Archive for the The Chairman’s Corner Category

AN ICONIC TRAGEDY

On April 16, 2018   /   Blog, News, The Chairman's Corner  

The horrific bus crash that took the lives of 16 players, coaches and team personnel from a Saskatchewan Junior Hockey League team has sparked a national outpouring of grief that is nothing short of a cultural phenomenon.  Since the April 6th crash, Canadian media has been filled with stories that have acquainted readers, listeners and viewers with every detail about the Humboldt Broncos team and town and the names, lives, billets and hometowns of each and every one of the deceased and several of the injured.  The public has responded with a wide variety of tributes, from the touchingly symbolic (leaving hockey sticks outside our doors at night) to the breathtakingly tangible (just under $12 million raised to date through a record-breaking GoFundMe campaign to benefit victims and their families).  And it all seems entirely appropriate.  Sixteen people, thirteen of whom were between the ages of 16 and 21, lost their lives; another thirteen have been grievously, and is some cases, permanently injured.  It is by any measure, a massive tragedy.

Yet there is something extraordinary at work here.  The nation, and perhaps parts of the world, have been galvanized in the face of this tragedy in a way that is unprecedented.  These sixteen motor vehicle fatalities will, after all, be less than 3/4 of 1% of the motor vehicle deaths that will occur in Canada in 2018 if this is a typical year.  Even adjusted for the age of the bulk of the victims, it will still likely only account for just over 3% of motor vehicle deaths among Canadians between the ages of 16 and 24.

Even as a single tragic event, the scope and breadth of the public grief is unprecedented.  It is even greater than that which followed the Lac Magantic train crash and explosion that killed 47 people, including an identical number of victims between the ages of 16 and 21, on July 6, 2013.  It is also a far greater chorus of grief than that which greeted the September 18, 2013 collision in Ottawa of an OC Transpo bus and a train.  While the latter involved only six fatalities, the prospect of a bus colliding with a train in the middle of a city is a far more personal horror story for Canada’s largely urban population than an accident involving a coach bus at a rural intersection.

But perhaps it is exactly that distinction that is at work here.  A train rolling down a grade and exploding in a town or a bus colliding with a train at a level crossing are horrible tragedies that can happen anywhere.  A coach bus full of young hockey players from a small town heading across the Prairies to a playoff game in an unusually cold Canadian spring hit by a transport truck carrying a load of peat moss killing 16 and injuring 13 others: that is an iconic Canadian tragedy.  Gordon Lightfoot could (and might) write a song about it; Gordon Pinsent could (and might) play the wizened and wise old coach in the movie.  It is not just a tragedy; it is viewed both within Canada and abroad through a sentimental and nostalgic lens as a quintessential Canadian tragedy.

The Humboldt Broncos have shown yet again that, despite fifty years of unceasing urbanization, massive diverse immigration and American cultural imperialism, Canadian iconography endures in the hearts of its citizens and the world.

Back to Top

THE BURDENS OF PRIVILEGE

On March 15, 2018   /   Blog, The Chairman's Corner  

Much has been written recently about the necessity of confronting and reconciling legacies of privilege in Canadian society.  Just last week, posters went up in public schools in a school district in the BC Interior and at the Ontario University Institute of Technology in Oshawa asking students to reflect on their own privileged status, be it health, gender, race or sexual orientation.  Students, parents and members of the broader community were predictably outraged by the message.  However, while I would argue that students under the age of 21 are probably not the right audience for this reminder, it is not an inappropriate ask of those of my generation.  As uncomfortable as it is and as confrontational as it often feels, coming to terms with the impact of privilege in our society is long overdue.

My own life is absolutely the product of all of the privilege that has and continues to be afforded to white healthy heterosexual males.  I have seen it starkly many times.  When I was a teenager, a Black (and devoutly Christian) friend from work and I were shopping at a sports store and he was suspected and held for shoplifting simply because he was wearing an NFL jersey that was of a type sold in the store, AS WAS I.  As a young first year lawyer, I sat uncomfortably as an older client repeatedly insisted upon directing his questions to and obtaining answers from me RATHER THAN THE FAR MORE SENIOR FEMALE LAWYER THAT I WAS WITH.  And those are just two more glaring examples that fly into my mind quickly.  There have been countless other that I could list.

My only concern is with the generational fairness of how we as a society address the legacy of privilege.  The world is changing, and changing fast.  That is as it should be.  And there will be a necessary realignment of leadership in our society that will mean that those who have been the beneficiaries of privilege must be disproportionately excluded from the opportunities that were previously disproportionately bestowed upon them.  But in doing so, we must be careful to avoid creating yet another class of people who are to be unfairly excluded from opportunity on the basis of their identity.

I am 57, and have reaped the benefits of my privilege for virtually my whole career.  It is fair and appropriate that I recognize my privilege and forgo the types of late stage career leadership opportunities (politics, corporate boards) that have traditionally been extended to and claimed by people like me.  That is not to say that I will have no role in the transformation of our society.  I share my views in this blog, I mentor and encourage young people from diverse backgrounds that I come across in my work, in my not-for-profit Board work and anywhere else I find them.  But I will leave the formal leadership opportunities to others. I will make space for others, and allow the voices that are emerging to take precedence over mine. The more angry voices of those seeking change often bluntly state that it is time for people like me to shut up and stand down, and although I am often unsettled by the tone of the request, it is not an unfair expectation.

I do so because it is the right thing to do not only for society, but also because it is a generational imperative.  I have great confidence that the transformation of society that is ongoing now will rightfully negate the bulk of the privilege that my son would have historically enjoyed as a white heterosexual male.  Happily, that will not bother him; in my experience he and the vast majority of his generation reject the tribal mythologies that were so much a part of my own childhood.  The millennials will certainly not enjoy the full benefits of their historically privileged status, but if those of us who are older, who have enjoyed those benefits for at least a good portion of our lives and careers, do not step back and allow the disproportionate allocation of opportunities that are required to reorder society, it will be left to the millennials to unfairly bear this cost.  And so the cycle of righteous grievance will continue.

It is tempting both intellectually and opportunistically to believe that we can best serve the cause of the disenfranchised to use our privilege to be the leaders of the required change.  Even if that was true, and I do not think it is, too many will see that as yet another paternalistic expression of privilege.

Having said all that, I also recognize that my views are conveniently sanguine because I have already enjoyed a great run down the highway of privilege.  Those ten and twenty years younger than I are caught betwixt and between in this thesis.  For those, the correct personal strategy for reconciling privilege is less clear cut.  However, I do hope that such enlightened men in positions of power will find a just path to manage their careers in a fashion that balances their own aspirations with the demands of societal transformation and intergenerational fairness.

Back to Top

THE DISTRACTION OF MISPLACED OUTRAGE

On February 15, 2018   /   Blog, News, The Chairman's Corner  

On February 9, 2018, a Saskatchewan jury constituted in accordance with the Criminal Code of Canada acquitted farmer Gerald Stanley in the death of Colten Boushie, a 22-year old First Nations man.  The death resulted from an incident on the Stanley farm in which Mr. Boushie and three friends arrived in a disabled vehicle and attempted to start Mr. Stanley’s all-terrain vehicle before being confronted by Mr. Stanley and his son.  Mr. Stanley was charged and tried for second degree murder and the lesser included offence of manslaughter.

On the basis of the portions of the testimony of the witnesses that are not in dispute, many commentators have noted that it would be difficult to support either a finding of guilt for second degree murder or an outright acquittal in this case.   The fact that the jury nonetheless acquitted Mr. Stanley has understandably given rise to questions with respect to systemic elements of racism in the justice system, including particularly the use of peremptory challenges in the process of jury selection.

Shocked and disapproving reaction to the acquittal by the First Nations community, the broader community and the Canadian government itself has been swift.  Rallies have been held across the country, and both the Prime Minister and the Minister of Justice expressed resolve to act to address systemic issues that may have contributed to this troubling verdict.  The Boushie family arrived in Ottawa only four days after the decision, and has already met with the Prime Minister and three Cabinet ministers.  The resolve for change is undeniable.

Meanwhile, on January 26, 2016, after five years of foot dragging, jurisdictional challenges and a full throated defence by the Government of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal (“CHRT”) ruled against the federal government in a challenge brought to its chronic and undeniable underfunding of critical social services to First Nations children and families relative to the level of equivalent services provided to Canada’s non-First Nations citizenry.  Since the date of that decision, three compliance orders have been issued by the CHRT, and yet the government has still not come forward with any concrete plan to address the deficiencies detailed by the CHRT.

The government’s resolve to address the systemic issues that may have contributed to the Colten Boushie jury finding is admirable and should not be discouraged.  However, the issues to be addressed, including that of the availability and use of peremptory challenges, are complex, and have implications that can as often help as hurt victims and accused parties from minority communities seeking justice through the court system.  The solutions will not be simple, and will not be found and implemented quickly.

The CHRT ruling, on the other hand, specifies a funding formula for services that can be applied without further study and lengthy deliberation.  The finding of a court of competent jurisdiction with respect to the Canadian government’s abrogation of the human rights of child soldier Omar Khadr was sufficient to prompt a quick financial settlement in that case despite public outrage against that settlement.  It is both confounding and disappointing that the government has not found the same decisive resolve respect to the CHRT ruling.  I am certain that the First Nations’ community, and perhaps even the Boushie family itself, would agree that a far greater good could come from this tragedy and the collective frustration and goodwill that have emerged in the face of Colten Boushie’s death if the government addressed the specifics of the CHRT ruling in priority to the vagaries of jury selection mechanics.

Justice Minister and Attorney General Jody Wilson-Raybould had it right in her tweet last Friday: “As a country, we can and must do better”.

Back to Top