O10 O THEGLOBEANDMAIL| SATURDAY,OCTOBER19,2019
EDITORIAL
PHILLIPCRAWLEY
PUBLISHERANDCEO
DAVIDWALMSLEY
EDITOR-IN-CHIEFO
ur national election journey of 40 days and 40
nights is almost at an end, and what a short, sur-
prising trip it’s been. So what have we learnedalong the way?
The first thing learned: A 40-day campaign isn’t longenough. No, really. The Americans go overboard, with an
election period measured in years, but Canada leans too far
in the other direction. It’s as if there’s a fear that overexpo-
sure to politics will cause the country to break out into a rash.
The truth is the opposite: It’s the lack of familiarity – voters
with politicians, and politicians with what marketing gurus
assure them is a lo-fi electorate – that breeds contempt.
Also learned: Voters need more debates – many more –and they’ve got to be better. But then anything would have
been better than the one and only official English-language
debate, which appeared to have been designed by people
who thought the point of the exercise – aside from serving as
a publicly funded opportunity for the networks to promote
their news anchors – was to ingrain a little more contempt
for politicians and the process.
Canadians deserved better. So did the leaders, and theirideas. Next time, the job should be given to the people who
produced the much better official French-language debate.
The election period may have been too short and the de-bates too few, but even so, we did learn important things
about the parties and their leaders.
We learned that Hollywood isn’t the only place guilty ofcasting a white guy as Aladdin. And we learned that Cana-
dians are forgiving. Despite politicians’ best efforts, they gen-
uinely want to vote on real issues.
Speaking of which, we learned that if Conservative LeaderAndrew Scheer becomes prime minister, he will be sworn in
while still holding United States citizenship. Maybe U.S. Pres-
ident Donald Trump, who likes to find novel ways to pres-
sure foreign leaders, could call him up and threaten to re-
lease his U.S. tax returns.
We also learned that Mr. Scheer has for two decades beenclaiming, falsely, to have been an insurance broker. Not a
doctor or an astronaut. An insurance broker. Yeah, he’s Cana-
dian.
We learned that Doug Ford must be part of Criss Angel’slatest magic trick, which involved the Premier of Ontario
vanishing for the duration of the election. That, or he was
placed in a reverse-witness-protection program: guarded
24/7 in a secure, undisclosed location in return for a promise
to not testify on behalf of the Conservative Party.
If you’d played a drinking game in which you filled a shotglass every time Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau mentioned
Mr. Ford, but emptied it back into the bottle every time Mr.
Scheer didn’t, you’d have gone 40 days in a state of perfect
sobriety. But you’d have developed carpal-tunnel syndrome
from all the pouring and un-pouring.
We learned that party platforms, a relatively recent inno-vation, are a very good thing. So is the novelty of having
them costed and reviewed by outside experts. All of the ma-
jor parties produced detailed platforms, containing real
ideas for governing and offering genuine alternatives to the
status quo. But that doesn’t mean they don’t also contain
varying degrees of imperfection.
For example, we learned the Liberal platform includes apromise to create national pharmacare, but doesn’t include
nearly enough money to fulfill the promise. In a little-no-
ticed shocker, theauthor of the Liberalgovernment’s phar-
macare roadmap admitted as much.
We learned that the NDP and the Greens have ambitiousplans, but they often just don’t add up.
And we learned, or perhaps more precisely were remind-ed, that the Conservatives don’t have a serious environmen-
tal plan. The party has settled for not so much climate-
change denial as denial of the need to do anything about it.
We also learned that identity politics took centre stage inthis election. But rather than the identitarian left’s prefer-
ence for race and gender identity, it’s Canada’s most ancient
divide that’s being felt. The Bloc Québécois, federal stan-
dard-bearer ofanciennes chicanes, has found a new spin on an
old angle, and is back from the dead.
Less than three fortnights ago, the Liberals were cruisingto a majority, and Mr. Scheer and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh
were seen to be heading for defeats of historical proportions.
We learned that a lot can change in 40 days.
Anelection
thatschooled
allofus
ADECENTPROPOSALRe This Is The Federal Election
Campaign That Decency Forgot
(Oct. 17): Columnist Gary Mason
tells us we are now witnessing the
most depressing election cam-
paign ever. I do think it’s fair to say
that we have seen a hardening of
attitudes over the past 20 years or
so, and social media has been a
major component of that. There
is more than enough evidence to
suggest that the fewer relevant
facts a person has in regard to a
given subject, the more fiercely
held their opinion on that matter
will be.
Niceness has also become a
major problem. People seem to
have gotten into the habit of tell-
ing themselves that because they
are nice, their opinions are nice –
and beyond contradiction – and
any person who disagrees with
them is by definition not nice and
deserving of abuse – which
doesn’t seem very nice.
That’s a reason to feel de-
pressed, I would say. The current
election campaign’s divisiveness
is merely symptomatic of a far
larger problem.
SteveSolomanTorontoPOBODY’SNERFECTRe The Man In The Middle (Oct.
16): For me, the most important
point in Adam Radwanski’s con-
sideration of Justin Trudeau is
this: “Canada is further along
toward addressing everything
from inequality to climate change
to reconciliation than it was four
years ago, but not as far as many
might wish.” No, it’s not perfect,
but we are moving forward with
Mr. Trudeau, which is no small
feat in these troubled times.
SusanNealeVictoriaJUSTADROPRe Indigenous Issues And The
2019 Election (Editorial, Oct. 16):
Incorporating the United Nations
Declaration on the Rights of In-
digenous Peoples into the bosom
of domestic law will, in my mind,
be the slow drip eroding Cana-
dian sovereignty. If you think mi-
nority governments are a recipe
for legislative logjam, try giving a
single group perpetual veto over
land and resources development.
HowardGreenfieldMontrealIn discussions about the United
Nations Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples, the bone
of contention is whether incorpo-
rating UNDRIP into Canadian law
will give Indigenous peoples the
power to veto resource projects. I
believe the evidence is clear that
such integration would simply
formalize the duty to consult with
Indigenous peoples.
The UNDRIP right of free, prior
and informed consent requires
that Indigenous peoples have ac-
cess to all relevant informationand enough time to make deci-
sions, based on their own forms of
decision-making, while free from
coercion. The term “veto” is not
used. If Indigenous peoples say
no to a project, the project’s pro-
ponent has the option of seeking
a judicial review, as would hap-
pen in any other similar situation.
The Truth and Reconciliation
Commission of Canada calls UN-
DRIP the framework of reconcil-
iation in the country. Those that
support the well-being of Indige-
nous peoples should fully sup-
port its legislative implementa-
tion.
ChrystalDésiletsIndigenous
rightsprogramco-ordinator,KAIROS
Canada;OttawaWRITINGTHERAILSRe Come On, Ride The Train: Why
Canada Needs A National Rail
Strategy (Oct.12): When speaking
to high-speed rail being better for
our environment than cars and
planes, it’s vital to consider the
full environmental costs. Since
high-speed rail operates most
efficiently using straight rail lines,
two processes are essential to its
implementation: high levels of
land appropriation (and subse-
quent displacement of people
and communities) and a huge
amount of construction – raised
viaducts or bore tunnels are vital
to accommodate the preferred
straight rail lines. There is also the
massive amounts of raw materi-
als: cement, steel, gravel, stone.
That’s all before any additional
construction to build or expand
stations with links to other tran-
sit, including, surely, to airports.
We already have roads, high-
ways and airports, and the envi-
ronmental costs for repairing this
existing infrastructure would be
nowhere near that of building a
high-speed rail service in Canada
EstherShannonVancouverI believe many Canadians would
like to see regular, lower-speed
passenger rail service between
many cities countrywide, rather
than a high-speed one between
our largest metropolises. With-
drawal of long-distance bus ser-
vices in the West has left many of
us without any options. Re-estab-
lishment of regular trains on the
southern prairies between Winni-
peg and Calgary, or even further
west to Kamloops,would be a
good start.
GarySouceyMedicineHatAlthough Canada is the only
Group of Seven country without
high-speed rail, we likely lead the
world in high-speed rail studies.
I’m sure we can look forward to
many more before we catch up to
the likes of, say, Uzbekistan.
TimJefferyTorontoWHATABOUTIT?Re What About Alberta (Oct. 12): Iunderstand that Albertans are
frustrated. But I’m still trying to
figure out why Albertans now
think their economic problems
are caused by Eastern Canada.
When times were good for so
long, was the boom created by
Eastern Canada? I don’t think so,
because I still have a copy of a
book titledLet the Eastern Bastards
Freeze in the Darkby Mary Janigan.
To solve this regionalism, we have
to see this East-West confronta-
tion dropped in favour of trying to
support each other.
WilliamBaldwinTorontoA few thoughts on the problems
in Alberta. First, the energy
crunch didn’t just happen over-
night – why wasn’t Alberta pre-
pared for it? Second, Alberta had a
very healthy contingency fund
during Peter Lougheed’s premier-
ship – what happened to it? Third,
I believe it’s time Albertans start-
ed paying provincial sales taxes.
And finally, with its vast open
spaces, why isn’t Alberta seriously
investigating alternative energy
sources such as solar and wind?
Alberta seems to be a signifi-
cant architect of is own economic
malaise. It should stop pointing
the finger at everyone else.
RichardBeginKelowna,B.C.Albertans seem to have swal-
lowed hook, line and sinker Jason
Kenney and Andrew Scheer’s
message that Rachel Notley and
Justin Trudeau are solely respon-
sible for the prolonged delay of
the Trans Mountain pipeline ex-
pansion. Had their predecessors
Jim Prentice and Stephen Harper
remained in power, the Federal
Court of Appeal likely would have
ruled the same way, and TMX
would be sitting pretty much
where it is now.
GeorgeHaehLethbridge,Alta.BACKSTORYRe Plot Twist: Booker Prize Jury
Defies Rules And Splits Award Be-
tween Margaret Atwood, Bernar-
dine Evaristo (Oct. 15): I sympa-
thize with the Booker Prize judges
who ended up crowning Margaret
Atwood and Bernardine Evaristo
as joint winners. In fact, this is not
Ms. Atwood’s first experience in
sharing a literary prize – an act
that she performs with grace. In
1977, she shared the limelight
when the judges of the Toronto
Book Awards were divided on the
relative claims of herLady Oracle
and Margaret Gibson Gilboord’s
The Butterfly Ward. The judges on
that occasion were Jack Granat-
stein, Beth Appeldoorn, Marian
Engel and the undersigned.
JohnRobertColomboTorontoLETTERSTOTHEEDITOR
Thesubjectwhoistrulyloyaltothechiefmagistratewillneitheradvisenorsubmittoarbitrarymeasures-Junius
LetterstotheEditorshouldbe
exclusivetoTheGlobeandMail.
Includename,addressanddaytime
phonenumber.Keeplettersunder
150words.Lettersmaybeeditedfor
lengthandclarity.E-mail:
[email protected]SINCLAIRSTEWART
DEPUTYEDITOR
CHRISTINEBROUSSEAU
ASSISTANTMANAGINGEDITOR,NEWS
DEREKDECLOET
EXECUTIVEEDITOR
EDITOR,REPORTONBUSINESS
SHAWNARICHER
ASSISTANTMANAGINGEDITOR,
FEATURESANDSPORTSANGELAPACIENZA
MANAGINGEDITOR,EXPERIENCE
GARYSALEWICZ
ASSISTANTMANAGINGEDITOR,EXPERIENCEDENNISCHOQUETTE
HEADOFENTERPRISE
TONYKELLER
EDITORIALPAGEEDITORSYLVIASTEAD
PUBLICEDITOR
NATASHAHASSAN
OPINIONEDITOR