CKNW Editorial
for September 21, 1999

In my lifetime I have been the beneficiary of the brilliant columnists who have written and now write for the Vancouver Sun. Many have also written for the Province, my paper, but I concentrate on the Sun today for reasons, which I hope, will become clear.

I remember Elmore Philpott and that dedicated royalist Harold Weir. There was, of course, Jack Scott of revered memory and Jack Wasserman who made a gossip column sound like literature, which it was. Allan Fotheringham was there for many years and Denny Boyd, the best all rounder of his time was too. Didn’t Barry Mather write for them after he left the dying News Herald? He was the one who said of the two so-called “Clubs”, which were the main watering holes of the city before cocktail lounges arrived, “the Pacific Athletic Club is no more noted for athletes than the Arctic Club is for Eskimos.” There was, of course, the patron saint of political writers, Marjorie Nichols who, in the finest traditions, never ever let the facts get in the way of a good yarn. God knows I’ve missed some and my old friend Stan Winfield late of ICBC fame will let me know all about them.

Now there are Pete McMartin, Stephen Hume and others writing on general things, Vaughn Palmer, easily the best political columnist in the country, and my friend Trevor Lautens who, to continue my intended superlatives, is the most elegant writer of them all.

We heard last week that Trevor was headed into some sort of retirement and I hasten to say that this had nothing to do with me saying a week ago today that he grew up in Toronto, not Hamilton. I thought I was doing him a favour but upon reflection that sort of mistake could never be construed as complimentary. In all events, Trevor and I have been pen pals and sometime lunch companions for many years – I think I owe him lunch, come to think of it. And his retirement will not come at the expense of his Saturday column, I’m delighted to hear.

Trevor and I are not on the same political wavelengths – he is that most rare of animals, a compassionate, gentle right winger but none the less right for that. And though the eastern media like to portray me as a right winger most who know me – especially Trevor Lautens – know that just ain’t so. All this by way of leading to the point, counterpoint Trevor and I have been playing column to editorial this past three weeks. And it concerns bigotry.

May I say here and now that for all my disagreement with Trevor on the question of the Chinese boat people I don’t think he has a bigoted thought in his cranium – not in the conscious level of his substantial brain that is. But I believe that we are both products of the same bigoted era and that he hasn’t sufficiently rebelled against his youthful learning experience. But that’s all by the bye. On Saturday, Trevor talks about the discrimination of today and especially deals with affirmative action and quotas. And here we come close to agreeing except I say of Trevor that he reminds me of the man (I forget who it was but Trevor will remind me by fax ere I get off the air this morning) who said of Macaulay “I wish I was as sure of anything as Tom Macaulay is of everything.” You see, while I feel the injustice of affirmative action and quotas, which when in operation smash the notion of merit to bits, I wonder how else you break the bonds of systemic discrimination? The most obvious example of the problem is, or perhaps one hopes was, in the Southern United States. How do you give a group of people for whom slavery is a recent memory, and who are in many places the majority, the opportunity hitherto denied them? The answer often given is that blacks cannot compete in terms of qualifications with whites but how will they ever be qualified if they don’t get the chance to play the game?

I am distressed to see Natives being rushed into and through Law School without meeting appropriate criteria yet how does the native community produce passers of the LSAT exams until there are lawyers, as examples, in their communities?

I am less sympathetic to women in Universities. Like Trevor, I think this notion that “women only” need apply for faculty positions is nonsense and very dangerous nonsense at that. Women have been on faculties at universities in his country for a very long time. They have reached the point, I think, where the answer is not to have quotas for women but penalties if it can be demonstrated that they have been discriminated against. (Incidentally, at UBC both the Dean of the Law School and the President are women).

But here is an issue where Trevor and I part company only because, like Macaulay, he is certain of his ground and I waffle. Which, considering that he is conservative and I am a limp wristed liberal is only to be expected I suppose. Trevor is against affirmative action and quotas, period. I find these notions intellectually dishonest and, in practice discriminatory in themselves yet I still waffle. So be it.

Lunch is on me, Trevor .. just make the usual arrangements as soon as it’s convenient.