The Hatchet

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit hatchetmedia.caRemember 2014?Pauline Marois, the Parti Québécois Premier of Quebec, had just called an election, trying to turn her minority into a majority. She was running on the so-called Charter of Values and hoping to channel the culture war forces towards a third referendum. She had just recruited Pierre Karl Péladeau, one of the province’s most powerful businessmen, as a star candidate, and it really looked like Quebec sovereignty was about to dominate Canadian politics once again.And then she lost. She lost big — giving up a majority government to the Quebec Liberals.Things only got worse for the sovereigntists in the following years. In 2018, François Legault’s party, the Coalition Avenir Québec, came to power, vowing to stop focusing so much on the federalist-separatist debate and instead focus on the economy. By 2022, the PQ was down to just three seats.Today things look very, very different.Last week, CAQ, under the leadership of Christine Fréchette, was completely wiped out. And the PQ’s Paul St-Pierre Plamondon, or PSPP, as he’s often referred to in Quebec, will be the province’s next premierBut the death of CAQ and the return of the separatist government are far from the only unlikely stories that have emerged from this election: You have the rise of the Conservative Party of Quebec under former shock jock Éric Duhaime, who captured 19 seats, mostly in the Quebec City region; the survival of the Liberal Party of Quebec, which looked like it might be finished after their leader, Pablo Rodriguez, resigned and replaced by a relative unknown Charles Milliard, and somehow he emerged with 40 seats; and even Quebec Solidaire, the leftist sovereigntist party that mostly competes for seats in the downtowns of Montreal and Quebec City, had a decent night, potentially holding the balance of power in this new minority legislature.But what's undeniable is that Quebec politics hasn’t looked this unpredictable in years.Featured on this episode: Nora LoretoTo Learn More:"A post-CAQ Quebec" by Nora Loreto on Substack"Under PSPPressure" by Paul Wells on Substack"After being wiped off political map, what's next for the CAQ?" by Antoni Nerestant in CBC NewsSupport us at Hatchetmedia.ca The Hatchet is a podcast and newsletter dedicated to exposing power and money in Canada. We deliver important original and fascinating journalism about how this country actually works. Music: I dunno by grapes (c) copyright 2008 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (3.0) license. Ft: J Lang, MorusqueTo hear more, visit Hatchetmedia.ca 

There’s something that I’ve noticed lately when it comes to how we talk about whatever is happening in Canada these days.Every announcement from the government, every hot take from the newspaper columnists and the talking heads on the nightly news comes with a caveat: WE ARE IN A TRADE WAR.And that means that any investment in Canada right now is viewed as a great investment. Just don’t look too hard at the fine print.And for the most part, Canadians have been willing to go along on this ride.That is until last month, when Prime Minister Mark Carney hung up a “For Sale” sign on Canada’s four largest airports to a room filled with the world’s richest investors.This time, there has actually been some pushback. And I think that’s because it’s less clear who this is supposed to benefit.It’s hard not to think that Mark Carney’s Liberal’s have secured bottomless latitude to extract value out of Canada wherever they see fit — as long as it’s in the name of capital “I” investment. And if you’ve got a problem with that, well, you’re probably not on Team Canada. Or maybe you just don’t understand it.That’s certainly been the party line when it comes to the airport deal — even when we know that in other countries where they’ve tried the exact same thing the results have been crystal clear: prices go up and services get worse.So when Peter Nowak, Canada’s preeminent competition watcher, called me up last week I knew exactly what was on his mind.If our governing monopoly says it’s open season for big business in Canada, where exactly does that leave the rest of us?Peter and I dig into all of that and do a little cross-country check-in on the state of Canadian competition.NOTE: A version of this conversation also appeared in Do Not Pass GoFeatured in the episode: Peter NowakTo learn more: “Watchdog Moves to Block Veggie Merger as Feds Drive Up Price of Competing Imports” by Peter Nowak in Do No Pass Go“Canada, EU Deepen Ties But Diverge on Consumer Protection” by Peter Nowak in Do Not Pass Go“The Anti-Competitive Barriers Holding Canadian Films Back” by Peter Nowak in Do Not Pass Go “Do Not Pass Go Hits One Year Thanks to Your Support! Here’s What’s Next” by Peter Nowak in Do Not Pass Go“Actually, privatizing Canada’s airports is a bad thing” by Arshy Mann in The Hatchet Support us at Hatchetmedia.ca The Hatchet is a podcast and newsletter dedicated to exposing power and money in Canada. We deliver important original and fascinating journalism about how this country actually works. Music: I dunno by grapes (c) copyright 2008 Licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution (3.0) license. Ft: J Lang, MorusqueTo hear more, visit Hatchetmedia.ca  This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hatchetmedia.ca/subscribe

Allowing big, private money to buy up chunks of our airports has been a long-held neo-liberal dream in Canada. Kim Campbell proposed it during her short-lived government, as did Justin Trudeau in 2017.They were both hoping to follow in the example of Margaret Thatcher’s UK, which became the first western nation to fully privatize their existing major airports back in 1987. Since then, many European countries, as well as Australia and New Zealand, have followed suit, with massive pension funds often purchasing the airports outright or buying up long-term concessions to run them. But the idea has never really caught on in Canada, for one very good reason — Canadians hate it. A recent Nanos poll found that over 50% of Canadians oppose the plan and with only a little over 30% in favour. And that’s because Canadians clearly have an intuitive understanding that airports aren’t the kind of asset that it makes sense for governments to completely sell-off. They are, after all, natural monopolies, giving them enormous power to charge what they want.So why does Carney want to do this? Because it’s not about what’s best for Canadians. Instead, this is a proposal that works for the benefit of major asset managers and pension funds. These giant pools of money are on a desperate search for increased returns, wherever they can be found. And vital infrastructure is a great place for them to do it. Because they know that they can gauge consumers with no consequences.Everyone knows that’s how these kinds of deals work. So it’s especially galling that the government still frames this proposal as a way to lower costs for consumers. Nothing could be further from the truth. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hatchetmedia.ca/subscribe

The Toronto police have had a rough few months.Back in May, while the police service was still reeling from the fallout of the worst corruption scandal in recent history, three off-duty TPS officers were arrested in Barcelona, Spain.In typical fashion, the Toronto police withheld most of the important details from the public, citing concerns for the ongoing international investigation. A police spokesperson called the allegations “serious” but said little else.And they refused to reveal the names of the officers.But soon, the press began piecing together more of what had happened. And a disturbing picture began to emerge.The three officers had been arrested in connection with an alleged violent, sexual assault.But there was one detail that seemed to get under everyone’s skin and garner most of the attention.The fact that when these off-duty police officers were arrested and charged with a serious crime in a foreign country, they allegedly had the temerity to flash their badges.That detail came to dominate the conversation around this story. And how could it not? It’s an almost cartoonish example of how many police officers feel that they’re above the law — apparently, even foreign laws. How could an action like that mean anything other than — “I am one of you. And we protect our own”?But as the coverage of this story played out, I couldn’t help but notice that the emphasis on the flashed badges detracted from what should be the more pressing concern here.Three sworn officers were arrested and charged with sexual assault, assault and resisting arrest. One of them was alleged to have fled the scene and was found two days later at an airport.And if history is any guide, the police will do their best to keep this case shrouded in secrecy.So we wanted to talk to someone who actually went to Spain and spoke to people on the ground about what happened. The details may be disturbing, but it’s important that the public knows about these allegations. Allan Woods is a veteran Toronto Star reporter based in Paris. Normally, he covers international politics. But when this story broke, he made his way over to Barcelona, and put together the most comprehensive report that we have on this story. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit hatchetmedia.ca/subscribe

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit hatchetmedia.caIf you were an openly gay man in Toronto in 1980, chances are that you would’ve thought that life was getting better. After all, the last decade had seen so much progress.Homosexuality had been partially decriminalized back in the late 1960s. A few years later, Toronto had become the first city in the country to ban homophobic discrimination in municipal hiring. Pride parades and festivals were a regular occurrence. There was a thriving queer nightlife and queer press and queer arts scene.George Hislop, an out-and-proud gay man, was running for city council, and even the sitting mayor, John Sewell, was pro-gay. Was there still discrimination and hardship? Of course. But more and more people were coming out of the closet, and even the broader society was starting to slowly embrace people with different sexual orientations. But then, things started to change. George Hislop lost his run and so did John Sewell, largely because of homophobic attacks in the press. In 1981, the Toronto Police launched Operation Soap, raiding multiple gay bathhouses and arresting almost 300 men. And though the community mobilized — taking to the streets and the courts to fight back against such blatant aggression — all of a sudden, progress doesn’t look nearly as certain.And it wouldn’t have been long before you started to hear the rumours — something was going around. Some kind of a disease.You’d notice people around you getting sick. Young men, in the prime of their lives. You’d see the purple blotches peeking out from under sleeves and shirt collars and you’d wonder what the hell could be happening. And then, one by one, you’d see those people start to die. By 1982, the disease had a name — AIDS. But the government wasn’t doing anything to help. And most public officials wouldn’t even say the word out loud. And so you get together with a few other people and decide that something needs to be done. That is, in essence, the origin story of one of the most impactful grassroots organizations in recent Canadian history — the AIDS Committee of Toronto (ACT), our first so-called “AIDS service organization.”ACT has had a profound impact on the country, and the world at large. It was a beacon of hope at a time when social conservative forces were ascendent across North America. It spawned other important organizations, like AIDS Action Now! and Casey House, that had their own out-sized impacts. And for decades, it was the largest and most prominent entity of its kind in Canada.But late last year, ACT announced that it was closing its doors. And as someone who covered the AIDS epidemic for years, this came as quite a shock to me. So I wanted to dig into what happened and take a look back at ACT’s unique history. And what I found was absolutely fascinating. If we examine ACT over the decades, we see so many examples of the various dilemmas that plague any organization trying to do good in the modern world:Should you set out to help people or allow people to help themselves?Is it better to work within the system or to fight it from the outside?When do charity fundraisers stop being a way to help more people, and become something that exist solely to keep on fundraising?I spoke to Kevin Hurren, who wrote an excellent profile about the history of the AIDS Committee of Toronto for Xtra, that digs into all of these questions.To Learn More“The many eras of the AIDS Committee of Toronto—including its final bow” by Kevin Hurren in Xtra.How to Survive a Plague by David FranceQueer Progress: From Homophobia to Homonationalism by Tim McCaskell“The Last Pandemic” by Arshy Mann & Jordan Cornish in COMMONS