They were full of praise for Paul Martin Jr. tonight, those Liberals gathering in Montreal to pick his successor were. Eleven months of staying out of sight following his government's defeat to the Conservatives Paul Martin reappeared to say good-bye. With grace and eloquence he thanked Liberals, and paid tribute to his still bitter predecessor Jean Chretien, who was undoubtedly deliberately avoiding the love-in. What a grouch. It only proves that Paul Martin is a far better man. 

It's a bittersweet end to a political career that held so much promise for so many years. Martin cultivated respect and a powerful political machine as he turned the nation's treasury from a spiralling $38 billion deficit situation in 1993, to surplus in the early days of the new millenium. Years of his rather conservative fiscal measures could very well have empowered the Chretien government and its back to back majorities by appealing to those who thought the Mulroney government had effectively controlled spending and deficits. Boy, were we ever fooled.

When he finally got to become Prime Minister he proved to be a man of good intentions, prepared to reward Canadians for a decade of fiscal prudence. There were accords signed with natives, a national child care policy in place, and admirable efforts underway to help lift the poorest of the poor out of poverty. Unfortunately for Martin, the stink left over from Chretien and the sponsorship scandal fogged everything up, leaving Martin to preside over a governing party which had lost the trust of the electorate.

Paul Martin was fun to caricature and I've got a big gallery of editorial cartoons which chronicles his time in politics to show for it. I know he admires satire directed at himself, having sold several originals to him over the years. I never met him, but I got pretty close to him during the election. Once, while I was in Ottawa I paid a visit to his House of Commons office while he was Finance Minister to drop off an original. He wasn't there but his assistant allowed me and my wife to hang out in his office. So long Paul.

Last month I drew a cartoon which compared ex-MP Stan Keyes' appointment as President of the Canadian Payday Loan Association to Muhummad Yunnus, Nobel Peace Prize winner who pioneered microcredit loans to the world's most poverty stricken. A comment was left yesterday under my blog entry concerning the cartoon from someone going by the name... yep... Stan Keyes. I don't know if it is in fact from the ex Liberal Martinite cabinet minister, but it sure sounds like him:

Graeme MacKay does not know me. He has never taken the time to speak with me. He has broken the first rule of journalism and made assumptions. He has not done his homework on the Canadian Payday Loan Association. Graeme MacKay passes judgement, attacks then runs and hides. Pretty shameful.

I know he was pretty p-o'd after the cartoon ran. Complaints by Keyes were fired off to my boss, and he was offered the opportunity to defend Payday loans through an Spectator Op-Ed piece which has yet to be delivered and printed. Looking forward to reading it, Mr. Keyes!

In other news, local campaign scrutiny activist Joanna Chapman writes in that she's a fan of my cartoons (at the bottom of the entry.)

 

It always happens... I take off for a few days and a huge story drops begging for mass punditry and editorial cartoons. Just as I'm starting a long Thanksgiving weekend with my wife's family in the U.S. I hear the news that Stephen Harper drops a proposal before Parliament which would recognize Quebec as a nation within Canada. Then, the radio reception fades and I don't hear about the story until I'm on my way back home 5 days later. (The U.S. media took no notice of this Quebec as a nation news from what I heard).

So as Canada pondered its future in what I thought would become a new constitutional crisis I decided to shut out all access to the goings-on via the Internet and concentrate on personal issues: drinking beer, eating turkey, shopping for xmas gifts for the kids, dining out with my wife, attending a bowling birthday party for my 10 year old niece, going to see Borat with my brother inlaw, and capping everything off with more brown pops before heading home.

Much to my surprise was the speed in which things would be decided. All day today the motion has been debated, and despite a few exciting bits such as the resignation of a conservative cabinet minister, the proposal is to be voted on tonight, and it's expected to be supported by all parties, including the Liberals, and including the Bloc Quebecois. Getting those two to agree on something so divisive as the old "distinct society" issue is monumental. Pierre Trudeau ought to be rolling in his grave as the Toronto Star's Patrick Corrigan illustrated.

I guess this all came about after Gilles Duceppe put the motion before the house that declared "Quebec a nation" without the additional "within a united Canada" which was added by the Conservatives in their own motion. Am I right? If so, then that answered my question as to why this all of a sudden came about. Dolts calling into radio talk shows gave me the wrong impression Harper just pulled this one out of his a$$. (Actually, Harper's put a lot of thought into Canadian federalism than a lot of people know.) In fact, this recent 'Quebec as a Nation' thing was started by the Bloc Quebecois. The Bloc's motion was probably inspired by Michael Ignatieff's "Quebec is a nation" comments last month, designed to play a bit of cheap politics just on the eve of the Liberal's leadership vote.

If tonight's vote does in fact end this brief discussion on Canadian unity then I think Harper may have pulled off a brilliant political maneuvre as a simple response to the proposals raised by the Bloc Quebecois and Michael Ignatieff. I really don't think anyone has an appetite to debate a largely symbolic recognition of status proposal, not now anyway.

* * * Update, Nov. 29 * * *

A little late but at least I drew something reflecting the Quebec is a nation thing:

Now I'm just wondering what's going to happen the next time I take a couple of days off.

I've got inlaws down here, don't you know.

This cartoon regarding the passing of a NDP motion in Parliament to give the last surviving veteran of the First World War a state funeral caused a bit of a stir. Here's some feedback:

First a letter from a local reader of the Spec:

A not so favourable response following its printing in the Halifax Chronicle-Herald:

And my defence to one of the emails sent by people conveying their discomfort:

I think the whole state funeral discussion took on a macabre tone, but I decided I wasn't going to ignore it. I mean, here we are with the last 3 soldiers standing (actually 2 since one dropped out because he's live in the U.S. since 1924) and it has taken on this contest feel as to who's going to win the privilege of a state funeral. I'm just surprised that it's been made into this big public news event. Surely, they (the Dominion Institute) or Veteran's Affairs could've raised the issue once we were down to the last veteran. With Jack Layton and the NDP sponsoring this as a bill, I just saw it as blatant political opportunism. They know they need to patch up things with the military, keeping in mind their cut and run policies, but especially after some in the NDP accused our soldiers in Afghanistan as "terrorists". Maybe I'm not giving the NDP credit when it's due, but I don't buy that this was just a motion to "collectively celebrate the sacrifice of all WWI veterans". There was more to it in terms of scoring political points for the NDP. It was smart, because who's going to argue in the House of Commons not to have a state funeral for the last veteran?