Silencing the Press, A Blow to Canadian Democratic Values

2024-02-22 10:00 AM

Opinion: Cammie Duyzer, Becca Bohren

In a recent gathering of the justice ministry, a disturbing compromise underscored a troubling trend in the federal government and the fragile state of freedom of expression in the country. The discussion on the table was the controversial topic of the legalization of sex work, where the Western Press overheard a discussion between the Federal Government representatives and the Albertan representatives. After some miscommunication and a shocking statement at the press conference, the Western Press issued multiple apologies directly to Alberta’s Premier and acknowledged their mistake.

However, what transpired afterwards was shocking.

The meeting witnessed an unprecedented move; one that could set a dangerous precedent for media freedom in Canada. The Western Press was singled out and asked to leave the meeting solely because their presence made Alberta's representatives uncomfortable. This act of exclusion did not extend to any other media outlet present and extended beyond the small group of representatives who initially made the mistake. This selective silencing raises grave concerns about the principles of fairness, transparency, and freedom of the press, cornerstones upon which we should hold ourselves.

The decision to exclude Western Press begs several uncomfortable questions. Does the discomfort of a single province's representatives justify the silencing of media voices? Is the government’s objectivity and impartiality as legitimate and credible as thought? And most importantly, what message does this send about the state of media freedom and democracy in Canada?

In the aftermath, we must ask ourselves what kind of society we wish to live in. Are we comfortable with a landscape where media outlets can be silenced because their presence is inconvenient to certain political interests? Or do we believe in a Canada where freedom of speech and the press are non-negotiable, where media plays an integral role in holding power to account and ensuring an informed public?

This incident should be a moment of shocking realization surrounding the validity and integrity of our governmental systems and representation. It is imperative for all stakeholders, including government officials, media organizations, and the public, to reaffirm their commitment to upholding and protecting the principles of freedom of speech and press. Let this moment be a catalyst for strengthening the foundations of Canadian democracy.

As Canadians, we must stand united in defence of these principles, for they are the very foundation upon which our society is built. The exclusion of Western Press is not just an affront to one media outlet, but a challenge to our collective values. It’s time to reassert our commitment to these values, ensuring that such breaches of democratic norms do not find a place in our diverse and vibrant democracy.

Who’s Really Running This Conference?

2024-02-22 10:00 AM

Opinion: Faryal Ansari, Ava Pierson

During the Press Conference on Day 1 of the Federal Provincial Simulation, a member of the Western Press asked a misinformed question - which was targeted towards Alberta, when it should have been directed towards the Federal Government. This question was shortly after rescinded and the member has since offered her sincere apologies, both towards the Premier and Alberta as a whole.

While we, the Wild West Press, have apologized and moved forward from this unfortunate accident, the same cannot be said for Alberta. When members of the Western Press sat in ministry meetings today, day 2 of the Fed-Prov conference, many were unjustly asked to leave. When the reporters from our Press were asked why they needed to leave, all they were told was that “they did not consent, and did not feel comfortable with [our] presence.”

This behaviour presented by Alberta and its leaders is unprofessional and undemocratic. We as the press are the voice of the people, and we are now being silenced. There is absolutely nothing respectful about shutting down an entire region's perspective over a situation that has been apologized for and clarified. If the Albertans are putting the fate of their province into a leader who cannot understand the basics of democracy, perhaps they should reconsider where their votes are going.

Hostile Alberta Overthrows the Feds, Silences Press.

2024-02-22 9:30 AM

Opinion: Faryal Ansari

This morning, upon entering the Fed-Prov conference, the Western Press was specifically kicked out of almost all ministry meetings. As Fed-Prov is an exercise in democracy, this blatantly targeted and undemocratic silencing of the Western perspective over what was a publically rectified miscommunication is incredibly disappointing. Once again the Federal Government's lack of control and assertiveness is seen in the unorganized allocation of time. An anonymous source in the First Ministers’ meeting tells us that the premier of Newfoundland and Labrador was allocated a great amount of time to talk about budget increases although the subject was supposed to be “not open for discussion.” This situation happened yesterday as well, when Québec was allotted too much time to talk about the Charlottetown Accords, even having time to facilitate a vote on it despite it not being on the agenda. We, the Western Press, believe that this situation is way out of hand, and it's time for Alberta to put their big-boy pants on. As always, we believe in empowering Western perspectives, and thus urge the Premier of Alberta to live up to his leadership position and discuss this issue with us, rather than silencing us.

The Feds Say the Gameplan is Fine. No One is Convinced.

2024-02-21 7:00 PM

Opinion: Jason Cheng

A first day of FedProv has come and gone, and battle positions and trenches have been dug criss-crossing in the sand. However, through the fire over the top of no-man's-land, one thing is clear- the Fed's plans are not okay. Colorful scandals coming to light such as the feds not including the Indigenous delegation in the budget and bribing them for silence, out-of-touch claims and proposals from the Feds, and Yukon's budget being sliced by a whole 30% have eroded the confidence people have in the Feds to create fair, equitable, and detailed plans.

Let's start turning the heat up on that Dutch oven? Ah, the ill-fated finance meeting today, the one that allegedly broke out into a heated argument, had some gems of moments from our quite illustrious Fed representatives. Let's take a look, shall we? Well, first of all, I was told by a Western reporter, who was there, that throughout the meeting, a resounding theme was the Fed's constant shutting down of questions. A Newfoundland and Labrador Finance Minister questioned this attitude from the Fed, asking "Is this a democracy? ... Then why are you shutting down questions so fast?". That... does not look good. You decide for yourself what that means, but to me, that's classic 'I-don't-know-how-to-respond-so-I'm-shutting-you-down'. For that to be happening so often that you get a Minister calling you out? Doubly bad.

Hey, at least you can't say the Fed don't have variety, though, because I was also told that not only do the Fed apparently have a very itchy trigger finger on the 'mute follow-up question' button, they needed to defer to their prime minister! That's right, folks, you heard that right, the Federal government Finance Ministers, yeah, you know, the people in charge of the entire nation's coffers, needed to defer to their prime minister because they couldn't answer follow-up questions! And no, no, this wasn't an admin question or something that should actually necessitate the PM's intervention, this was about the budget! If that isn't the most damning condemnation of just how unprepared and bare the Fed's gameplans are, I don't know what is. I'm not even going to get into the Fed's unprofessionalism and rudeness towards their fellow policymakers, that's an entirely different opinion article, but I'll leave you with some especially great zingers from the Fed, such as thanking the Ministers "for educating me on something I already know". That's quite some defensiveness right there, and I'll leave you to decipher what that defensiveness could possibly mean in context to what I've just laid out (hint: it's not very good).

Now, I confess, I heard most of the above second-hand. I attended Housing and didn't make it to any of the meetings after lunch. However, even disbarring everything I heard down the grapevine, Housing alone convinced me that the Federal government must change or clarify something, anything now. So, in Housing this morning, the Feds discussed their plans for the housing benefit, then pivoted to banning corporations and overseas customers from purchasing residential homes. The Fed outlined their plans to expand the benefit from the trial provinces of Ontario and more. Several provinces asked for clarification and further detail, for example Nunavut who asked why they chose those trial provinces in the first place.

It's not the Fed's answers to those questions that bugged me, sitting in the back taking notes. It was their indecisiveness. For even simpler questions such as why they chose those trial provinces- you know, the trial for the scheme that will cost upwards of 9 digits- I noticed the Fed conferring with one another and taking time to respond. Now, I get it. People may not be as confident in the material, might not be as comfortable answering questions, might just be careful and avoiding mistakes. However, it's really not a great look for the Fed, on their own positions and pre-established material, to be this unsure when asked simple follow-up questions for clarification and elaboration.

When you combine all this with the fumbling responses to the challenges the Fed finds in the way of their gameplans and slightly questionable decision making, such as Yukon's budget cuts and bribe to the Indigenous delegation, it's no surprise not many, including me, are completely convinced the Fed's gameplans are really all that good.

Now, the nail in the coffin. The finance meeting stuff was second-hand, I didn't hear it myself, it could just be a mass delusion and the Fed were actually good and everyone's just making stuff up, but all of this I'm describing now I witnessed with my very own eyes and ears. Okay, so I understand taking your time to answer and even needing conference time with colleagues to answer follow up questions, but I can't explain how the Fed's gameplan seems more like an outline than an actual gameplan. When Nunavut asked for a more concrete timeline, the Fed had no response, saying they would work on it. After Saskatchewan asked for a budget for the other provinces after the Fed explained their 2-billion dollar budget for the northern provinces, the Fed again had no response, saying they would work on it. When Saskatchewan asked the Fed how exactly they would stop corporations from buying up residential homes, the Fed's response was a slightly rambly rendition of "we just would". When Sask. followed up with the statement that corporations wouldn't be very happy with that, the Fed's response was just that... the corporations wouldn't be able to buy residential housing, which is literally just their main point again. And, when Sask. asked how the Fed determines which buildings are residential or not, the Fed just gave a vague response that they would prevent "predatory attempts to buy housing", and didn't elaborate further. When Quebec asked if the Fed had considered regulations or taxes instead of outright bans, the Fed replied that they hadn't thought of that and that they would "take it into consideration"... come on, you get the point.

I just personally can't see how the Fed can possibly make something happen with a gameplan this broad and incohesive- whether it be a consequence of the people answering the follow-up questions not being the people who actually wrote the legislation, the Fed not having their notes written, housing and finance just being less cared for by the Fed, it's not a good look when the federal government looks like a broken record machine set on a vinyl of nonstop vague and unpledged "we will take that into consideration", "we will think about that", and the main point repeated verbatim. You can't just come to FedProv with a big mission statement and nice big plans promising me a sandwich, only to show up with a couple slices of burnt toast.

I really hope that the Feds get their gameplan fixed and their cabinet prepared in the runup for Day 2, because otherwise I don't see it going any better than the first.

The First Minister's Meeting: A Mess Waiting to Happen

2024-02-21 5:00 PM

Fresh Reporting: Manal Yahya

Today was the 57th annual Fedprov conference, and the Wild West Western Press had the privilege to sit in during both the First Minister meetings. The Prime Minister and his deputy started the meeting with a senate reform bill, which was immediately met with a variety of additional proposals. During this first meeting, which solely focused on senate reforms due to the lack of organization and assertiveness from the Prime Minister, many provinces felt unheard as there was too much unnecessary deliberation and debating rather than zeroing in on what mattered. The Chief of the Assembly of First Nations especially felt deliberately undermined during this meeting as the federal government had given them no budget. After a consistent stream of rebuttals, all of which the Prime Minister could not control, resolution finally came with six proposals being approved, despite improper voting. Some of the proposals approved were reducing the senate age limit to sixty-five, creating a ten year maximum term, and one of the three senators per province must be Indigenous if that province has a population of two-hundred thousand Indigenous people or more.

It is important to note that, during this specific meeting, disputes were not settled by mutual concession, rather each province's ideas were just added on to what the federal government proposed. This is not upholding an important core ideal in Federal Provincial, which is compromise. Following lunch at the second meeting, many provinces voiced that the Prime Minister was not in charge of the meeting, instead letting his deputy speak and do his work for him. Although this did spark a slight change in the Prime Minister, this meeting was not much different from the first. Once again, allotted time for proposals and discussions were overtaken by back-and-forth disagreements, which the federal government appeared to struggle managing. A few good things that did come out of this meeting were more than one bill getting approved and one of the bills being in consensus with all the provinces. To conclude, the meetings witnessed today required many improvements with its structural design and management, but we are also happy to report that, despite these unfortunate factors, multiple bills did eventually get approved, which makes today a successful first day at Fed-prov.

The Federal Government Tries Silencing the Assembly of First Nations through BRIBERY!

2024-02-21 2:10 PM

Fresh Reporting: Anonymous Insider

Prior to the federal meetings, the prime minister had created a budget that slashed 30% of funding for all provinces while providing no budget for the Assembly of First Nations. This issue was brought up during the meeting of the first ministers, which the federal government silenced by offering a bribe of 5 million dollars - a quarter of what the assembly of First Nations originally had asked - along with an additional 5 million dollars if The First Nations Assembly was to be cooperative. By having no proper say, the assembly of First Nations had agreed and a vote had been taken.

This is an exact representation of the colonization of the Indigenous people. In the past, there has been a consistent lack of progress when it comes to listening to and uplifting the voices of the Indigenous population. The federal government coerced them out of their right to vote and silenced them with false promises of money, which the minister of Indigenous Affairs claims they never received.

Everyone deserves to know the corruption within the federal government, including bribery in order to silence and buy votes from the Indigenous people once again.

information provided by an anonymous insider.