Front Burner - 'Racist' letters on Senator's website trigger suspension

Episode Date: May 13, 2019

Last week Senator Lynn Beyak was suspended by her colleagues without pay for the remainder of this parliamentary session. Her punishment came after posting letters on her official Senate webpage that many, including the Senate's ethics watchdog, deem racist towards Indigenous people. Beyak says she's being punished for exercising freedom of speech. CBC's JP Tasker has been following this story from the very start and today on Front Burner he gets us up to speed.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. As I talk about it, I can feel and smell everything that I did back then. And he looks down at me, I'm looking up at him, and he says, that's my little girl. It's a 30-year-old homicide where we don't have anybody charged and convicted.

Felt like a murderer had gotten away with something. Tell me now, did you have anything to do with the murder? Someone Knows Something with David Ridgen, Season 5. Now available. Go to cbc.ca slash sks. Hello, I'm Jamie Poisson. A senator was suspended by her colleagues without pay late last week. It's a pretty rare move. She's been suspended from the Red Chamber for the rest of this parliamentary session.

She won't get paid until the suspension is over. Her colleagues made the move after she refused to apologize. She was suspended for posting letters on her Senate webpage that many, including the Senate's ethics watchdog, believe are racist towards Indigenous people. believe are racist towards Indigenous people. Some of the letters on the website describe Indigenous people as lazy, opportunistic, pampered and inept. Senator Lynn Bayek says she's being punished for exercising freedom of speech. Telling the truth is sometimes controversial, but never racist. The Senate's reputation has been enriched by my stand. But for a lot of people, this is a story about racism.

Racism in Canada's Red Chamber. And how that's just not okay. To Indigenous senators that sit, basically, we've sat right across from her. You know, it was a little disturbing to every day have to face her and look at her. My colleague JP Tasker has been covering this story from the start. It's really been unfolding for about two years now. And he's here with me from Ottawa. That's today on FrontBurner. Hi, JP. Hey, thanks for having me back. So let's get started. Lynn Bayak was originally a Conservative appointed senator. What do we know about her?

Yeah, she was one of the last picks from former Prime Minister Stephen Harper. She was put in the chamber in 2013, so she was one of the last ones from Harper's cohort. Okay, and then last week, the story that, as I mentioned, you've been following for two years, it really comes to a head, and she is suspended without pay by her colleagues from the Senate. Cole's Notes version, why? Yes, she's being suspended now because she's refused to take down letters that she's posted on her website, letters that most people would agree are pretty racist because they describe First Nations peoples as lazy, as inept, you name it.

There's some really harsh criticism in there for Indigenous people. So because she refused to take those down and because she refused to apologize to the Senate, they gave her the boot. Okay, and so she to apologize to the Senate, they gave her the boot. Okay. And so she gets suspended by the Senate. This comes in the wake of a report that we're going to get into in a couple of minutes. But she defends herself Thursday in the Senate's red chamber. And she says she's being unfairly punished by her Senate colleagues for practicing free speech. I stand accused today by the Senate ethics officer of refusing to censor the free expression of Canadian citizens with whom he disagreed.

The committee has agreed with the officer and issued a report that now urges this body of free debate to become a tool of censorship. What else does she get into here? Yeah, for Lynn Bayek, from the beginning, this has always been about free speech. Yeah, for Lynn Bay, from the beginning, this has always been about free speech. And she says the only reason she's facing so much criticism for the letters, for her stance on Indian residential schools, is because political correctness has gone awry in this country. And she really believes that all of this punishment that she's had to endure for posting these letters is really what she describes as a totalitarian nightmare.

That's something out of George Orwell's 1984 novel. I have posted the letters of hundreds of Canadians on my website. It has become a positive public forum. I will not act in a manner that interferes with the freedom of expression of the people I represent each day. I note at this point that the penalty of the committee report is right out of Orwell's 1984. right out of Orwell's 1984. Okay, so I want to unpack all of this a little bit more.

There are so many threads in this story. It's obviously about this one suspended senator, but it's also about the legacy of our residential school system, racism against Indigenous people, limits of freedom of speech, particularly if you are a senator. And let's go back a little bit to where this all started for you in March of 2017. Yeah, it's the beginning of March,

and I'm sitting in my desk at the office like any other day listening to the Senate chamber. It sits a bit later than the House of Commons usually does. A debate, Senator Bayek? Thank you, Speaker. And Senator Lynn Bayek is rising to speak to another motion, nothing to do with residential schools. I want to present a somewhat different side of the residential school story. Far too many Indigenous people, especially women, are incarcerated in Canada today.

But she kind of launches into this diatribe against the Truth and Reconciliation Commission, which, as you'll probably remember, was a body set up by the former Conservative government to investigate the Indian residential school system and to kind of come to some conclusions about its place in history, but also to pursue some justice for people who had survived it. I want to first acknowledge the excellent work undertaken by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Mistakes were made at residential schools. In many instances, horrible mistakes

that overshadowed some good things that also happened at those schools. And she basically tears a strip off the commission, including Murray Sinclair, who is the commissioner, and he's sitting across from her in the Senate because since being commissioner, he was appointed to the Red Chamber. And she launches basically into an attack on the institution

for saying she's disappointed in it for not focusing on all the good that happened at residential schools. I speak partly for the record, but mostly in memory of the kindly and well-intentioned men and women and their descendants, perhaps some of us here in this chamber, whose remarkable works, good deeds, and historical tales in the residential schools go unacknowledged for the most part and are overshadowed by negative reports. Saying that, you know, a lot of children had some good experiences there. They learned English. They learned the Christian faith. They, you know, made friends and participated in sports. And none of that is really focused on in media reports and in the TRC report. She thought that that was wrong because there were so many well-intentioned

teachers and administrators at those schools that just don't get a proper accounting in our history. Obviously, the negative issues must be addressed, but it is unfortunate that they are sometimes magnified and considered more newsworthy than the abundance of good. And of course, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission found that overwhelmingly physical, mental, sexual abuse, and of course, 6,000 children died while in care because of malnourishment and disease. And also there was this sense of isolation for a lot of Indigenous people who are essentially taken away from their families. In his final report, Justice Murray Sinclair delivered a rousing speech acknowledging past wrongs. What took place in residential schools amounts to nothing short of cultural genocide.

Yeah, the TRC found that absolutely some children did have positive experiences in these schools over the course of the lifetime that they existed. But the vast majority, and I mean the vast majority, had very negative experiences because they just didn't get a proper education. They weren't given the proper attention by administrators. There was rampant sexual and physical abuse. And Senator Lynn Bayek really put this to a professor at one committee meeting on this topic. His name was Jim Miller. He's a professor at the University of Saskatchewan. You're putting me in a very difficult position with Senator Sinclair sitting here. I know. He's a very open-minded man, too.

She was asking him, like, you know, can we just kind of go back, forget all the negativity, let's focus on the good. And he said, listen, I've done extensive research on this, so has the TRC, and overwhelmingly people at the very best had a mixed experience. Emotional deprivation, poor care, inadequate instruction, overwork, aggressive, hostile proselytization by missionaries and so forth. So that was my experience. Okay, so she gives a speech in March 2017. She's essentially hitting on this idea that we need to focus on what's positive when it comes to the legacy of residential schools and what happens after she gives a speech. It really prompts a national conversation, frankly.

People are outraged on both sides, really on the other side. I'm joined in the studio by Phil Fontaine. He's the former National Chief of the Assembly of First Nations and a residential school survivor. Clearly doesn't know that there were 38,000 abuse claims, another 7,000 testimonials that were gathered by the TRC. And if she had been aware of those, she wouldn't have spoken as she did. Of course, coming down on her, saying it's totally inappropriate for a member of the Upper House to be questioning the Truth and Reconciliation Commission,

to be questioning Murray truth and reconciliation commission to be to be questioning murray sinclair one of the most respected voices on indigenous issues in this country i am a bit shocked that you still hold some views that have been proven to be incorrect over the years but nonetheless i accept that you have the right to hold them and i confront her along with my colleague colleague Katie Simpson, outside of a committee meeting one day to ask her about all the backlash she's faced and whether she thinks it's appropriate to defend this system and defend the teachers that were in it. Have you given any thought to resigning from the

Aboriginal People's Committee? No. And she says, you know, listen, I understand there was pain there. She said, I suffered with these people because she lives and dried in Ontario, in northwestern Ontario. I've suffered with them up there. I appreciate their suffering more than they'll ever know. When you say you've suffered with them, what do you mean? I work with them. I just told you I've worked with them for 30 years, the ones who are still suffering.

And we should just make it very clear she is not Indigenous. She is not. So this is why the comment was so controversial. Of course, she never went to one of those institutions. why the comment was so controversial. Of course, she never went to one of those institutions. But she said by virtue of living in Dryden in a place in this country where there are just so many residential schools, she knows what went on there. It's not clear if she's ever actually been inside one of those. But she said also that, you know, she knows Indigenous issues because one time when she was a teenager, she went on a double date with an Indigenous guy with her past husband. I've been involved since we double dated when I was 15 with an Aboriginal fellow and his wife.

I've lived up there for 40 years, worked with them. They're my friends. They spoke at my husband's funeral. We all get along great. Okay. That she, you know, socialized with a lot of First Nations peoples, so she understood very well what went on there. And she kind of pushed back

against all suggestions from people like the Assembly of First Nations, but also Carolyn Bennett, the Minister of Indigenous Affairs, any suggestion that she had to have some more education on this. I don't need any more education. You know, that antidote that you brought up about the double date, there were people who were just outraged by that comment. Well, frankly, I was shocked. And I was kind of like stunned when she said it to me. I haven't been able to ask Senator Bayek about much of this since it all blew up in the first place in March 2017 because she's refused all requests for interviews. She hasn't spoken to us in the hallways of the Senate.

She doesn't answer emails or phone calls. So the only thing that we have to go on are statements that she releases through the parliamentary press gallery and some of the things that she has to say in the chamber. The speech that caused so much hurt and distress was actually a speech about taxes. That's my mission here in the Senate, is the wise use of tax dollars. And then how does this continue to snowball from there? Oh, it goes on. Basically, a week or two after that last comment, that comment about double dating, she's at an Aboriginal People's Committee meeting.

And let's just remind our audience, when she's making these comments, she's a member of the Senate Aboriginal People's Committee. So she's actually studying some of the plights that are facing First Nations people in this country, including the legacy of the Indian residential school systems. But at one of these meetings, she basically starts to grill two survivors, John Morisot and Doris Young. They're elderly. They've come to Ottawa to tell their story of what went on for them as students in the Indian residential school system. I have struggled all my life to find my way back to my land, my ancestors, my culture. I could not teach my children my precious Cree language. I could speak it, but school had taught me to be ashamed of it.

And she asked them, basically, do they think there should be an audit of all federal spending on First Nations peoples? What are your dreams and goals? Where do you want to live? And what would you tell the government to do with the tax dollars instead of wasting the billions that we have wasted over decades? And still you have no education in Crane River and you have no language teachers in the PAH. And she says, what do you think of my plan to have a referendum on all federal spending? And it's a very bizarre question to ask because they've just finished telling some harrowing tales of being in these schools. They're obviously very choked up about their experience.

They're quite emotional. And then for her to turn to this question of tax dollars really, you know, threw everyone for a loop, frankly. And the two elders really responded saying, listen, this is not for us to comment. So if you just did that for the Métis children that go to school, then we're putting people in blocks. And I don't think that's the answer to those questions. When you start talking about tax dollars, then it puts up some real walls. So that ignited a whole tsunami of criticism again, because she just was so tone deaf in how she was approaching the issue.

Okay. What happens after that? I remember at the time that generated quite a few headlines. Yeah. And that was kind of the straw that broke the camel's back for Ronna Ambrose, who is then the interim Conservative leader of the party. And she finally pulls the plug on Lynn Bayek being a member of that Aboriginal People's Committee. And she says that she will no longer sit on that committee because of all the inappropriate things she had said. Look, there is no way to explain her comments. And I think that we should never try and find a

way to rationalize that dark period in Canadian history. So and at that time, is she getting support in the Senate? She had some support, yes, from her Conservative caucus colleagues. Most importantly, Gisele Monté, who was the senator from Quebec, Kelvin Ogilvie and others. I see the parasites are still following. Did you call us the parasites for being here? I don't recall that. Did you hear that?

And obviously the Conservative caucus was trying to surround their friend and colleague. And then she starts to post these letters on her website. Am I right? That's right. So in the midst of all this, she is receiving thousands of letters from Canadians, the vast majority of which are negative, that are coming down on her saying that she should never say these sorts of things. It's really offensive. But there is a small minority, a fairly sizable minority her saying that she should never say these sorts of things. It's really offensive. But there is a small minority, a fairly sizable minority, actually, I should say. About 20% of the letters she's received to this point are in support of the things that she is saying, that they want to see an audit of federal spending on Indigenous issues. They want to take a second look at the legacy of the Indian residential school system.

And so she starts to post these letters to her website. legacy of the Indian residential school system. And so she starts to post these letters to her website. And a lot of them, as I said, off the top include some unsavory content. And she says she's creating a forum for free speech on her website. She's saying that she has the most positive and informative website on Indigenous issues in the country because she's allowing what the quote unquote other side of the Indian residential school story to be told. And this really kicks it into high gear because at this point, Andrew Scheer has become the leader of the party, and he has to respond to her using a taxpayer funded website to post content of tremendously questionable value. And so what does Andrew Scheer do with all of this?

Andrew Scheer is in a pickle because there are members of the Conservative Senate caucus that have defended Lynn Bay Act. They say, well, we disagree with some of the things that she said. She should be a member of our caucus. Our caucus allows for differing views on these things. So he really has to come to a conclusion. But he's facing a lot of pressure from the Liberals. Liberals quickly pounce on this as an issue they think will work in their favour. And so finally, it comes to a boiling point in January 2018 when Andrew Scheer kicks her out of caucus after she refuses to take down the letters from her website at his request. She refuses, and Scheer gives her the boot once and for all from the caucus. Scheer's office had this to say. There's a fine line between espousing distasteful views on a public policy position and willingly promoting unacceptable racist comments.

And she's really left on her own. She's sent out to be an independent senator. And I know we talked earlier about how Lynn Bayock had been defending herself after her March 2017 speech. But what is she saying now? Has she changed her mind at all? She hasn't. And actually, after all this, you know, made it into the pages of cbcnews.ca, she said she would take the summer to meet with Indigenous peoples to learn more about these issues. And she came back from those months of soul searching to say that really she thought

she was right all along. She thought that First Nations peoples should assimilate into Canadian society. She thinks that they should give up their status cards, their Indian status cards, which entitle them to certain rights and benefits because of the treaties they signed with the Canadian crown. So she kind of doubles down in the face of all this criticism from the letters, from her talk about the Indian residential school systems. And she says, you know, now more than ever, Indigenous peoples have to assimilate into the mainstream. Bayak went on to say, none of us is leaving, so let's stop the guilt and blame and find

a way to live together and share. All Canadians are then free to preserve their cultures and their own communities on their own time with their own dime. One thing I've always struggled to understand about this story is why, for Lynn Bayock, this was such a central issue. Well, she really made it clear because after all this happened, she was investigated by the Senate ethics officer because so many of her colleagues complained about her behavior. Let's talk about that report.

The Senate investigator got a series of complaints about Senator Bayek and investigated the issue, particularly the issue of the letters that she posted on her website. This Senate report was released in March. And can we start with what it revealed about Bayak's understanding of racism? She doesn't really have a grasp of what exactly racism is. And she doesn't believe that if there is racism out there, that it exists in Canada. And the Senate ethics officer made that clear in his report by quoting one of her statements that she made to him during the course of this investigation. And she says, in my view, there is no racism in Canada right now.

There are groups putting people into silos, trying to divide us by saying that we have racism, we have racism against Indigenous peoples, Ukrainian white privilege. I find those people racist. So that statement leads the ethics officer to conclude that this is just not a solid concept to Senator Lynn Bayek, that she doesn't quite understand that all the things that she's posted on her website, all of the things that she has said in the chamber and at committee and in media interviews are hurtful to Indigenous peoples. And he concludes that it doesn't matter how many times you tell her that this is inappropriate, she just doesn't accept that and that she wants to push what she calls the positive story of Indian residential schools. Okay. And I know she ends up sort of walking back that opinion that there's no racism

in Canada. She like eventually concedes there is racism, but that the overwhelming majority of Canadians are not racist. And that also she says that the term racism is subjective. Am I right about that? Yeah. She says that, okay, fine, maybe there is racism in Canada, but we all bleed the same color. We all live together in peace and harmony here in this country. She just doesn't accept that there might be some racial tensions still, you know, from decades of painful colonialism. Okay. And then what does the report find when it comes to her right to freedom of speech? So the Senate Ethics Officer delivers his report on all this. He recommends to the Senate Ethics Committee that she should be suspended and that free speech is just simply not a good enough

defense for this. And so the Senate Ethics Committee kind of mulls that question over as to whether Lynn Bayek is covered by this right to free speech. And they determined that basically, no, that is not an adequate defense, because there are limits to free speech in this country. That's been decided by the Supreme Court of Canada. And the Senate Ethics Committee determines that none of what she has said or done is actually covered by that principle, because it just kind of crosses the line that racism should not be endorsed by a taxpayer funded website, it should not be featured prominently on the Senate of Canada webpage. And because she refuses to comply with demands to take that down, the only way to adequately sanction her is to suspend her.

It is your pleasure, Honourable Senators, to adopt the report. Agreed. Adopted on division. Adopted on division. You talked earlier about some reaction from the Indigenous community, but what else have you been hearing over the last two years from Indigenous leaders and other members of the Indigenous community. Yeah, Senator Lillian Dick, who is an Indigenous senator from Saskatchewan, she's the chair of the Aboriginal People's Committee, and she was a part of that committee when Senator Limbeck was saying all those things to the elders. So Senator Dick said so many people

are just relieved not to have to face her every day because of what she symbolizes now. That the kind of things that she posted in my mind were terrible, and she couldn't see that. So it was like every day being poked a little bit in the eye. And how have other senators responded to her suspension? I know you mentioned earlier that she did, at least at one point, have some supporters. Yeah, so when the report, the Senate Ethics Committee report,

came up in the chamber and they had to vote on that, that's what the actual vote was on Thursday, it passed in the House. It was a unanimous decision of the chamber to adopt that report. So there are at least one or two other people in that place that believe Senator Bayek should not have been suspended for her actions. They believe that what she's done to this point did not warrant her suspension. Okay. And of course, we don't know who those people are at this time.

We don't. And let's talk about the takeaways here. You know, did this whole ordeal reveal anything about a need for more education for senators about issues like racism? Or were there other red flags that this raised? Well, I think all of us should be troubled by the fact that she thought the content of those letters was not racist, but edgy and opinionated. That's how she described it. Edgy and opinionated. Perhaps there needs to be more training for some of the members of our upper house.

But I also want to say, I think it really shows the need for fundamental reform to the Senate ethics process. Because Pierre Legault, the Senate ethics officer, took more than a year to review racist letters. That is a long time to me, to a place that's really tried to get out underneath bad press, because they faced so much of it during the expenses scandal, you know, two years of negative headlines, and they're just finally starting to turn the corner now by instituting a lot of reforms, you know, to the appointments process, to the expenses process. It was not well received by so many of those members of the upper house. JP, as always, thank you. Thank you. What happens next year? Well, Senator Bayek's suspension should last about six months, until after the next fall election.

After that, a couple of things could happen. The Senate wants her to do a few things, including taking part in some anti-racism training at her own expense. It also wants her to apologize to the Senate in writing. If Bayek doesn't fulfill these conditions, she could face expulsion from the Senate entirely. That's all for today. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks for listening to FrontBurner. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts. It's 2011 and the Arab Spring is raging. A lesbian activist in Syria starts a blog. She names it Gay Girl in Damascus. Am I crazy? Maybe.

As her profile grows, so does the danger. The object of the email was, please read this while sitting down. It's like a genie came out of the bottle and you can't put it back. Gay Girl Gone. Available now.