The Hatchet

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

The Montreal police have arrested and charged the friends of an unarmed teenage boy who was shot and killed by the Longueuil police last year. Meanwhile, the police officer who killed Nooran Rezayi is a free man.The whole thing stinks of a cover-up. The full force of the state is being deployed against a group of teenagers in order to silence them, smear their reputations and whitewash the unjustified and unjustifiable killing of an unarmed child.And it's all because Quebec’s policing establishment understands what it would mean for the public to see Nooran Rezayi’s death for what it is — a moral outrage, where justice must be served. To Learn More:The Killing of Nooran Rezayi from The Hatchet"11 charged in connection with events leading up to fatal police shooting of teen Nooran Rezayi" by Alessia Simona Maratta & Phil Carpenter in Global News"SPVM cracks down on Montréal-Nord unit suspected of co-ordinated racist behaviour" in CBC Montreal 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.caThere’s an unfortunate tendency to talk about the cops as some kind of a monolith.And don’t worry, I’m not about to go on some lecture about how not all police officers are bad. I just mean that we often miss that police forces are complex, political institutions with competing centres of power.There are the police boards that are supposed to govern these forces and maintain civilian rule over the cops; the police chief and upper management that run the force and oversee the day-to-day operations; the rank-and-file cops who actually do the police work; and the union that represents them.Even in relatively well-run police forces, there’s inevitably going to be tension between these different levels. But it’s not uncommon for those tensions to turn into outright infighting and backstabbing, which can have profound implications everyday people.That’s one way to think about what’s been happening in Saint John, New Brunswick.The city’s police chief Robert Bruce has been in his position since 2021.And over the last year, tensions that had been building between him and everyday officers have spilled out into the open in dramatic fashion. A police union rep was dragged out of a city council meeting by force. Numerous harassment complaints have been filed against the chief by the officers working directly with him.And you have a police force where one out of every five officers is on leave, putting a major drain on the city’s resources.But the chief claims that at the heart of all of this is simply the police union playing dirty, and refusing to go along with the change that is necessary to modernize the Saint John police force and make it more accountable.So what is actually going on here? And who’s in the right?Andrew Bates, a reporter from The Telegraph-Journal, joined us in The Hatchet studios in Toronto to help us make sense of this mess.To Learn More:"Chief said wounded officer 'had it coming to him,' lawsuit alleges" by Andrew Bates in The Telegraph-Journal"Chief says he faced 'resistance' to change from union" by Andrew Bates in The Telegraph-Journal"Saint John police union rep forcibly removed from council chambers" by Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon in CBC News "Saint John police Chief Robert Bruce announces retirement amid conduct complaints" by Bobbi-Jean MacKinnon in CBC News