MARL at Twenty-five

Just over three years ago, I opened this bulletin's Editorial with these words: "[The dawn of a new millennium is] a good time to consider the status of rights and liberties in our society. Many of us forget that rights and liberties are not one of the obvious benefits of "civilization" but, on the contrary, a human condition enjoyed quite naturally in so called primitive societies, something that must be protected, or won back, from societies 'enjoying' organized government. Inside civilization, it's a matter of eternal vigilance and, often, struggle to secure and protect rights. Groups such as MARL have been very busy these past two millennia, and it is often hard to know whether to feel triumphant at what has been achieved or depressed by so many continuing threats to our rights and liberties." I continued by identifying a few of the incidents that had recently threatened rights and liberties in our own nation. The abandonment of an aboriginal youth just outside Saskatoon, one of the items then identified, is under judicial enquiry as we write. And our rights and liberties have been recently assaulted, indeed all over the world, by the anti-terrorist legislation that post-9/11 hysteria provoked, especially in the United States. In that country, truth, justice and freedom have been profoundly challenged by security legislation that suspend traditional rights, the rationalizations for two wars, the imprisonment without charge or trial of several thousand individuals rounded up in Afghanistan, and the servility of the political (non-)opposition.

Rights and liberties are delicate flowers. They are sown, cultivated and protected by constitutionally embedded basic freedoms; by imaginative and vigorous educational programs; by the balance in a given society of an economic distribution that does not provoke envy, hopelessness, and resentment; by a well-informed, independent and courageous press; and by individual attitudes and habits, along with public institutions, that perpetually and courageously incline towards freedom and justice rather than away from them. In addition, as the late Martin Luther King Jr. noted, an apathetic "liberal" may be more useless and even more dangerous than a strident racist. In this struggle, Canada has at least two advantages lacking in the United States.

One advantage is the 18th-century parliamentary development that created the concept and institution known as "His/Her Majesty's LOYAL Opposition". In this political tradition, we expect and, indeed, have institutionalized an embedded opposition to the sitting government, an opposition that we take for granted as always loyal to the (Head of) State and to the country. By thus legitimizing opposition, we ensure the safety of its critical activities; governments, the citizenry and the press may all dislike what they hear and may howl to the skies, but no one (usually) is attacked as "disloyal". In contrast, to our south, one of the saddest aspects of the events leading up to the war in Iraq (and even to that in Afghanistan) was the presence of utterly servile politicians and the absence of any debate that would have prevented the invasion(s) or helped, through loyal criticism, to plan it (them) more thoroughly. Americans forgot that a core requirement for freedom is a constant readiness to defend one's country AGAINST its government.

If not along the same lines, then at least having a similar effect, is the second advantage, the one we have in our Monarchy. As Manitoba's W.L. Morton pointed out, a Canadian need be loyal only to the King/Queen and can freely criticize any and all other political actions or proposals, while an American (or anyone living in another of the world's many republics) must be loyal to all the principles of 1776 or those of 1789 or whatever, which form an entire constellation of both vague and clear ideas for the criticism or testing of which one can be labelled "un-American"! Perhaps not in normal times, but at least in times of crisis, these two advantages help protect, if not promote, real and active freedoms.

I mention these points to provide some general, abstract, historical context for celebrating MARL's twenty-fifth birthday and for lamenting its current number of memberships. In the past quarter century, MARL has played an important role in enlarging patients' rights in medical offices and hospitals, aboriginal rights in the marketplace and before governmental authority or institutions, the rights of physically challenged Manitobans to employment and promotion and to everyday mobility, the rights of gays and lesbians etc. to dignity, equality and opportunities, the rights of citizens and immigrants of colour to the same opportunities and treatment as others enjoy, and so on. We had a major impact on the amendments to the province's bill of rights. We provided an umbrella for a multitude of organizations to receive government or philanthropic grants so that they could undertake important research and lobby for expanded opportunities and supports. We loaned our personnel to any number of other organizations to provide start-up advice, continual supports both palpable and moral, and co-operation on wider projects. And we have commissioned the writing of presentations to government committees, informative handbooks for schools and the general public, and research results concerning timely issues and controversies.

One might say that our successes have been our undoing: thanks to MARL, numerous groups now exist that address the particular problems of this group or that, and persons interested in those issues have so many challenges concerning financial support, other assistance, occasions to lobby, and the elimination of discrimination that they can't spare the energy to keep MARL as strong as it once was. But I think the creation of many or most of these groups would have happened anyway, due to the advantages of concentration on specific objectives and sometimes to MARL's suspected neglect of various issues. However, both the significance of our presence and the source of our weakness are found in this plethora of specific groups. We used to discuss the prioritization of issues, so that all our energies collectively could be directed to the most urgent problems while less urgent problems were put on hold; this annoyed those impatient to attack their own issues, but it maximized and concentrated research and agitation, and success could be followed by turning efforts to the next issues on the list. Furthermore, we facilitated the discussion and resolution of clashes between the goals of different interests; not every clash could be resolved, but some could, and others could be debated in a more cooperative spirit. Now, it's every group for itself.

One of MARL's current tasks (and challenges) is to carry on with the attempt to reconcile competing interests. This is not easy, especially from "outside" the agency in question, whence efforts to mediate are often less welcome than before. But no other group is positioned to take up this work or motivated to do so. Unfortunately, fewer individuals than before wish to help us through membership and both fewer individuals and fewer foundations wish to help us through financial support. Yet our presence remains crucial. We alone focus on the entirety of rights and liberties taken together. And we alone try to read all legislative bills in order to screen with general principles for particular threats to freedom, equal treatment and opportunity, or tolerance.

In recent years, MARL has enjoyed superb administrative support and leadership and, less consistently, hard-working and dedicated boards. Most committees are in desuetude, but the Charter Rights and Legislative Review Committee is in operation, and this is our core committee both for the importance of its work and the significance of its public perception. We have also newly established an Education Committee and a Communications Committee, as well as groups aimed at helping the Board do its work. There are challenges to rights and liberties all around. There is crucial work to be done. Once we have convinced a larger number of Manitobans as to why they should be interested in our policies and activities, our membership and our finances will both improve. The next quarter century is up to today's MARL supporters and tomorrow's potential supporters. Bon courage!