A sanctimonious, self deluded, hypocritical, elitist, trudeau and his entire inner circle support a lack of integrity and commitment to all Canadian citizens. When the liberals stand in the HOC and refuse to answer questions or show respect for the opposition, their leadership and failure will be the end result. This liberal government embarrasses the entire country.
Having spent much of my career in the military and federal public service, under both flavours of government, I recognize the perennial dysfunction of Ottawa. I spent years mired in it, and it’s not new in the last 8 years.
You’re suggesting we’re not taken seriously under the current regime. Seriously? The ostensibly Loyal Opposition you are still a member of is exponentially more unserious, so much so your leader was openly mocked by POTUS, the most powerful man in the planet.
I’m saddened you didn’t remain leader of the CPC and steer your party away from the populist, mobocracy-friendly, Twitter troll, anti-science, anti-everything bent it is now on.
The current regime has massive flaws, you’re right. But I hope they get re-elected, if only to keep an even less serious CPC from the levers of power.
I would just disagree with POTUS being "the most powerful man in the planet." I think it is quite obvious that he is just a puppet and under the direction of more powerful players such as the Military/Security Industrial Complex, among others.
The term populism is not only harmful, but superfluous. The term populism suggests that a certain opinion lies outside the democratic spectrum. Democracy, however, comprises a large tent in which there is room for a great many opinions.
Your use of the word unserious so takes away from the content that it makes the article almost a waste of time. I am not about to share it. I fail to understand why you didn't use more appropriate language such as "frivolous" or "ignorant", "flippant" or "neglectful". It is their attitude towards national security that is the major concern as they treat the matter as inconsequential.
In my opinion, many of these ills are largely the result of the way our country, its PM, and its governmental institutions have been structured and established. Particularly in terms of the oaths of secrecy that are taken which, unsurprisingly, set the stage for some abuses and corruption.
It doesn't take a genius to figure out why much corruption has taken place in the course of history in our nation.
When the federal Cabinet operates under the Privy Council largely in secrecy, there is bound to be occurrences of corruption and treasonous behaviours such as the current fiasco in both the Chinese interference in our elections, and the lack of proper oversight over the sordid affair.
For those unfamiliar with the Privy Council, here are some educational snippets from my post:
> [apart from his oath to the Queen (Crown)] the Prime Minister declares his oath to the Privy Council.
> The Privy Council has a broad scope of roles and activities, including advising the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, and coordinating responses the country faces – such as what we saw with the Truckers Convoy.
> It is also worth recalling that the Declaration of the Public Emergency Order was officially enacted by Order in Council number 2022-0106 on February 14th, 2022.
> Here is the text of the oath to the Prime Minister swears to members of the Privy Council:
“I, __________, do solemnly and sincerely swear (declare) that I shall be a true and faithful servant to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, as a member of Her Majesty's Privy Council for Canada. I will in all things to be treated, debated and resolved in Privy Council, faithfully, honestly and truly declare my mind and my opinion. I shall keep secret all matters committed and revealed to me in this capacity, or that shall be secretly treated of in Council. Generally, in all things I shall do as a faithful and true servant ought to do for Her Majesty. So help me God.”
Mr. O'Toole, it would be nice to get your thoughts on any of this, for you have served in a very high level position in our government, were a member of the Privy Council under PM Harper (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Privy_Council_for_Canada_(2006%E2%80%93present)) and have rubbed shoulders (or at least have had interactions) with many of its members. If I am not mistaken, you are no longer a member of the Privy Council, no longer bound to this secrecy and thus free to share your thoughts on the matter, all in the name of transparency for the Canadian constituents you have humbly served.
I think your audience here on Substack and Canadians in general would love to hear your take.
Dan - happy to comment. Again you search for some nefarious purpose of the Privy Council when that is not the case. Occam’s Razor - the simplest answer is often the right one. The Privy Council grew out of the development of responsible government and the monarch being the ceremonial head of state and relying upon the elected parliament and its executive (PM and cabinet) to make decisions in the name of the King or Queen. I remain a Privy Councillor for life but generally only active members of cabinet are brought into classified discussions. The issue of secrecy is a question worth asking. Deliberations need to be secret to ensure the most candid discussions to drive the best decisions. There are also a range of other issues - keeping intelligence sources safe, not allowing for free riders or market advantage for some people using confidential information and the fact that some decisions will take some time to implement. There are many confidences that have developed in the western world largely due to the common law. Solicitor-client. Spousal privilege. Etc. I relates to the need to provide some degrees of protection for some discussions. It is generally a very good thing. Best, Erin
Thank you for sharing this valuable information Mr. O'Toole. Much appreciated. You are right in that I am somewhat apprehensive. I am so mostly because of some of the secretive actions taken by members of the Liberal Cabinet in the last few years, particularly during the Truckers' Convoy and also particularly the secretive meetings held between our Deputy PM/Finance Minister & members of the WEF (which has been confirmed through info/access requests). I am sure many other Canadians are quite disturbed about this level of secrecy and its possible effects on policy making (e.g., agendas central to the WEF such as Climate Change / Carbon Taxes (which are grossly exaggerated and exorbitant), the Ukraine, Woke policies, etc.) Thanks again for the exchange.
An excellent perspective from a senior member of our parliament. I’m not sure what is more tragic - the incompetence, negligence of the current Liberal NDP government, or the general apathy and inaction by Canadians. Either way - our country cannot continue at this pace. Thank you Erin for continuing to be a calm logical voice of reason in a deeply disturbing era in Canadian history.
By the way, I just wanted to say that it is refreshing to see a long-time member who served in government such as yourself having created this Substack platform to share your thoughts.
While there will always be division along political stripes and ideologies along with criticism directed your way (not excluding those coming from yours truly), I once again find it refreshing that you nevertheless have the grace and courage to embrace open and honest discourse that this platform offers. Not many would be willing to do so.
So, I just wanted to express my gratitude and also hope that others who have served in various levels of government would consider joining in civil discourse with their fellow Canadians.
We need more discourse and less division. Open, honest and respectful communication enables this.
In short, this can provide a conducive means by which we can help address some of country's ills, and bring Canada back to the best country on earth.
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. How I wish you hadn’t been dumped by your party as
leader. We need thoughtful, adults like yourself leading Canada, not the goon show Poilievre and company are putting on. The Trudeau government is failing Canada when we need a serious government at a most critical time in our history. We have a government instead that is always in reactive mode, mouthing talking points ad nauseam without dealing appropriately with very significant files. Nothing is more important than maintaining our national security and sovereignty in the face of an increasingly hostile international environment where autocracies are on the rise wishing to attain hegemony over other nations. And what does our PM say in response? That Canada will never make its 2% NATO commitment when Jens Stoltenberg is stating that the 2% only now represents the floor, the bare minimum NATO members should be contributing. Having made such a dismissively outrageous comment, how can Trudeau expect our NATO partners to take Canada seriously? Heck, we can’t even fight forest fires in our own country effectively ourselves because we don’t have enough trained fire fighters and members of the military to dispatch to affected areas. Should they not be trained ahead of time instead of having to send them to Gagetown to train before they can go to Nova Scotia? By the time they get there, the fires will be under control thanks to the hard work of Nova Scotlans themselves aided by firefighters from the US and other provinces. It seems like the Trudeau government is in total meltdown. It’s only being propped up by a weakened NDP too afraid to pull the plug on Trudeau and his MPs because the NDP knows their seat count will drop and they can’t raise enough funds to fight effectively in another election. It would also be a terrible time to force an election in the midst of the ongoing scandal of Chinese interference in at least the last two before we know exactly how they interfered and how to stop them. In the meantime, I do wish Mister Poilievre and his tribe would tone down their aggressive partisan attacks and character assassinations. We need this leader to be statesman like and serious. If Trudeau remains steady in his partisan attacks and comments, Poilievre and company should not descend to his level of discourse. They must rise above it, stick to the facts and be properly informed as to the substance of those facts. Pierre Poilievre must take the briefing offered to him so that he at least knows the facts on which David Johnston is basing his decision not to call a public inquiry. Poilievre can then choose to disagree with Johnston’s assessment of the CSIS materials they both will have seen without revealing any sensitive intelligence information. He would then be able to critique the government in an intelligent, mature fashion instead of resorting to foolish schoolboy tirades based on pure conjecture and hatred for the PM.
Perhaps you can start with a serious opposition. Once we have a serious opposition we can talk about calling the country unserious.
I see that the accusation now is that the current government has not taken foreign interference serious enough.
But that is not the accusation that your party and its (unserious) leader is making. Your party is not only accusing the government of being completely incompetent in this area, but also at the same time highly competent in using foreign interference for political gain. And this accusation is thrown out repeatedly and enthusiastically without any evidence. Accusing the Prime Minister of a peacetime version of treason on the basis of exactly what? Anonymous sources that are leaking classified information?
I am sorry, I would have more respect for this article if you would call out the irresponsible behaviour of your party first. That would be a good first step to being serious.
Our party has been raising this issue for several years. I raised the inappropriate Trudeau Foundation donations in 2017/18. The fact that the heat has gone up and this is bubbling over now is due to the inaction by the government.
That is a ridiculous statement. What does the Pierre Elliott Trudeau foundation have to do with foreign interference?
How do foreign donations to a foundation that hands out scholarships interfere with our elections or system of government? It simply does not. Can you give one example how the activities of the PET foundation interfere with our elections?
I don’t want to turn this into a debate particularly because I am not sure you have followed it closely. The motivation for the donation directed by the Chinese state was to curry favour. The origin of the funds and the intention behind them was revealed in intelligence leaks and explains why the Foundation board resigned on mass. Perhaps look to their action if you think I am being too partisan. My issue years ago was that the donation was not only inappropriate, but it happened at the time the government was cancelling a monument to our fallen from Afghanistan. The donors and the foundation were looking to erect a statue to the PM’s father in Montréal when the government was walking away from the Afghanistan monument. These type of actions were all completely inappropriate and showed a lack of judgment.
I think this is a great example of unserious opposition.
So maybe this donation was an attempt to gain favour or a poor attempt at PR by the Chinese. But there is zero evidence that the Chinese made this donation at the request or suggestion by the government. Nor is there evidence that this donation influenced any decision made the government. It is not even clear if the government was aware of this donation.
Furthermore, the government does not manage the actions of the foundation. So, if you want to spend you energy holding a charitable foundation, not controlled by the government, to account, be my guest. I don’t think that is serious opposition.
And please, do you really think that the government gets involved with some statue of PET on the McGill campus (it does not) and that this is somehow related to an Afghanistan monument?
A sanctimonious, self deluded, hypocritical, elitist, trudeau and his entire inner circle support a lack of integrity and commitment to all Canadian citizens. When the liberals stand in the HOC and refuse to answer questions or show respect for the opposition, their leadership and failure will be the end result. This liberal government embarrasses the entire country.
Indeed. It's hard to refute what you say.
Having spent much of my career in the military and federal public service, under both flavours of government, I recognize the perennial dysfunction of Ottawa. I spent years mired in it, and it’s not new in the last 8 years.
You’re suggesting we’re not taken seriously under the current regime. Seriously? The ostensibly Loyal Opposition you are still a member of is exponentially more unserious, so much so your leader was openly mocked by POTUS, the most powerful man in the planet.
I’m saddened you didn’t remain leader of the CPC and steer your party away from the populist, mobocracy-friendly, Twitter troll, anti-science, anti-everything bent it is now on.
The current regime has massive flaws, you’re right. But I hope they get re-elected, if only to keep an even less serious CPC from the levers of power.
I would just disagree with POTUS being "the most powerful man in the planet." I think it is quite obvious that he is just a puppet and under the direction of more powerful players such as the Military/Security Industrial Complex, among others.
Thank you for your service to our country.
The term populism is not only harmful, but superfluous. The term populism suggests that a certain opinion lies outside the democratic spectrum. Democracy, however, comprises a large tent in which there is room for a great many opinions.
Your use of the word unserious so takes away from the content that it makes the article almost a waste of time. I am not about to share it. I fail to understand why you didn't use more appropriate language such as "frivolous" or "ignorant", "flippant" or "neglectful". It is their attitude towards national security that is the major concern as they treat the matter as inconsequential.
In my opinion, many of these ills are largely the result of the way our country, its PM, and its governmental institutions have been structured and established. Particularly in terms of the oaths of secrecy that are taken which, unsurprisingly, set the stage for some abuses and corruption.
Central to these oaths is the Oath of secrecy of the Members of the Privy Council. I have written about these in my piece Under False Authority, Under False Oaths (https://fournier.substack.com/p/under-false-authority-under-false).
It doesn't take a genius to figure out why much corruption has taken place in the course of history in our nation.
When the federal Cabinet operates under the Privy Council largely in secrecy, there is bound to be occurrences of corruption and treasonous behaviours such as the current fiasco in both the Chinese interference in our elections, and the lack of proper oversight over the sordid affair.
For those unfamiliar with the Privy Council, here are some educational snippets from my post:
> [apart from his oath to the Queen (Crown)] the Prime Minister declares his oath to the Privy Council.
> The Privy Council has a broad scope of roles and activities, including advising the Prime Minister and his Cabinet, and coordinating responses the country faces – such as what we saw with the Truckers Convoy.
https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/corporate/mandate.html
https://pm.gc.ca/en/cabinet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Privy_Council_for_Canada_(2006%E2%80%93present)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_current_members_of_the_King%27s_Privy_Council_for_Canada
> The Privy Council is supposed to offer transparency to the Canadian public, as part of their mandate is to ‘foster an accountable Public Service’.
https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/corporate/transparency.html
https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/corporate/mandate.html
> Arguably, the Orders is Council division can also be secretive and thus a possible breeding ground for secretive orders and mandates.
https://www.canada.ca/en/privy-council/services/orders-in-council.html?lang=en
> It is also worth recalling that the Declaration of the Public Emergency Order was officially enacted by Order in Council number 2022-0106 on February 14th, 2022.
https://orders-in-council.canada.ca/attachment.php?attach=41560&lang=en
> Here is the text of the oath to the Prime Minister swears to members of the Privy Council:
“I, __________, do solemnly and sincerely swear (declare) that I shall be a true and faithful servant to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, as a member of Her Majesty's Privy Council for Canada. I will in all things to be treated, debated and resolved in Privy Council, faithfully, honestly and truly declare my mind and my opinion. I shall keep secret all matters committed and revealed to me in this capacity, or that shall be secretly treated of in Council. Generally, in all things I shall do as a faithful and true servant ought to do for Her Majesty. So help me God.”
Mr. O'Toole, it would be nice to get your thoughts on any of this, for you have served in a very high level position in our government, were a member of the Privy Council under PM Harper (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_members_of_the_Privy_Council_for_Canada_(2006%E2%80%93present)) and have rubbed shoulders (or at least have had interactions) with many of its members. If I am not mistaken, you are no longer a member of the Privy Council, no longer bound to this secrecy and thus free to share your thoughts on the matter, all in the name of transparency for the Canadian constituents you have humbly served.
I think your audience here on Substack and Canadians in general would love to hear your take.
Thank you again for your service to our country.
Respectfully,
Dan - happy to comment. Again you search for some nefarious purpose of the Privy Council when that is not the case. Occam’s Razor - the simplest answer is often the right one. The Privy Council grew out of the development of responsible government and the monarch being the ceremonial head of state and relying upon the elected parliament and its executive (PM and cabinet) to make decisions in the name of the King or Queen. I remain a Privy Councillor for life but generally only active members of cabinet are brought into classified discussions. The issue of secrecy is a question worth asking. Deliberations need to be secret to ensure the most candid discussions to drive the best decisions. There are also a range of other issues - keeping intelligence sources safe, not allowing for free riders or market advantage for some people using confidential information and the fact that some decisions will take some time to implement. There are many confidences that have developed in the western world largely due to the common law. Solicitor-client. Spousal privilege. Etc. I relates to the need to provide some degrees of protection for some discussions. It is generally a very good thing. Best, Erin
Thank you for sharing this valuable information Mr. O'Toole. Much appreciated. You are right in that I am somewhat apprehensive. I am so mostly because of some of the secretive actions taken by members of the Liberal Cabinet in the last few years, particularly during the Truckers' Convoy and also particularly the secretive meetings held between our Deputy PM/Finance Minister & members of the WEF (which has been confirmed through info/access requests). I am sure many other Canadians are quite disturbed about this level of secrecy and its possible effects on policy making (e.g., agendas central to the WEF such as Climate Change / Carbon Taxes (which are grossly exaggerated and exorbitant), the Ukraine, Woke policies, etc.) Thanks again for the exchange.
An excellent perspective from a senior member of our parliament. I’m not sure what is more tragic - the incompetence, negligence of the current Liberal NDP government, or the general apathy and inaction by Canadians. Either way - our country cannot continue at this pace. Thank you Erin for continuing to be a calm logical voice of reason in a deeply disturbing era in Canadian history.
By the way, I just wanted to say that it is refreshing to see a long-time member who served in government such as yourself having created this Substack platform to share your thoughts.
While there will always be division along political stripes and ideologies along with criticism directed your way (not excluding those coming from yours truly), I once again find it refreshing that you nevertheless have the grace and courage to embrace open and honest discourse that this platform offers. Not many would be willing to do so.
So, I just wanted to express my gratitude and also hope that others who have served in various levels of government would consider joining in civil discourse with their fellow Canadians.
We need more discourse and less division. Open, honest and respectful communication enables this.
In short, this can provide a conducive means by which we can help address some of country's ills, and bring Canada back to the best country on earth.
So, thank you once again.
God bless.
How have the breifing protocols changed from 2008 until now? Is this a long term systematic problem?
Thank you for your thoughtful comments. How I wish you hadn’t been dumped by your party as
leader. We need thoughtful, adults like yourself leading Canada, not the goon show Poilievre and company are putting on. The Trudeau government is failing Canada when we need a serious government at a most critical time in our history. We have a government instead that is always in reactive mode, mouthing talking points ad nauseam without dealing appropriately with very significant files. Nothing is more important than maintaining our national security and sovereignty in the face of an increasingly hostile international environment where autocracies are on the rise wishing to attain hegemony over other nations. And what does our PM say in response? That Canada will never make its 2% NATO commitment when Jens Stoltenberg is stating that the 2% only now represents the floor, the bare minimum NATO members should be contributing. Having made such a dismissively outrageous comment, how can Trudeau expect our NATO partners to take Canada seriously? Heck, we can’t even fight forest fires in our own country effectively ourselves because we don’t have enough trained fire fighters and members of the military to dispatch to affected areas. Should they not be trained ahead of time instead of having to send them to Gagetown to train before they can go to Nova Scotia? By the time they get there, the fires will be under control thanks to the hard work of Nova Scotlans themselves aided by firefighters from the US and other provinces. It seems like the Trudeau government is in total meltdown. It’s only being propped up by a weakened NDP too afraid to pull the plug on Trudeau and his MPs because the NDP knows their seat count will drop and they can’t raise enough funds to fight effectively in another election. It would also be a terrible time to force an election in the midst of the ongoing scandal of Chinese interference in at least the last two before we know exactly how they interfered and how to stop them. In the meantime, I do wish Mister Poilievre and his tribe would tone down their aggressive partisan attacks and character assassinations. We need this leader to be statesman like and serious. If Trudeau remains steady in his partisan attacks and comments, Poilievre and company should not descend to his level of discourse. They must rise above it, stick to the facts and be properly informed as to the substance of those facts. Pierre Poilievre must take the briefing offered to him so that he at least knows the facts on which David Johnston is basing his decision not to call a public inquiry. Poilievre can then choose to disagree with Johnston’s assessment of the CSIS materials they both will have seen without revealing any sensitive intelligence information. He would then be able to critique the government in an intelligent, mature fashion instead of resorting to foolish schoolboy tirades based on pure conjecture and hatred for the PM.
Perhaps you can start with a serious opposition. Once we have a serious opposition we can talk about calling the country unserious.
I see that the accusation now is that the current government has not taken foreign interference serious enough.
But that is not the accusation that your party and its (unserious) leader is making. Your party is not only accusing the government of being completely incompetent in this area, but also at the same time highly competent in using foreign interference for political gain. And this accusation is thrown out repeatedly and enthusiastically without any evidence. Accusing the Prime Minister of a peacetime version of treason on the basis of exactly what? Anonymous sources that are leaking classified information?
I am sorry, I would have more respect for this article if you would call out the irresponsible behaviour of your party first. That would be a good first step to being serious.
Our party has been raising this issue for several years. I raised the inappropriate Trudeau Foundation donations in 2017/18. The fact that the heat has gone up and this is bubbling over now is due to the inaction by the government.
That is a ridiculous statement. What does the Pierre Elliott Trudeau foundation have to do with foreign interference?
How do foreign donations to a foundation that hands out scholarships interfere with our elections or system of government? It simply does not. Can you give one example how the activities of the PET foundation interfere with our elections?
I don’t want to turn this into a debate particularly because I am not sure you have followed it closely. The motivation for the donation directed by the Chinese state was to curry favour. The origin of the funds and the intention behind them was revealed in intelligence leaks and explains why the Foundation board resigned on mass. Perhaps look to their action if you think I am being too partisan. My issue years ago was that the donation was not only inappropriate, but it happened at the time the government was cancelling a monument to our fallen from Afghanistan. The donors and the foundation were looking to erect a statue to the PM’s father in Montréal when the government was walking away from the Afghanistan monument. These type of actions were all completely inappropriate and showed a lack of judgment.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-trudeau-foundation-ceo-board-resigns/
I think this is a great example of unserious opposition.
So maybe this donation was an attempt to gain favour or a poor attempt at PR by the Chinese. But there is zero evidence that the Chinese made this donation at the request or suggestion by the government. Nor is there evidence that this donation influenced any decision made the government. It is not even clear if the government was aware of this donation.
Furthermore, the government does not manage the actions of the foundation. So, if you want to spend you energy holding a charitable foundation, not controlled by the government, to account, be my guest. I don’t think that is serious opposition.
And please, do you really think that the government gets involved with some statue of PET on the McGill campus (it does not) and that this is somehow related to an Afghanistan monument?