Divisive ‘us’ holding up anthem bill
Senate haggling prompts charge of ‘tactic’
OTTAWA • Aone-linepiece of legislation to make the national anthem gender-neutral devolved into an argument about grammar and national unity in the Senate this week.
Proponents are still hoping to see the late MP Mauril Bélanger’s bill passed before Canada Day and the 150th anniversary of Confederation. It would change O Canada lyrics from “true patriot love, in all thy sons command,” to “in all of us command.”
Bill sponsor Frances Lankin accuses Tories of trying to kill the bill. If a legislative murder was planned this week, the murder weapon was questionable grammar.
Conservative Sen. Tobias Enverga, to the incredulity of several colleagues, proposed the wording “in all of our command” Tuesday.
“This is in no way a tactic or a gimmick so as to delay the bill,” he submitted. “I am moving this amendment because I feel it is truly in the best interest of all Canadians that any changes made to our national anthem be grammatically accurate.”
Enverga argued “us” creates a grammatical error — a “fatal flaw,” he said. Other senators chimed in disagreeing with this interpretation, with Liberal Sen. Claudette Tardif reading out loud a grammar-themed letter she received from a high school teacher. “It doesn’t make sense to me grammatically,” offered Liberal Sen. Jane Cordy.
Enverga also invoked national unity. “The word ‘us’ is inherently divisive as it construes an ‘us’ versus ‘them’ mentality — we don’t want that — that has no place in the meaning and rhetoric of our national anthem,” he declared. “Although this point may seem frivolous, colleagues, this is certainly not a humorous subject.”
“This is a tactic, although you said it wasn’t. This is a tactic to kill the bill,” Lankin said. “I wish I could find your intervention on this grammatical issue amusing. I say to the honourable senator that I do not.”
Lankin had told senators several weeks ago a procedural issue in the House of Commons could cause any amendment at all to defeat the bill, whether intentionally or not.
Bélanger died last year after a public struggle with ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis) which leaves the bill without a House sponsor. Convention would dictate unanimous consent be sought for a new sponsor before any Senate amendments could be dealt with. If someone voted against the motion for a new sponsor, the bill could be automatically defeated.
Conservative Sen. Don Plett, who at the end of May proposed wording “thou dost in us command” for reasons of literary tradition, said he was unaware of the rule and had no intention to kill the legislation outright. Last week, senators voted his amendment down.