A youth perspective

Please lend him your ears.

In my previous column, “The End of the Beginning,” I mentioned that I had spoken to several people as we all waited at the entrance to the Library and Archives Canada building to hear the Prime Minister testify last Friday.

One of the people I spoke to was a young University student. His name is Allan Buri. I asked him whether he might like to contribute a guest column to this newsletter and, to my delight, he agreed.

The short bio he sent me is charming: “ I am a first year student studying Public Affairs and Policy Management at Carleton University. I hope to gain a greater understanding of the workings of Canada’s public policy world.”

I really hope you will read what he has to say. Its wise beyond his years. It reminds us just how important it is to encourage attention to national security issues among the coming generation.

Here is Allan Buri’s column:

A Youth Reflection on the Public Order Emergency Commission Hearing

This past Friday, I had the privilege of bearing witness to the Prime Minister’s testimony before the Public Order Emergency Commission. Being below the average age of the room, Mr. Wark approached me and asked if I would be open to providing a younger person’s perspective on the event. I was honoured to accept.

The reason I followed the public hearings was to bear witness to a historic moment. As was proposed early in the hearing, perhaps this unprecedented invocation of the Emergencies Act will open the floodgates for more frequent invocations in the future. If that is the case, it would be my generation that experiences the long-term consequences of this Commission.

Shortly after speaking with Mr. Wark, the title of “youngest at the hearing” was assumed by a handful of attendees, accompanied by their parents, who could not have been older than twelve. Many were wearing “Freedom Convoy 2022” merchandise, just like their parents.

The endurance of the CoVID-19 pandemic provoked strong opinions surrounding public health measures which eventually manifested themselves in the protests and counter-protests which induced the invocation of the Act under scrutiny. It is not hard to imagine these fervently held opinions being expressed by adults around the dinner table, and then being inevitably absorbed by their impressionable youth.

In that moment, I was reminded that the increasing polarization and siloing within Canadian politics is indisputable. Within his testimony, the Prime Minister himself expressed the concern he shared with his staff and caucus regarding the unprecedented levels of animosity they encountered while on the campaign trail in 2021. Yet it was not until I encountered this direct link between parent and child, exhibited by their matching apparel, that I fully appreciated the weight of ideological inheritance.

This is not a new phenomenon.

One of the greatest tools our society has to dilute the impacts of one’s upbringing on one’s future is public education. It is here that a youth perspective is most salient.

Early in his testimony, the Prime Minister noted how the protesters displayed a gross misunderstanding of Canadian political institutions. Firstly, the Prime Minister noted that the protesters were associating the federal government with mandates that were enacted by provincial governments. Additionally, the Prime Minister claimed, they were confusing the democratic right to protest with the right to occupy a city and border crossings until they were “obeyed”. Such a right does not exist.

This should have come as no surprise. In the Ontario public education system of which I am a product, the “Civics” course has been reduced to a half semester credit. This time frame largely precludes any meaningful analysis of the divisions of power between and within orders of government, an outline and explanation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and a healthy mixing of different approaches to political dilemmas. A haven outside the home for safe and open dialogue surrounding political issues that require critical thinking ensures students are able to encounter and recognize opinions outside the ones expressed within their families. This recognition is imperative for a healthy democracy.

This Commission itself is analogous to the nature of being a student, which entails acknowledging that one does not know everything.

In both instances, one is presented with new information, and is subsequently asked to integrate it into previously held viewpoints. What I learn as a university student either strengthens the previous viewpoints I developed through school and family, or forces me to reevaluate them.

Similarly, through the Commission, the public is inevitably going to be presented with new information that has the potential to alter their original perceptions of the Ottawa protests and the invocation of the Emergencies Act. Having the strength to resist confirmation bias and objectively analyze new evidence is difficult. Commissioner Rouleau has a mentally taxing task ahead of him.

In following the Public Order Emergency Commission, I hope Canadians heeded the quote that greets Carleton University students when they enter the library:

“The wisest mind has something yet to learn”

Young people commonly keep their minds open because they have not yet learned or experienced enough to take hard stances. However, in a heavily polarized political scene, it can feel like there is increasing pressure to sort one’s self into a group in order to belong. This often disfavours the curious and fluid nature of a student, even though this nature is crucial to developing well reasoned, holistic opinions.

The hardening of opinions in order to conform with a group is also seen as preferable as it shields one from being singled out as “wrong”, and anger imposes a high price on being wrong.

And this is something I fear continually turns young people away from these political discussions. Many feel they cannot venture their own questions about such complex topics as the invocation of the Emergencies Act without being spurned by the hardened views of their parents, peers, or even teachers. This is unfortunate, as these contributions are incredibly valuable.

I would like to close by speaking to one final takeaway I had from the Prime Minister’s hearing. The entire nation was able to tune in to hear their Prime Minister justify his actions in the face of articulate opposition. Groups that were vehemently opposed to the government’s positions were permitted to publicly question them. The Prime Minister mentioned how he invoked the Act knowing full well he would be unable to circumvent this accountability mechanism. Many of my peers are political cynics, and many of their concerns hold some merit. Many feel our institutions are out-of-touch, ineffectual, untrustworthy, and serve the interests of older generations and established, privileged classes rather than our own. Many doubted the Prime Minister would even appear to testify.

However, at the very least, I encourage my peers not to take for granted the process which has unfolded before us over the past six weeks.