Above: Watch the full broadcast of The West Block on Sunday, December 15, 2013. Hosted by Tom Clark.
THE WEST BLOCK
Episode 15, Season 3
Sunday, December 15, 2013
Host: Tom Clark
Guest Interviews: John Baird, Vladimir Lapshin, Hugh Segal,
Elizabeth May, Andrew Scheer
Location: Ottawa
***Please check against delivery***
Tom Clark:
On this Sunday morning there are just ten days until Christmas but Santa’s got bigger problems on his hands. Old Saint Nick is caught in a tug of war over his own house. Who really owns the North Pole? Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is here and so are the Russians.
And a permanent fixture in Canadian politics takes a bow; Senator Hugh Segal on the state of Canadian politics and a possible cure.
Plus a rare look inside the office of the Speaker of the House of Commons; Andrew Scheer on MP’s, politics, his kids and what they all have in common.
I’m Tom Clark. It is Sunday, December the 15th and you are in The West Block.
Well one man you would think is safe from politics is Santa Claus but he is right in the middle of it. As countries, including Canada claim ownership of the North Pole. To explain, here it is your weekly West Block Primer:
Twas at the North Pole, two weeks before Christmas.
With presents to make and lists to sort,
When what should appear to Santa’s surprise but a new and shiny Canadian passport.
And before he knew what to do,
One arrived from Russia and Denmark too.
If presents weren’t delivered, Santa knew who to blame.
It was all those countries making their claim.
Deep down Santa knew Christmas would never be the same.
On Canada, and Russia and Denmark too.
And politicians who do what politicians do.
Paul Calandra
You know that the Liberals don’t think that the North Pole or Santa Claus live in Canada. We do. We’re going to make sure that we protect that Mr. Speaker, as best we can.
Tom Clark:
Back to the pole with Santa in a flash,
It’s about the resources and all that cash.
Oil and gas, minerals and fish,
Every country can dream and wish.
We Canadians just recently laid claim to this spot.
No science to prove it but that’s not a stop.
The ocean floor, in ten years we didn’t map it,
So here’s how John Baird decided to wrap it.
John Baird:
Ah listen, they, I think in many respects you could say, we ran out of time.
Tom Clark:
Old Mother Russia, ourselves and the Danes,
Are convinced by the legitimacy of our claims.
But we haven’t heard from the US, Norway or China,
Which could make our bid look rather minor.
It’s a decade or more to decide this whole matter.
Meantime, spare a thought for the plight of old Santa.
Well joining me now to talk more about this is Canada’s Foreign Minister John Baird. Mr. Baird thanks very much for being here.
You admitted in the press conference when you were talking about our claim to the North Pole that we’re a little bit late to the game. How is it that we spent ten years and $200 million dollars and somehow forgot to map the North Pole for our scientific evidence?
John Baird:
But we did an expansive mapping of a big chunk of the Arctic. Where we fell a little short was on Lomonosov Ridge. We had other’s handiwork but not Canadian science, Canadian mapping. And I thought, you know listen before this goes forward, let’s take the time to get it right. This is not a race. It’s not a contest, on how fast we can go. In any event, the UN Commission won’t be able to even look at our submission for several years. So we said, let’s put a partial submission in and take the time to do the science.
Tom Clark:
You know when we made that claim Vladimir Putin reacted pretty quickly. He talked about Russia putting a greater priority on moving military assets, Russian military assets into the Arctic. Earlier today I had a chance to speak with what the chief economic councillor at the Russian Embassy here in Ottawa. Take a listen to what he had to say:
Vladimir Lapshin:
There is military potential of Russia in the Arctic of course. There are nuclear submarines there, so it’s natural to protect this potential but it has nothing to do with the claims and with the potential confrontation with other Arctic countries.
Tom Clark:
So you’re saying that the Russian military, if it moves in greater numbers into the Arctic would be there strictly for peaceful purposes?
Vladimir Lapshin:
Of course, of course. It’s a civil right to protect the national defense and that’s part of our program.
Tom Clark:
Do you buy what he’s selling?
John Baird:
Well listen, what we don’t need is more provocative rhetoric to raise the temperature. I think Stephen Harper and our government have made Arctic sovereignty a big issue for the last eight years. Obviously, we want to work within the international process, put a submission forward that represents the biggest and most expansive claim that we can possibly make. At the end of the day, these decisions will at the end of the day be done diplomatically and I have a lot of confidence that what the countries like Denmark, Canada, the United States and others can work cooperatively and come to a decision. What we want to do is assert our sovereignty as Canadians would expect us to the greatest extent we possibly can.
Tom Clark:
Well I mean if they’re increasing their military so are we in a sense. I mean we talk about increasing the Canadian military presence in the Arctic. Are we getting to the point where we’re hitting a danger line of militarizing the Arctic beyond what any of us want?
John Baird:
Well I’ve got news for you, Russians been very active in the far north for a long, long time. You’ll recall almost ten years ago they put a Russian flag underneath the water at the North Pole, so they’ve been up there for a long time. I think what we need to do is work within the commission on the continental shelf, work bilaterally and exert the sovereignty, the greatest sovereignty we possibly can over the far north. That’s exactly what Stephen Harper ran on back in 2005-2006. That’s exactly what we’re doing today.
Tom Clark:
I want to take you to another part of the world. There is a very pressing issue in the Central African Republic right now. 1,600 French troops are in there. There were reports last week alone, 500 people were killed in sectarian violence in that country; a lot of worry about it. Are we as a country going to be getting involved in the situation there?
John Baird:
The answer is yes. Obviously we are deeply concerned about the sectarian violence; Muslim against Christian, Christian against Muslim. Religious freedom is one of the cornerstones of our foreign policy. What we committed to do is to provide $5 million dollars to the international fund to support the African union led mission which is working with the French. Canada is a wealthy country. We can participate. We can do our share and we’re announcing that today.
Tom Clark:
How dangerous is that situation, I mean some have said that it’s got shades of Rwanda all over it, are we staring at a potential massacre in that country.
John Baird:
You know, we’ve seen significant casualties already, we’ve seen significant violence, and fear. and intimidation. What we want to do is work constructively with the African Union, with the French and others, to ensure that things don’t continually deteriorate so that we don’t see something like we did regrettably in Rwanda some time ago.
Tom Clark:
Might we supply our C17 that massive military lift capacity that we have as we did in Mali?
John Baird:
There’s been no request from the French and we don’t anticipate one. We’ve got those resources obviously deployed right now to the Philippines where they’ve been providing much needed aid in the aftermath of the natural disaster there.
Tom Clark:
John Baird, Canada’s foreign minister, thanks very much for dropping in this morning. I appreciate your time.
John Baird:
Great to be with you.
Tom Clark:
Well coming up, a decade’s long political career coming to an end. Conservative Senator Hugh Segal is stepping down from the Red Chamber and we hear what’s next for him.
And then, a rare interview with the man whose job it is to keep 308 MP’s in line. How does he do it? Well it helps that he has kids. Stay with us.
Break
Tom Clark:
Welcome back. Well whether the Senate scandal is to blame or not, the reality is that three Conservative senators have resigned in just the last few weeks. One of them, Hugh Segal insists it wasn’t the scandal but rather an offer that he couldn’t refuse. After four decades in Canadian politics, Segal is stepping aside to become the next Master of Massey College at the University of Toronto. Segal ran for elected office often but made his mark as the confidant to premiers and prime ministers and in the process he emerged as one of the most respected voices on the political stage.
Joining me now from Kingston, Ontario is Senator Hugh Segal, and Hugh, great to have you on the show again. I wanted to use your experience. You’ve been around political and public life virtually all of your life. When you reflect back on it, are we more dysfunctional today as a democracy or our democratic institutions more dysfunctional than they have been in the past? What’s your take on that?
Hugh Segal:
No I don’t think so Tom. I think in our digital rapid response world, I think we now are part of a generation who always thinks that what they’re going through is tougher than what prior generations going through but I’m afraid I’m chronologically advanced enough to remember the Diefenbaker- Pearson years which were seen to be, Mr. Pearson never having had a majority, although he made great progress on so many issues with a minority. They seem to be very, very difficult. There were huge battles over alleging spy scandals and other issues; alleged people tied to the Mafia working in ministers’ offices. It was very tough and very difficult and the level of debate was pretty dysfunctional which is why people were relieved when both parties went to new leaders in both Mr. Stanfield and Mr. Trudeau. So, I don’t think our period of time is worse. I think the cycle however, of what you do in the world of news and media coverage is much more rapid and much more intense. I don’t know that it’s made it more substantial or more meaningful but all the noise does create a sense of more difficulty than perhaps there really is.
Tom Clark:
But doesn’t it create something else Hugh and that is that the need for control if you are in power, and this has been one of the great criticisms of the current government, is the enormous amount of control it exerts over its own members and tries to exert beyond its own field. Is that in itself a problem or is that old as the hills?
Hugh Segal:
I remember writing questions when I was on Mr. Stanfield’s staff about the concentration of power in the Privy Council Office and Mr. Trudeau’s Prime Minister’s Office, and that was 35 years ago. I think one of the great illusions in government, and it’s almost a self-delusion is that of control. You know are we in control the minister says to the deputy. Yes, minister, he responds with a phrase which has become the basis of one of the great comedy series on the BBC. But in fact, in a democratic society where there are many different points of view, where the media has an important role to play, where there are many different interest groups, economic and social who are fightingfor their piece of the agenda. Nobody is ever in total control and I think it’s a mistake for governments to want to be in control or for leaders of any political affiliation to want to be totally in control. What they have to be thinking about is how can they exert the most constructive influence on events, on circumstances to produce a better country, consistent with the promises they have made and the principles which drive their political view. But being in control is a goal you can never achieve and frankly in an open and pluralist democracy, I’m not sure we want governments that are ever in total control. I think that would be a bad thing.
Tom Clark:
I’m rapidly running out of time Hugh but talk to me a little bit about your sense of our ability to attract the best and brightest in this country, to go into public service, the sort of thing that you’ve done for decades now. Whether it’s the media’s fault or whoever’s fault it is, the perception is there that this is a less than honourable professions anymore. Are you worried about that?
Hugh Segal:
I’m worried that the levels of cynicism are so high, that bright, competent, caring individuals with great skillsets when asked to be candidates for public office will say, are you nuts? Why would I subject myself to that? But that being said, it should not be easy for anybody to get elected or to win the nomination of their party. It should not be easy for any party to roll over another party. It should be difficult. It should be hard. And frankly, a level of cynicism is what drives in my view the whole notion of public accountability. And all governments from the days of Cicero on have faced that measure of cynicism and it may be more intense because of the media world in which we operate, but so is the range of influence that governments can have. So in my judgment, it’s just a weather forecast through which people who care about public life have to be prepared to manoeuvre in some way.
Tom Clark:
Hugh Segal, it’s been a pleasure to have your voice on the national stage for all these many, many years. I hope we’ll continue to hear it in the years ahead. Thank you so much.
Hugh Segal:
Thank you Tom.
Tom Clark:
Well coming up, voted the hardest working MP in the House of Commons by her colleagues, Elizabeth May is here to talk about the newest and only other member of the green caucus.
And next…
Andrew Scheer:
Order…order…
Tom Clark:
…Keeping order in the House of Commons, Andrew Scheer sits down for a rare interview and tells us how he keeps a straight face when the zingers fly.
Break
Tom Clark:
Welcome back. Well the Green Party caucus doubled in size this week when Thunder Bay MP, Bruce Hyer joined the team. Hyer was elected as a member of the NDP but he left that caucus in 2012 after being disciplined for voting with the government to scrap the long gun registry. He acknowledges that some constituents might not be happy about this move but said he’s got two years to win them over.
Well Hyer’s new party leader joins us in studio now. Elizabeth May good to have you here.
Elizabeth May:
Hi Tom.
Tom Clark:
Bruce Hyer, why should he not have to resign and run again but this time under the Green Party banner?
Elizabeth May:
I think when you get that kind of question; I always want to remind people the system of government under which we operate. And we do not have a system based on you elect a political party when you go to the polls. You’re electing your Member of Parliament and under our constitution, Members of Parliament represent their constituents. That’s the Westminster Parliamentary tradition and the problem is it’s almost as if political parties have hijacked the system to such an extent that people running for Parliament are sort of cardboard cut outs representing the leader in that riding. That’s not our system. We don’t elect a prime minister. We don’t elect parties. We elect Members of Parliament.
Tom Clark:
Right but don’t you think the voters in Thunder Bay should have a say in all of this?
Elizabeth May:
I think they should have the say to be able to know that their Members of Parliament will vote the way they want them to vote, not the way they are directed by their party leader. The whole top down discipline thing is far more anti-democratic than a Member of Parliament whose sitting as an independent deciding, I can represent my constituents well under the Green Party banner where we don’t have whipped votes, and this is just…and people laugh and say well you’re just one MP, of course you don’t have whipped votes. But I mean globally, you look around the world at the Green Party caucuses and you find that no, there is not such a thing as you have to vote the same way because you don’t check your brain at the door when you get elected.
Tom Clark:
Fair enough but let me ask you this, half of the Green Party caucus now in Canada supports the Conservative government in getting rid of the long gun registry. Are you comfortable with that?
Elizabeth May:
Sure, because half of the Green Party… all…100 percent of the Green Party caucus believes in representing our constituents. So my first allegiance as a Member of Parliament is to the voters of Saanich–Gulf Islands. My second allegiance is leader of the Green Party of Canada; doing what I can to build the party. I think under our constitution we have to rebuild those direct links between constituents and their Member of Parliament. We’re there to serve. You know it’s not this gladiatorial contest all the time between political parties; hyper-partisanship is extremely unhealthy. I think it’s one of the reasons voter turnout is going down. If you want voter turnout to go up then you have to convince your voters that you’re there to work for them, not just to be some kind of pawn on somebody else’s chess board.
Tom Clark:
I’ve got to bring this up because it’s very, very unique; 100 percent of the Green Party caucus now in Ottawa was born in Hartford, Connecticut.
Elizabeth May:
(Laughing) Isn’t that weird!
Tom Clark:
You both grew up in the United States. You moved here when you were 17. Bruce Hyer moved here when he was in the 20’s. so you’ve now you’ve got two Americans, basically…
Elizabeth May:
We were born in the same hospital. Is that not the weirdest thing? I mean what are the chances?
Tom Clark:
So does having that American experience give you a unique perspective on Canadian politics?
Elizabeth May:
Well I don’t know. I think it’s a fluke. Obviously it’s a fluke. Any minute now, I’m looking forward to doubling our caucus again, who knows. But I’m 100 percent Canadian. I didn’t maintain dual citizenship. I’ve been living…as you said, I came here with my parents as a kid so my whole adult life is as a Canadian. But there’s no question, I mean I grew up in some very volatile times in the US. My parents were active in the anti-war movement. I’m sure I’m affected by my early years in civil rights movement, anti-war movement. If nothing else, my mother raised me to be an activist but I’m 100 percent Canadian and this is my country, and I serve.
Tom Clark:
Let me ask you this and we’ve only got about a minute left, the relevance of the Green Party now, some people might say, what are you doing? You’ve got no power in the House, you’ve got no power in the committees, why not work inside one of the existing parties to push them to green alternatives and to green policies. Would you not have greater effect on the Canadian body politic if you did that?
Elizabeth May:
You know, I think that by modeling the kind of behaviour we want to see in Parliament… I stand very firmly against heckling. I put all my expenses online before anybody else. I think we can lead by example and we also believe in cooperation. So I will work with any other MPs across party lines. For instance, very strongly support the Reform Act brought forward by Conservative Michael Chong. Want to work with anybody else to get rid of the first pass the post voting system so Canadians can get the kind of government we want. I’ve seen too many friends of mine in the other parties, all of them, struggle to bring forward climate and other issues, only to be overruled to say, well not now, it’s not the flavour of the month. We’ve got to stick firmly to principle and I think by being in the House we improve democracy.
Tom Clark:
Elizabeth May, leader of a newly expanded Green Party, thank you very much for being here. I appreciate your time.
Elizabeth May:
Thank you Tom.
Tom Clark:
Well keeping the Green caucus and all caucuses in line, is the job of the Speaker of the House of Commons, Andrew Scheer. At 34, he is the youngest speaker in the history of Canada. He’s also probably the tallest. Speakers seldom speak to the media but Scheer invited The West Block to his office late last week.
Tom Clark:
Nice office.
Andrew Scheer:
Not bad.
Tom Clark:
Pretty historical too…
Tom Clark:
When he ran for the conservatives in Regina, he didn’t expect to find himself in this office – steeped as it is in tradition and non-partisanship.
Andrew Scheer in the House:
Oral questions, questions orales…
Tom Clark:
The once rocked-ribbed hyper partisan Scheer found out that he had to put away his Conservative leanings and work instead for all parties.
Andrew Scheer:
By accepting the job as Speaker you make a commitment to the House that that’s where you’ll focus on, that’s what you’ll make a priority.
Andrew Scheer in the House:
The honourable finance minister I think still has some time left, I’ll allow him to answer the questions but I do urge him to choose his words judiciously.
Tom Clark:
Do you ever get push back from your old colleagues?
Andrew Scheer:
(Laughing) There’s a great commercial on TV right now about a referee going about his day with coaches yelling in his ear and he just kind of steadfastly looks straight. There’s always a little bit of a reaction that people who don’t understand why I’ve done something or what the basis for a ruling would be, or sometimes a larger thing at play that they don’t see.
Andrew Scheer in the House:
Order, order.
Tom Clark:
Perhaps to help the process the speaker added this picture to his office… Saint Thomas Moore believe it or not the patron saint of politicians.
Andrew Scheer:
Well if there’s one group that might need a few extra intercessions it might be politicians….
Tom Mulcair in the House:
Who did the Prime Minister originally ask to give Perrin’s emails to the RCMP. Only the prime minister knows the answer.
Stephen Harper in the House:
Of course Mr. Duffy was living at a long time residence and claiming travel expenses….
Tom Clark:
In your head as you’re sitting there in the speaker’s chair and listening to the questions and answers, are you sort of scoring it as you go along? Sort of saying, that was a great question, that was a really bad answer.
Andrew Scheer:
(Laughing) You know, developing a poker face was an important part of the job really because sometimes there are great zingers and sometimes from both sides someone will say something that it’s hard not to laugh at.
Tom Clark:
His front row seat gives him a unique vantage point to judge the state of our democracy.
something that many feel is broken.
Andrew Scheer:
I think there’s always room for improvement in any institution that has so many different kinds of players and so many different objectives. It’s frustrating at times for members of the Opposition if they feel that they have a genuine right to obtain an answer or information. It’s frustrating from a government perspective to think that sometimes questions are unanswerable and that it’s more rhetorical in nature instead of substantive. That’s not unique to this parliament.
Tom Clark:
Reforming the house is one thing, but controlling it is another.
Andrew Scheer:
I try to do the kind of escalation, you know order…
Andrew Scheer in the House:
Order
Andrew Scheer:
Order
Andrew Scheer in the House:
Order
Andrew Scheer:
Sometimes you just need to let a little bit of steam out.
Andrew Scheer in the House:
Order, right now, order
Tom Clark:
Do you ever make the mistake of looking at your kids and going order, order?
Andrew Scheer:
Every once in a while the Speaker voice comes out, when I’m dealing with my children… actually it’s funny with the kids, the kids will start saying order to each other. I was driving with the kids somewhere and there was a bit of fighting in the back seat and my daughter turned around, and she’s six, she turned around and just yelled “order,” and I just smiled and said, that’s my girl.
Tom Clark:
And this is our show for today. Be sure to tune into Global National with Dawna Friesen for your political news fix throughout the week. Until next Sunday, I’m Tom Clark. Have a great week.
Comments