition of insanity . . .

    Why not have a look around . . . What was Sweden doing & South Dakota?
    Gov De Santis of Florida said his 1 lockdown was a huge mistake . . . Florida doing just fine today, Disneyland has been open for months.

    States that eliminated the zero science Mask Mandate saw cases drop to nothing, while Mask States saw number increase . . .

    Time for this insanity to end . . . last year, if you eliminate the explosion in Drug Overdose Deaths . . . fewer people died in 2020 than in 2019. Won’t see that on the 6 oclock News on the FakeStream Media.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

SLOBODIAN: Not so quick with allegations of hate crimes

It wasn’t a fair fight, but a police investigation determined it was also not a hate crime.

mm

Published

on

On the surface, a gang of white boys piling on one black boy sure looked like it could be a hate crime.

As it turns out, there was more to the story regarding the April 16 attack in an Edmonton schoolyard.

It wasn’t a fair fight, but a police investigation determined it was also not a hate crime.

A video of the incident, during which the 14-year-old was swarmed and beaten is painful to watch.  It made local news and the “racist” incident was featured on the CBC The National.

That seven boys, all aged 14 but for one 12-year-old, attacked one boy is profoundly disturbing. Whoever stood back to video this is just as guilty as his bully buddies who kicked, punched and put the victim in a chokehold. 

Predictably, some swiftly concluded this attack was purely driven by racial hatred. The facts be damned.

They didn’t talk to the boys involved. 

But police did.

The hate crimes unit concluded this incident didn’t meet the Criminal Code criteria for a hate crime.

“There is still not sufficient evidence that this event was motivated by hate bias or prejudice toward the complainant’s race,” said Edmonton Police Service chief Dale McFee. “As such, it does not currently meet the Criminal Code threshold for a hate-motivated crime.”

During the melee one of the boys yelled out the nasty N-word. McFee rightfully acknowledged this as “highly inappropriate” but not sufficient to meet hate crime standards.

Police discovered the boys had a troubled history but didn’t elaborate.

“Our investigation currently shows this began as a consensual schoolyard fight and was part of an ongoing dispute between a group of male youths, that reportedly started last year,” said McFee.

Admittedly, McFee’s choice of the word consensual is cringeworthy considering that the victim was grossly outnumbered. McFee opened himself up to criticism and is obliged to explain why police arrived at this conclusion.

Police everywhere are working under a microscope, constantly being accused of discriminating against minorities. With budgets being slashed and calls to defund them, they can’t afford to be careless or callous. 

After hearing the results of the investigation, one anti-racism activist with A Fight For Equality insisted it was a hate crime and said charges should be laid against the boys. Essentially, this is a demand for police to ignore the Criminal Code. 

Canada cannot ever go down that slippery slope.

Other activists accused police of not getting the zero-tolerance for hate crimes message across.

What are they doing as activists to bring people with all skin colours together and repair relations in communities? How are they helping to teach their children tolerance and that beating up anyone is unacceptable? 

Knee-jerk reactions fuel division, create unwarranted fear and anger, and are grossly unfair to victims and perpetrators. To wrongly insist this was hate crime doesn’t help these boys who should be the priority. It ignores the root of why this happened and interferes with determining appropriate punishment. A problem, not honestly addressed, doesn’t get fixed.

The reaction to this incident is symptomatic of a growing Canada-wide problem.

McFee dared to say race wasn’t a factor. This is something Canadians are increasingly afraid to say out loud, even when true.

These days, people who denounce or even question accusations of race-based hate are – sometimes viciously – targeted as racist. That’s a bad thing to be. False accusations can destroy reputations. 

Race baiters, seeking to support agendas or personal biases, skillfully use this fear tactic to silence anyone who challenges potentially unfounded claims. 

We must cautiously discern between those who earnestly want unity and seek to protect victims of hate and those seeking to serve their own interests.

Yes, there are racists in Canada. 

No, Canada’s not a systematically racist country.

When Canadians learn someone has been the victim of a hate crime it tears at their hearts. They generously support activist groups who fundraise off of every incident. Ironic isn’t it? 

Moving forward, we must tread carefully on this issue of alleged systematic racism some insist permeates Canada.

Meanwhile, the definition of hate-crime victims sometimes gets confusing.

If seven black boys had attacked one white boy would anyone call it a hate crime? Or would it have been recognized for what it was? 

In today’s climate that’s an uncomfortable, but fair, question. 

Linda Slobodian is the Manitoba Political Columnist for the Western Standard.

Continue Reading

Opinion

HARDING: Maverick is poised to make gains as Conservatives turn their back on the West

“Until recently, the party said it will run candidates solely in ridings where a “split” of the vote wouldn’t elect a Liberal or New Democrat. Since O’Toole’s carbon tax flip-flop, interim party leader Jay Hill has hinted he may drop this policy and run in tighter races, seeing little difference between the Tories and Liberals on western issues.”

mm

Published

on

In the coming federal election, whenever it may be, the Conservative Party is positioning itself to lose a significant portion of its western and rural base to the upstart Maverick Party. It’s not hard to see why. 

The policies and person of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau fanned the flames of western discontent, and even independence in some quarters. Outdoing all his predecessors since Brian Mulroney, federal Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole has taken the west for granted. In a bid to win more votes in Toronto and Quebec, he has embraced a huge carbon tax with enthusiasm. It could just prove to be the most hated policy on the prairies.

Erin O’Toole’s carbon tax Petro Points plan turned some party faithful into real doubters, or downright hostile ones. Even the phrase “carbon Petro Points plan,” plainly demonstrates the mixture of a bad idea made worse by a gimmicky joke. Even Trudeau’s tax-and-give-it-back-to-you premise – however punishing – is still better than the Tory proposal. O’Toole wants to tax you, but deny he’s taxing you and leave you no recourse to recover your seized money except to make “green” government-approved expenditures. The anti-oil movement meets the nanny state, with a vengeance.

And O’Toole will actually campaign on the idea. The only previous time a major federal opposition leader openly campaigned on a carbon tax was the Stephane Dion Liberals of 2008. They had the most dismal showing in Liberal history to that date, thanks in part to Conservative attack ads that said, “Stephane Dion is not a leader,” and Harper’s comments that his carbon tax was “a tax on everything” that will “screw everybody.” The same could be said of Erin O’Toole and his carbon tax. Obviously, he must have some savvy, having won the Conservative leadership, but his about-face on the carbon tax has turned his reception from “meh” to “blech.”

A recent encounter brought home the seriousness of O’ Toole’s miscalculation for me. At the Chris Sky rally in Regina, I met a man from the Assiniboia Sask. area who told me, “A lot of people are saying they’re not voting Conservative anymore. I’ve never seen anything like it.”

If you don’t know Assiniboia, it’s got about 2,400 people and the closest place with more people, Moose Jaw, is an hour’s drive away. It’s farming and ranching all the way, though the coal-fired power plant in nearby Coronach is a big employer. 

In rural Saskatchewan, the two things heard most often in the 2019 election were: “The election is over as soon as it hits the Manitoba border” and “If Trudeau gets in again, I’m all for Western independence.”

The Maverick Party is best positioned to capitalize on that sentiment. Until recently, the party said it will run candidates solely in ridings where a “split” of the vote wouldn’t elect a Liberal or New Democrat. Since O’Toole’s carbon tax flip-flop, interim party leader Jay Hill has hinted he may drop this policy and run in tighter races, seeing little difference between the Tories and Liberals on western issues.

PPC leader Maxime Bernier gets it on many of the big western issues, but the loss of his own Quebec seat in the last election left a vacuum in the west for discontented conservatives. With no major party capable of electing MPs to champion western issues, Maverick is poised to fill that vacuum.

The late Joseph Garcea, a University of Saskatchewan political science professor who died in November, shared an important insight on the last provincial election. He said the Saskatchewan NDP had many little policy ideas, but no big idea to rally support. Similarly, the PPC has many little ideas. It’s hard to convince people to vote for change with little ideas. The Maverick Party has a big – and some would say radical idea: an independent west – whether within confederation or apart from it.

People make decisions emotionally, then justify them rationally. The Maverick Party will harness both the anger and grievance in western alienation and the hope found in western independence. The Maverick platform adds substance to the sentiment.

As a fresh party with rookie campaign teams, I’d be surprised if Maverick won any seats. However, they stand a good shot of landing plenty of second place finishes. That might be enough to make O’ Toole remember the West. If the Mavericks can do that, it will be accomplishment enough.

Lee Harding is the Saskatchewan Political Columnist for the Western Standard

Continue Reading

Opinion

MORGAN: I was a part of Kenney base. No longer

“I know who Kenney’s base was. The base hasn’t changed. Jason Kenney has.”

mm

Published

on

I was a part of Jason Kenney’s base.

Like most Albertans after 2015, I was mortified that we had managed to give the NDP a majority government due to our incessant political infighting and corruption in conservative ranks. I was eager and searching for a way to free ourselves from a provincial government that was farther to the left than Ottawa’s Liberals. I was ready to embrace pragmatism and compromise on the partisan front to ensure that Rachel Notley was a single-term premier, or as Jason Kenney put it, “one and done.”

Jason Kenney entered the Alberta political scene and offered us a plan. He showed us a path to conservative unity and he offered to lead us there. I was thrilled.

I have always respected and admired Jason Kenney. As a fiscal watchdog with the Canadian Taxpayer’s Federation, Kenney mercilessly held Ralph Klein’s feet to the fire in the 1990s on issues of spending and corporate welfare. As a Reform Party MP, Kenney took the Chretien Liberals to task on spending and corruption. Kenney deserves some of the credit for the balanced budgets that both Klein and Chretien eventually presented. It takes steady, reasonable pressure in order to get government leaders to take on tough tasks and Kenney was masterful at putting that pressure on.

As a cabinet minister in the Stephen Harper government, Jason Kenney was no less impressive. Immigration has always been a difficult file for conservative governments and as the Immigration and Citizenship Minister, Kenney made great inroads into relations with immigrant communities and was respected across the country. Kenney was no slouch in other ministerial portfolios as well and it has been long established that his parliamentary work ethic is second to none.

Because of that impressive political resume, I was confident that Kenney was the man who would bring Alberta back into being a province known for good, no-nonsense conservative governance.

I supported Kenney’s efforts to unite the Wildrose and Progressive Conservative Parties. I encouraged people to buy memberships in both parties and to vote to merge. I supported Kenney in his multiple leadership races and I supported the UCP in the 2019 Alberta election.

I know who Kenney’s base was. The base hasn’t changed. Jason Kenney has.

The Western Standard reported in an exclusive story, Premier Kenney said, in reference to Albertans who attended a rodeo south of Bowden last week, “If they are our base, I want a new base.”

I didn’t expect Premier Kenney to endorse or support the rodeo. Indeed, it was intentionally modelled to be in defiance of provincial regulations. Kenney clearly realized that the attendees of the rodeo did represent a large part of his base, and while that doesn’t obligate him to support them, it does obligate him to respect them. Kenney instead chose to insult them in public, and show contempt for them in private.

We were your base Premier Kenney, but we aren’t any longer. As for your new base, I am not sure where you expect them to come from. Rest assured, you will not be winning any love from NDP supporters no matter how much you spend or suppress individual rights.

Jason Kenney has turned into a terrible disappointment as Alberta’s premier and it is well reflected in his current support numbers. Kenney’s support among his base was slipping well before the pandemic struck. In this year of crisis however, Kenney’s support has truly evaporated. Kenney has tried to be everything to everybody, and ended up being nothing to anybody. It is a fate that befell Jim Prentice before him.

The conservative base hasn’t left Alberta. They have simply left Jason Kenney and it appears that he is just fine with that.

The base will not go back to Jason Kenney after having been abandoned and taken for granted by him though and he can’t win the next election without them.

The base will find a new home. It may be through replacing Jason Kenney within the UCP, or through a new partisan vehicle. That base may dominate in the next provincial election or we may end up with another NDP government. Time will tell.

Cory Morgan is the Alberta Political Columnist for the Western Standard and the Host of the Cory Morgan Show



Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard New Media Corp.