As I write this, controversial American pundit Ann Coulter is in the office tower next to mine attending a private $250-a-ticket reception where she and controversial Canadian pundit Ezra Levant are the guests of honour. (That's the invite, top.) The reception is a presentation of the International Free Press Society with the Clare Booth Luce Policy Institute. One of those helping to facilitate and organize this event is Ashley Scorpio, who is listed in the government's electronic directory, as a staffer working in the office of Conservative MP Gerald Keddy. (She has also worked for Ontario Conservative MP Patrick Brown and was once an administrative assistant in the Harper PMO.) Ms. Scorpio, it should be noted, did not use her Parliamentary contact info. Instead she invited those who wanted to tickets or information to contact her via a Hotmail address.
She is not, however, the only federal Conservative who is assisting with Coulter's visit to Ottawa.
The University of Ottawa Campus Conservatives invited her to speak and booked the room in its name. The booking form notes that all 80 members of that club would attend the event. The form is signed by the club president Laura McLennan. I have been informed that McLennan has posted on her Facebook wall a note saying that the club does not endorse the event but, as her page is protected and can only be viewed by her FB friends, I cannot verify that.
One should note here that the Conservative Party of Canada, unlike the Liberals, does not differentiate between “young Conservatives” and “adult Conservatives.” If you buy a membership in the Conservative Party, you're a member. Period. Presumably, the 80 members of the campus Conservative club are also members of the party.
In any event: Why should we care if card-carrying Conservatives helped facilitate this event or paid $250 to hang out with her?
Well, first of all, in politics at any level, you're known – fairly or not — by the company you keep, I suppose. Do other card-carrying Conservatives endorse Coulter's views — views which, to some is inflammatory, to say the least? She told a Muslim student at the University of Western Ontario Monday night that rather than travel by airplane, the Muslim student should “take a camel.” For those Conservatives, like Jason Kenney, who have spent the better part of a decade reaching out to and building bridges to Canada's Muslim community, is it helpful to that bridge-building enterprise to have any party member anywhere close to a pundit who would offer up a such a viewpoint?
For the record, Dimitri Soudas, the press secretary to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, had this to say: “The Conservative Party of Canada and/or the government of Canada has absolutely nothing to do with her private tour across the country.”
Conservative MP Dean Del Mastro had this to say: “Ultimately, the opinions she has — they're hers. I think Canada's strong enough as a country, we're strong enough in our identity and in our convictions to be able to hear what someone has to say and then choose a different path.”
NDP MP Olivia Chow says she does not believe Coulter should have been prevented from coming to Canada but she does believe there is a double standard at work with the Conservatives, a point she made in this exchange during Question Period In the House of Commons Tuesday afternoon:
Ms. Olivia Chow (Trinity—Spadina, NDP): Mr. Speaker, once again the government is showing its hypocrisy. A year after banning anti-war MP George Galloway from entering Canada, the minister of censorship has no problem with letting a pro-war Conservative come and preach hate.
Ann Coulter said: “The government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport and dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East.”
I am all for freedom of speech, but why the double standard?
Hon. Jason Kenney (Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, CPC): Mr. Speaker, I am surprised the member does not understand Canadian immigration law. It is not politicians who decide who can come into the country, it is professional members of the public service.
In the case, for instance, of Mr. Galloway, Mr. Galloway received a preliminary inadmissibility determination by an officer of the Canadian Border Services Agency, I presume based on the fact that he publicly and overtly handed tens of thousands of dollars to the leader of a banned anti-Semitic terrorist organization called Hamas.
If the hon. member has information on anyone who comes to Canada that she thinks would be the basis for an inadmissibility review, I invite her to furnish that to the president of the Canadian Border Services Agency.
Chow: Mr. Speaker, newly filed court documents revealed that the minister was active in stopping Mr. Galloway from crossing the border. CBSA was told that Galloway could not be admitted under any circumstances. For this government, a pro-peace British MP is a threat, but a pro-war Conservative who said that Jews need to be perfected and called Muslims insane savages is fine.
Will the minister admit he supports free speech only if he agrees with the speaker, or is this more Conservative hypocrisy?
Kenney: Mr. Speaker, this government supports free speech within the Canadian law. If the hon. member has any information that she thinks would render a visitor to Canada inadmissible, she should supply that information to the CBSA. They can take it into account.
They did take into account Mr. Galloway's admission of having financed the leadership of Hamas, which is a banned terrorist organization. I simply made it clear that I would not grant a ministerial permit to effectively override the inadmissibility determination of the CBSA because I actually happen to believe that we should enforce the law and not allow financiers of terrorist organizations to come to Canada.
