You're viewing a single thread.
Context for people not from Canada?
Someone in the govt got a old Ukranian dude to speak to the parlement, and they all applauded him for fighting Russia in WW2, forgetting that the people who faught Russia in WW2 were the Nazis.
They had accidentally invited a literal Nazi to speak, and applauded him for it.
Canadian here. Minor correction: he didn't speak, but he was invited as a Ukrainian "hero" by the speaker of the house (a member of the sitting elected party). He was applauded - twice - for his "service". Including by Ukrainian president zelensky.
The only 'defense' I can offer is that our prime minister had no input on the matter, and Hunka's Nazi service came out after the fact. Canada does not support fascism or Nazism...
But it's a bad look, no matter how you cut it...
Having no input on a Nazi guest in your house is the opposite of a good thing. Silence is complicity.
I agree that silence is complicity, but that only applies if you know there's something worth being silent about, no?
In this case, the PM had no input because the speaker doesn't have to ask permission to invite people from his constituency. So it falls to the speaker to validate his invitees. As such, PM has no input, but also no more fault than anyone else told to clap for the "Ukrainian hero" in this scenario... Is my understanding
so is the Canadian House and PM office that incompetent that noone knows how WWII went?
It is a disgrace for the House and the PM ehose office did not care to inform themselves, when clearly doing something with a foreign policy context.
That's not how our parliament works. The amount of people calling for an end to the speaker's independence is concerning.
The speaker's job is to uphold decorum of parliament. This one spectacularly failed to do that, and resigned as he should. That doesn't mean we should make it a partisan position.
I never talked about parisan positions or whatever. I expect both the house and the presidents office to have staff looking into some more details about things and raising the issue with the respective position, if it could be in violation of values of the respective institution or the country in general.
That does not involve any change of authority and i struggle to imagine that there weren't staff people raising these issues beforehand. So i think it to be more plausible that their voice was ignored by the speaker and president, or the information was deliberately not passed on to them.
Either reason, lack of background check, ignorance by the political leaders or holes in the communications chain, speak of general problems in the organization that need to be adressed. These issues are specific to organizations and it doesnt matter whether it is a political party, a governmental institution, private business or NGO.
Canada doesn't have a president. The Speaker of the House is the top official when it comes to running Parliament. He definitely fucked up, but it was his fuck-up and he resigned because of it. I don't think it means we have to re-write the rules for how Canada's Parliament operates. I mean, it's not like we actually elected a Nazi, unlike some countries.
I'm sorry. i meant the premiers office. And again nowhere did i propose that they need to change anything, except for running their staff better.
You certainly did unknowingly imply that changes need to be made when you said that the "president's" staff should be vetting the Speaker's decisions. However, I understand that you aren't familiar with how Canada's Parliament is structured. To be clear, it is not currently the Prime Minister's prerogative or job to vet those whom the Speaker invites to speak in Parliament.
The PMO is ultimately responsible. The Speaker took the brunt, but you can't have the leader of a foreign nation visit the country and allow this shit to happen. Imagine having President Xi over and inviting a rapist from Nanjing to attend. There's no way in hell the PMO isn't responsible for vetting these people.
This is a bad take, the PMO didn't 'allow' it to happen because they had no say, no authority, they weren't even informed because they don't need to be informed. The speaker has independent authority over guests in the gallery and over who is recognized. It prevents the gallery from becoming a partisan tool, at least it has for our whole history. If you want to argue for change that's one thing, but don't assign blame where it doesn't belong.
"Sir we invited an Ukranian war hero, is that ok?"
What was he supposed to do, order a quick background check on that old dude before applauding?
I can't tell if this is tongue in cheek, but the opposition is staying that this is exactly what should have happened before allowing the Nazi entry.
My read on this situation is that it all seems obvious after the fact, but that's cuz now we know. I believe the vetting process is being reviewed because of this event. Definitely a gaffe on the part of the speaker, if this info is truly so readily accessible
How can one person be allowed to invite someone to attend an event with a visiting foreign leader and nobody cross checks? This nonsense about revising the process is a cop out. No way in hell the speaker can unilaterally do this without any background checks.
Someone made a point that made sense to me - they definitely do security cross checks, but not necessarily political checks.
My understanding is that they can invite who they want. I would guess based on the assumption that the speaker (an elected official himself) has the good sense to thoroughly vet who he's bringing through the front door
Actually, I made that exact mistake. Security checks, not background checks. I guess it's fair to assume that a nonagenarian won't be drop-kicking anyone.
After the fact, once it’s discovered who the individual was -> apologize to the people (citizens) for the mistake. Take responsibility like a leader should and at least start with the bare minimum of an “I’m sorry”
Well, he did
Yes probably they should’ve thought of that beforehand. It’s literally politicians’ jobs.. lazy twats
No, that's not it, in Canadian Parliament it is the speaker of the house who has ths sole responsibility for both inviting guests to the gallery and for recognizing them in the official remarks. Other members of the house and government weren't even given notice the guy would be there. The speakers office arranges guest vetting, but it is only a security vetting not a political one. That is the PPS and RCMP decide if the 98 year old, legal Canadian immigrant is likely to put the house and guesses physical danger, they don't consider at all if the guest will cause a political headache.
So the fallout is that the speaker (who in fact was solely responsible for what happened) has resigned, and the PM has offerd an official apology on behalf of all Canadians. There could be more political fallout domestically, as the opposition parties are misleading Canadians and stoking ignorance of our procedures to paint the government as responsible , which I emphasize again, they were not.
Hunka's Nazi service came out after the fact.
He fought Russians in WW2. Wonder which army he belonged to...
Could have been Poland, Romania etc I guess. But well it wasn't.
No, the Russians were the good guys in WWII, everyone who fought them were bad and Nazis or Nazi-adjacent. This is basic Hexbear 101.
The Russians were just spreading worker solidarity.
They were so nice they even helped with repopulating all the countries they helped liberate!
No, the Russians were the good guys in WWII,
The Russians were definitely not the good guys in WW2. They happened to end up fighting the same guys the Allies were, but that's it.
that comment is 100% heavy sarcasm
The Russians weren't exactly the food guys. They helped with the invasion of Poland and split it with the Nazis. After Hitler marched into Russia they turned into "the good guys" but weren't from the beginning.
They didn't turn into any kind of "good guy". They took all of eastern Europe from the Nazis and kept it for themselves, ruling it just as brutally until the dissolution of the USSR. They were entirely out for themselves and didn't do anything for justice or the good of the conquered nations.
PMO is fully responsible for this. Trudeau even apologized. I just hope inviting this literal Nazi to a diplomatic event doesn't water down JT's ability to call people who disagree with him Nazis. That's his favorite thing to do, poor guy
It sounds like you hate JT, which is fine, whatever. But from a protocol point of view, it really isn't on PMO.
The speaker's position, by design, doesn't report to the PMO - it's a separate office responsible for decorum and protocol in the house (in theory it's supposed to represent a higher ideal, and really not do much other then maintain order). As I understand it, speakers have a dedicated number of gallery seats they can fill, they just report it to some protocol/generic planning office. But they're responsible for their invitees.
That's why the speaker apologized for his actions, and emphasized it was his initiative. And PM apologized to the world on behalf of Canada, but not for any part he took in it. Opposition leader is making a very aggresive campaign to make Trudeau look bad, but that's politics for you. Seems like it's working, if I may say :P
Actually I don't hate JT, I just hate how he has executed the duties of his office.
Also it appears that I was wrong, PMO is apparently responsible for security checks not background checks, but I can't even find the source that led me astray in the first place.
The only ‘defense’ I can offer is that our prime minister had no input on the matter, and Hunka’s Nazi service came out after the fact.
Hunka granddaughter posted that he met Zelensky and Trudeau before.
the people who faught Russia in WW2 were the Nazis.
Not all of them though. Division of Poland and Winter War come to mind.
They said he was ukrainian who fought the Russians in ww2, that meant he fought as a nazi.
It wasn't acidental btw. His own granddaughter posted that he met with Zelensky and Trudeau before. Also he lived in Canada for long, all of them were one short inquiry of getting to know who he is, and that's why they have assistants etc. Sure, the western politicians have mostly shit for brains, but not one of 300 people even said "wait a minute".
"Man who caught for a nazi unit"
Let me fix that for you:
"A Nazi who fought for Adolp Hitler"
Why are facho news like reverse clickbaity so often?
You can get stickers! https://mistersunshinebaby-5569.myshopify.com/products/i-did-nazi-that-coming-stickers
That’s not the context though and misrepresents the situation.
The Speaker of the House invited this guy because he knew of him from his riding. Without doing research or looking further into the circumstances of this individual’s service, the speaker made the decision to recognize this individual.
This has nothing to do with the PM. It’s the speaker and he resigned.
It’s pretty disgusting that people try to twist this into a partisan issue so they can dig at the PM. It’s disingenuous and kind of shitty to misrepresent this situation tbh.
I'm wondering if somebody influenced that speaker. Russian propaganda is now using this that Zelensky (who was present at the time) was clapping when that Nazi was honored.
Could just be an honest mistake, but it doesn’t mean he shouldn’t be held accountable and I’m glad he has been. If I read the headline correctly I think the PM has also made a formal apology on behalf of the Canadian government as well but someone feel free to correct me on that because I didn’t quite get to reading the article.
I think the Speaker’s riding is North Bay? The way a lot of small towns / northern cities work is someone tells you “oh I know him he’s a good guy” and you just kind of take it at face value until you find out otherwise.
Now that’s not the way international protocol should work, obviously, and of course the Russians are going to use it.
I don’t necessarily believe he was “put up to it” because the simplest explanation is just Northern Ontario word of mouth gone awry and applied to an international diplomatic event where it absolutely should have been fact checked. If I recall correctly, the Speaker said it was a last minute decision.
I have a contact in the house so I can update if I hear any whisperings. My question is: is the Chief of Protocol responsible for reviewing the Speaker’s remarks. The answer could quite conceivably be no, and if so I think that process should be reviewed.
Oh man I didn't realize he resigned over this. I guess it's the kind of egg on your face mistake a political career can't really recover from though...
It's a brutal mistake. As far as speakers go, they're supposed to be apolitical - putting the decorum and honour of the house above all else - though they're elected officials. They really shouldn't be anything of interest ever, it's literally a protocol role. So this guy... Even IF he was really good at his job as a member of parliament, and well liked among all parties, his career is over
so the conext is that they don't do some basic research? pretty sure that's worse than a single one time oopsie.
The PM isn't a dictator with total control over who gets to invite people to Parliament
In fact it's the opposite case here, the PM has neither control nor responsibility.
The speaker of the house is the defacto boss of the parliament and that's who invited the nazi. Even if they knew the history of everyone who enters the building, the PM couldn't have prevented the speaker from inviting this guy. Had ANYONE known this guy's history, this wouldn't have happened.
This is true, the speaker is by all accounts a professional and well respected man with an impeccable, non partisan service history who made one of the most gigantic individual fuck ups in our patliaments history. If anyone had known beforehand the speaker would not have let him speak.
1000000% agree
"We have here in the chamber today [a] Ukrainian Canadian world [war] veteran from the second world war who fought [for] the Ukrainian Independence against the Russians and continues to support the troops today even at his age of 98." The Canadian Prime Minister heard this man was a Nazi and then started clapping. I don't understand how much more black and white this could be.
Yes let everyone, despite everything else going on at the time, pause in the moment to recall the finer points of WW2 geopolitics because everyone obviously has all those facts at the forefront of their mind at all times.
List of people who clapped: literally everyone.
I watched at home and didn’t clue in and I didn’t have cameras pointing at me documenting an internationally significant diplomatic event.
This is not the own you think it is.
Yes let everyone, despite everything else going on at the time, pause in the moment to recall the finer points of WW2 geopolitics because everyone obviously has all those facts at the forefront of their mind at all times.
Bruv, bruv, this is the bare minimum, I swear. If you cannot recall that WWII was Nazi Germany vs the Soviet Union, you aren't prepared enough to have opinions on the modern conflict or any aspect of geopolitics. This isn't the finer points.
List of people who clapped: literally everyone.
Mhm.
I don’t think you’re arguing in good faith. There were more countries involved in WW2 than Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union but, as I said, I’m not an expert and I don’t expect people to be.
It was a mistake on the part of the speaker, he owned it, and then the government apologized. Case closed. Don’t be a partisan hack.