Given my occasional independent streak, I've had a number of questions about recent comments from my Quebec colleague Joel Lightbound. So here are some of my thoughts.
First, I respect Joel a great deal and I'm glad he's a colleague of mine. It's probably obvious enough for those who know me, but I also think greater independence in our politics should be embraced.
Second, with respect to the substance of his message, I agree with some of the points he made and disagree with others. So let's run through some of the specifics.
He's right that we all need to stand down on divisive rhetoric. No, the Prime Minister is not the greatest threat to freedom in this country. Yes, unvaccinated Canadians are our neighbours and we should meet those with whom we disagree with compassion.
The pandemic has been frustrating for all of us, and we don't always meet the standards we set for ourselves even at the best of times (I include myself here too).
But we all need to manage our differences with respect and remember that we are trustees in the public interest.
Two related digressions:
1) it's maddening that Joel's call for less divisive rhetoric is being used by the CPC to attack and divide.
2) lines must still be drawn and we should not platform or engage the language of treason, medical experiments, Nuremberg Code, etc.
On the second substantive point, I don't take any issue with Joel's call for re-evaluating pandemic-related measures in keeping with the evidence and a cost/benefit analysis. Dr. Tam has said the same, and the government is reviewing travel rules (which should be revisited).
Now, there was also much I disagreed with in Joel's presentation. First, he, unfortunately, blended federal and provincial rules, adding to the confusion. Capacity restrictions, school closures, lockdowns - these are all provincial, and any criticisms should set the right target.
Second, the timing of the press conference was particularly challenging in light of the lawlessness in Ottawa, the Ambassador Bridge, and elsewhere across our country. The law should be enforced immediately, and we should not embolden further attacks on the rule of law.
Third, any serious criticism of government rules should acknowledge that mandates and restrictions are very different interventions. Restrictions are damaging to many aspects of our society, even as they’ve been necessary at times to save lives and protect our healthcare system. Mandates help to increase vaccination rates and they prevent future restrictions.
All of that's to say, we need to end the blockades as soon as possible. And we should be clear that federal pandemic-related measures are time-limited, and that they will be re-evaluated cautiously and in keeping with the evidence.
To close, given we all want to get back to normal as soon as we can, let's not forget that global vaccine equity is truly how we put this pandemic behind us.
To learn more about my position, you can also read this article in the CBC
You can also read more below on Twitter.