Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

The House of Commons is profoundly sad at Maclean's

by Aaron Wherry on Wednesday, September 29, 2010 7:56pm - 0 Comments

This evening the House of Commons unanimously passed a motion censuring expressing its profound sadness at this magazine. The following is the submitted text of that motion.

That this House, while recognizing the importance of vigorous debate on subjects of public interest, expresses its profound sadness at the prejudice displayed and the stereotypes employed by Maclean’s Magazine to denigrate the Quebec nation, its history and its institutions.

Independent MP Andre Arthur reportedly objected to the motion, then left the chamber, allowing the motion to be re-introduced and passed.

Tags: André Arthur, house of commons, macleans, Parliament, Quebec

More by Aaron Wherry

Guest

Awesome! Glad that hatred doesn't have any place in the Canadian media. Good for them.
Guest

You people that hate others because of differences in language, ethnicity, religion, etc. are real sick. The internet has become a vehicle for extremists to express their hatred towards others. Unfortunately, there aren't enough hospital beds for people like you.

Guest

Wow Macleans Love Group gives me a poor rating.

Bonkers

They gave you a poor rating because you commented without reading the article. The article is about bad behaviour, not "differences in language, ethnicity, religion, etc". Check it out.

Jan

Try reading both articles.

Christopher White

I'd like them to do another count: how many MPs actually read the article and weren't just cowed by party heads… this is a shameful attack on the press. While I believe that in the absence of quantifiable data, it's impossible to say which province is most corrupt, the article makes a good point. You don't like it? Fine, write a rebuttal, just don't tell people what they can and can't write.

Mike T.

just don't tell people what they can and can't write.

***

You'll be pleased to learn the House did nothing of the kind.
RunningGag

The complete lack of reading comprehension on these boards is astonishing. A censure is not censorship.

Christopher White

I know that a censure is not the same as actually censoring or making it illegal to write certain things, but it sends the wrong message.

I says to journalists that we (the House) are looking over your shoulder and if you say anything offensive and we can profit from it politically, we'll speak out against you.

RunningGag

I think you're stretching it here. Macleans is doing the same thing that the Sun was doing a couple of weeks ago. Lots of indignation, but they don't actually care. Nobody is intimidated by Parliament having a small hissy fit.

minaka

You really keep missing the point. The government has no business at all making a formal censure of a magazine article or its publishers. It is the beginning of the government having a people (that they're displeased with) instead of a people having a government.

Jan

Christopher, you are assuming anyone takes what is coming out of this parliament seriously.

Christopher White

No! Cynism BAD!
I agree though: these antics do nothing to win our confidence but we can't forget that these are OUR MPs and they are responsible to us. I've written to mine to express my displeasure at this motion.
The only way they are going to behave better is if we force them too.
I don't usually buy the print version, but I'll be picking up this issue cause I can. I know it's not terribly dramatic, but that's sorta the point.

tobyornotoby

"No one is to throw another stone until I give the okay even if he does say Jehovah!"

(much stone throwing ensues)

"All right, who threw that?"

Some Honourable members: "She did! She did! I mean …
He did! He did!"

Jan

Good one.

jay

I guess head-office told them to tab it up. Sun Media must be looking over their shoulders.
cardamum

I thought it was only the Prophet Muhammad that journalists weren't allowed to draw caricatures of. Now it’s Bonhomme too?

Ariadne

Well their Bonhomme is high in fashion than Muhammad.
minaka

Best and pithiest comment on "caricature chill" especially involving a snowman.

http://nottawa.blogspot.com Mark

It's moments like this that I'm glad I don't work for MPs anymore. What an embarrassing spectacle. All of them.

Patriquin's article may have been quite shoddily written, but this over-reaction is unbelievable.
Norm1965

Asking the politicians if they like the article is like going into a prison and asking the prisoners if they are innocent.
bergkamp

MPs are pathetic if they think this was a good use of their time. I thought Lorrie Goldstein had the best view – Maclean's does not go after regular Quebecers, just the political class in Ottawa and Quebec City and all this sound and fury is good way to avoid issue of money and how Feds have been paying extra money to Quebec to keep it in the country for the past forty years.

My grandfather was in RCAF during WW II, and was rather argumentative, and he liked to say if you are taking flak, than you are over the target. How pols have reacted to Maclean's story tells us a lot about what they are up to. Notice most pols have completely avoided substance of argument and instead went with distressed Victorian virgin act.
John Sankey

“Most” is a comparative, not an absolute – somebody has to be the “most”. If you disagree with Maclean’s choice of Quebec, which province do you pick instead? “None of the above” is not an option!

Jan

Declaring 'most' requires some sort of objective criteria.

Loraine Lamontagne

Andrew Coyne is way too lazy to investigate, say, how many "members of the public " appointed to committees for the preselection of judges or boards of regulatory colleges in Ontario, have ever donated to a political party or are members of a political party or have worked for elected representatives. In Quebec journalists look at these appointments under a magnifying glass and a pen at the ready to unveil the latest scandal.

Andrew Coyne relies on his prejudices to mislead readers with questions like "What explains Quebec’s unusual susceptibility to money politics? Deeply entrenched deference to authority? A worldly Catholic tolerance of official vice?"

Parliament is wise in its condemnation of Mr. Coyne's religious-hatred motivational prose. The taxpayers of Canada should stop funding Maclean's.
cbombast

Yeah, the Quebec Nation is like the Red Sox Nation, but more whiney and fiscally irresponsible.
Paul

Shameful. Keep up the good work Macleans. Obviously you are doing something right.
Western Mark

As a Canadian I am deeply saddened by my House of Commons.
DFRaser

When did Quebec become a nation?

Guest

yesterday in the house of commons

Les Autres

I have idea why Rogers Communication (Owner of Macleans) is alienating it's Quebec Customers, is it because Videotron just launched cellphone service?
Skinny Dipper

I guess Maclean's is anti-Quebectic. Legitimate criticism of Quebec is fine. Just remember that Quebec is surrounded by a sea of Arabs…oops, I mean Anglos. There's corruption everywhere. Why pick on the Quebectic nation?

maddinosaur

You are so right, Why pick on the Quebecois fiscal insolvency!

They should pick on the groups it's traditional for MSM's and socialists to hate in Canada,

Christians, Israel, whites, anglophones, farmers, stay at home moms, red necks. Jews, males, blonds, westerners, gun owners, people who ride bicycles without helmets, pro lifers, etc etc,…..

but leave the privileged Kebecois alone, they are a higher caste unlike the other miscreants.

Katherine

I honestly can't see what's offensive (or, more accurately, wrongly offensive – I can understand Quebecois being offended at the inputation that their province has corruption issues, but that's okay so long as the accusation is true and substantiated) about the picture. Particularly given that an independent MP from Quebec opposes the motion.

Quebeckers – if your governments are corrupt and misspending your money, don't you want to know?

Loraine Lamontagne

Quebeckers are more informed about corruption in their province than you will ever be in yours. But when the next corruption scandal arrises in, say BC, how important will it be to you that newspapers wonder about the relationship between corruption in BC and the religious affiliation of the residents of that province?

Ariadne

From BC Nation, we would really welcome scrutiny of our politicians, we can't get enough of it. If you go farther back, you will see Maclean's issues about BC politics and scandals.

Loraine Lamontagne

But do you welcome people who would, without any proof, link corruption in BC with the religious affiliation of the residents of that province? That is what Coyne is doing when he asks:

"What explains Quebec’s unusual susceptibility to money politics? Deeply entrenched deference to authority? A worldly Catholic tolerance of official vice?"

What explains BC unusual suceptiblity to money politics? Deeply entrenched deference to authority? A worldly tolerance of official vice from its Protestant and Siikhs communities?

Katherine

Oh, and I wouldn't have minded a bit if Macleans had target BC several years ago, as it would have been justified, giving the sheer number of our premiers who left office due to scandal.
James Wolfe

You clowns on the hill are so out of touch with the public, its sickening. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Freedom of the press, freedom of speech unless we upset Quebec? Well rubbish. MacLean’s did nothing wrong and any informed thinking person knows this. The truth hurts, eh Kebec? Well, to bad, so sad, booh, hoo, hoo…

The spin coming from Parliament is just that, more spin, nonsense and foaming at the mouth from all our politicians. You have no idea how disgusted the public is with all of you. Quebec is an embarrassment to most Canadians and has been for decades. Anti-English language laws like Bills 22, 178, 101…says it all.

All this crap for 10 seats, what a joke.
Elaine

I don't recall Parliament having anything to say when other Canadian regions were talked about in unsavory ways in Macleans – i.e. Saskatoon, Regina. READ the article – it is factual and balanced, not an opinion piece.
horfdorfer

The only thing wrong with MacLeans cover story is that it isn't exactly news that Quebec is corrupt. Here in Alberta we definately should be paying more attention to what goes on in Quebec. They're the biggest recipient of the $20 billion a year that gets sucked out of Alberta in equalization payments.
margaret

Did I read "Nation" of Quebec? Somehow I thought they were a province of the Nation Canada. How naive of me!

Ariadne

That's news to me too. But as what I understood, one blogger's correction of my comment, Canada is a sovereign state made up of 10 nations and 3 territories (govern by first nations). It's getting so confusing, isn't it?

Bill B

Years ago I read an article re the general attitude of the people of Quebec. They don't seem to mind when there is wrong -doing, but it is bad to be caught at it.
Mary

Macleans is in the business of s*itdisturbing and, as 90% of all media have done, has deteriorated to the Jerry Springer-type of what used to be called "Journalism". It is also masking a very deeply fundamentalist and ultra-conservative-libertarian philosophical bent that is deeply divisive and biased (although covered in cool humour asides). Rather than enlighten, the magazine, over the last few years, has outdone itself in playing an Ezra Levant Circus Clown's violin….Ah, it makes a reader long for the days of the Red Tories when integrity and presenting both or all opinions still mattered for Canadian….sad indeed….