A case must be made before refusing a permit
Will new problems sent our way from the United States never cease?
Trumps and tariffs and annexation and borders and fentanyl and complaints about us being nasty for not buying American products or vacationing in the United States is all bad enough.
Now, enter Sean Feucht.
JOSE LUIS MAGANA / THE ASSOCIATED PRESS FILES
Christian musician Sean Feucht
The Christian musician has ruffled feathers across the country because — to quote Feucht himself — 'God called us to come to Canada.'
After he requested permission to hold free concerts in a number of public spaces, a series of municipalities have cancelled or refused to issue permits for his performances.
Winnipeg has denied him a permit to perform: so has Abbottsford, Halifax, Charlottetown, Moncton, Gatineau, Quebec City and Vaughn. West Kelowna is considering its options, and Saskatoon has granted a permit, but has said it is also monitoring security concerns.
There are plenty of personal reasons you may not want Feucht to perform in your province: you may find parts of his hardline Christian message to be exclusionary and effectively promote discrimination against members of our community.
You may question the ethics of his ministry: after all, in June, six former senior members of his groups issued a report saying he should be removed from 'all positions of leadership and financial stewardship,' and said 'Having witnessed first-hand what we have witnessed about Sean we can no longer encourage any financial contributions to him and his endeavours; we can no longer encourage anyone to work for him, paid or unpaid; and we can no longer encourage anyone to partner with him in any ministry capacity.'
But you can't simply go to a laundry list of the most common reasons to refuse to issue a permit for a performance, and select the one most likely to apply.
In Winnipeg's case, the reason given was that the chosen public location, Central Park on Ellice Avenue, was too small, at just under two hectares, for the 2,000 people Feucht's organizers are expecting — especially because the concert is free, and total numbers of attendees were hard to predict. As well, there are concerns from the city's emergency services about how they would access the area, given the numbers of pedestrians, concert-goers, vehicle volumes and parking issues related to a concert of that size.
That's certainly a more cogent set of reasons than other municipalities have given.
Wednesdays
A weekly dispatch from the head of the Free Press newsroom.
But perhaps it would have been simpler to request that the organizers find a better site.
Holding something like a national Liberal Party Convention would have security and safety concerns — but the City of Winnipeg would not turn that away. Heck, a True North Whiteout street party has security and operational concerns, yet the city and the Winnipeg Police Service manage to address those.
A city can certainly refuse to issue a permit for a performance, but that refusal has to be clearly articulated, transparent, and the refusal has to be made for good reasons. (Just to be clear — being hounded by outspoken citizens who don't like a performer's public positions doesn't constitute a good reason.)
If those reasons aren't clear and cogent, the risk is that they will be interpreted as a means to quell free speech or the ability of people to assemble. Which, unfortunately, is what's happening now.
One thing is for sure: denying Feucht permission to perform pretty much across the country has most likely been a far greater money and attention generator for the performer than just ignoring him — or, at the minimum, suggesting a venue better suited to the size of his proposed event — would ever have been.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
7 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Smithsonian denies White House pressure to remove Trump impeachment references
WASHINGTON (AP) — The White House did not pressure the Smithsonian to remove references to President Donald Trump's two impeachments from an exhibit and will include him in an updated presentation 'in the coming weeks,' the museum said Saturday. The revelation that Trump was no longer listed among impeached presidents sparked concern that history was being whitewashed to appease the president. 'We were not asked by any Administration or other government official to remove content from the exhibit,' the Smithsonian statement said. A museum spokesperson, Phillip Zimmerman, had previously pledged that 'a future and updated exhibit will include all impeachments,' but it was not clear when the new exhibit would be installed. The museum on Saturday did not say when in the coming weeks the new exhibit will be ready. A label referring to Trump's impeachments had been added in 2021 to the National Museum for American History's exhibit on the American presidency, in a section called 'Limits of Presidential Power.' The section includes materials on the impeachment of Presidents Bill Clinton and Andrew Johnson and the Watergate scandal that helped lead to President Richard Nixon's resignation. 'The placard, which was meant to be a temporary addition to a twenty-five year-old exhibition, did not meet the museum's standards in appearance, location, timeline, and overall presentation,' the statement said. 'It was not consistent with other sections in the exhibit and moreover blocked the view of the objects inside its case. For these reasons, we removed the placard.' Trump is the only president to have been impeached twice — in 2019, for pushing Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelenskyy to investigate Joe Biden, who would later defeat Trump in the 2020 presidential election; and in 2021 for 'incitement of insurrection,' a reference to the Jan. 6 siege of the U.S. Capitol by Trump supporters attempting to halt congressional certification of Biden's victory. The Democratic majority in the House voted each time for impeachment. The Republican-led Senate each time acquitted Trump.
Winnipeg Free Press
15 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
From Laos to Brazil, Trump's tariffs leave a lot of losers. But even the winners will pay a price
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's tariff onslaught this week left a lot of losers – from small, poor countries like Laos and Algeria to wealthy U.S. trading partners like Canada and Switzerland. They're now facing especially hefty taxes – tariffs – on the products they export to the United States starting Aug. 7. The closest thing to winners may be the countries that caved to Trump's demands — and avoided even more pain. But it's unclear whether anyone will be able to claim victory in the long run — even the United States, the intended beneficiary of Trump's protectionist policies. 'In many respects, everybody's a loser here,'' said Barry Appleton, co-director of the Center for International Law at the New York Law School. Barely six months after he returned to the White House, Trump has demolished the old global economic order. Gone is one built on agreed-upon rules. In its place is a system in which Trump himself sets the rules, using America's enormous economic power to punish countries that won't agree to one-sided trade deals and extracting huge concessions from the ones that do. 'The biggest winner is Trump,' said Alan Wolff, a former U.S. trade official and deputy director-general at the World Trade Organization. 'He bet that he could get other countries to the table on the basis of threats, and he succeeded – dramatically.'' Everything goes back to what Trump calls 'Liberation Day'' – April 2 – when the president announced 'reciprocal'' taxes of up to 50% on imports from countries with which the United States ran trade deficits and 10% 'baseline'' taxes on almost everyone else. He invoked a 1977 law to declare the trade deficit a national emergency that justified his sweeping import taxes. That allowed him to bypass Congress, which traditionally has had authority over taxes, including tariffs — all of which is now being challenged in court. Winners will still pay higher tariffs than before Trump took office Trump retreated temporarily after his Liberation Day announcement triggered a rout in financial markets and suspended the reciprocal tariffs for 90 days to give countries a chance to negotiate. Eventually, some of them did, caving to Trump's demands to pay what four months ago would have seemed unthinkably high tariffs for the privilege of continuing to sell into the vast American market. The United Kingdom agreed to 10% tariffs on its exports to the United States — up from 1.3% before Trump amped up his trade war with the world. The U.S. demanded concessions even though it had run a trade surplus, not a deficit, with the UK for 19 straight years. The European Union and Japan accepted U.S. tariffs of 15%. Those are much higher than the low single-digit rates they paid last year — but lower than the tariffs he was threatening (30% on the EU and 25% on Japan). Also cutting deals with Trump and agreeing to hefty tariffs were Pakistan, South Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia and the Philippines. Even countries that saw their tariffs lowered from April without reaching a deal are still paying much higher tariffs than before Trump took office. Angola's tariff, for instance, dropped to 15% from 32% in April, but in 2022 it was less than 1.5%. And while Trump administration cut Taiwan's tariff to 20% from 32% in April, the pain will still be felt. '20% from the beginning has not been our goal, we hope that in further negotiations we will get a more beneficial and more reasonable tax rate,' Taiwan's president Lai Ching-te told reporters in Taipei Friday. Trump also agreed to reduce the tariff on the tiny southern African kingdom of Lesotho to 15% from the 50% he'd announced in April, but the damage may already have been done there. Bashing Brazil, clobbering Canada, shellacking the Swiss Countries that didn't knuckle under — and those that found other ways to incur Trump's wrath — got hit harder. Even some of the poor were not spared. Laos' annual economic output comes to $2,100 per person and Algeria's $5,600 — versus America's $75,000. Nonetheless, Laos got rocked with a 40% tariff and Algeria with a 30% levy. Trump slammed Brazil with a 50% import tax largely because he didn't like the way it was treating former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro, who is facing trial for trying to lose his electoral defeat in 2022. Never mind that the U.S. has exported more to Brazil than it's imported every year since 2007. Trump's decision to plaster a 35% tariff on longstanding U.S. ally Canada was partly designed to threaten Ottawa for saying it would recognize a Palestinian state. Trump is a staunch supporter of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Switzerland was clobbered with a 39% import tax — even higher than the 31% Trump originally announced on April 2. 'The Swiss probably wish that they had camped in Washington' to make a deal, said Wolff, now senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. 'They're clearly not at all happy.'' Fortunes may change if Trump's tariffs are upended in court. Five American businesses and 12 states are suing the president, arguing that his Liberation Day tariffs exceeded his authority under the 1977 law. In May, the U.S. Court of International Trade, a specialized court in New York, agreed and blocked the tariffs, although the government was allowed to continue collecting them while its appeal wend its way through the legal system, and may likely end up at the U.S. Supreme Court. In a hearing Thursday, the judges on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sounded skeptical about Trump's justifications for the tariffs. 'If (the tariffs) get struck down, then maybe Brazil's a winner and not a loser,'' Appleton said. Paying more for knapsacks and video games Trump portrays his tariffs as a tax on foreign countries. But they are actually paid by import companies in the U.S. who try to pass along the cost to their customers via higher prices. True, tariffs can hurt other countries by forcing their exporters to cut prices and sacrifice profits — or risk losing market share in the United States. But economists at Goldman Sachs estimate that overseas exporters have absorbed just one-fifth of the rising costs from tariffs, while Americans and U.S. businesses have picked up the most of the tab. Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Ford, Best Buy, Adidas, Nike, Mattel and Stanley Black & Decker, have all hiked prices due to U.S. tariffs Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. 'This is a consumption tax, so it disproportionately affects those who have lower incomes,' Appleton said. 'Sneakers, knapsacks … your appliances are going to go up. Your TV and electronics are going to go up. Your video game devices, consoles are going to up because none of those are made in America.'' Trump's trade war has pushed the average U.S. tariff from 2.5% at the start of 2025 to 18.3% now, the highest since 1934, according to the Budget Lab at Yale University. And that will impose a $2,400 cost on the average household, the lab estimates. 'The U.S. consumer's a big loser,″ Wolff said. ____ AP Economics Writer Christopher Rugaber contributed to this story.
Calgary Herald
17 hours ago
- Calgary Herald
An American embraces the spirit of Canada
Article content 'The Hall of Gods,' exclaimed Mary Schaffer in 1929 as she boated across Alberta's Maligne Lake, with its turquoise waters and sculpted mountain peaks. The first European to behold his land of wonder, she was told by First Nations people there that the very small land mass at the lake's centre was to them 'Spirit Island'. Article content My wife and I arrived in Alberta on July 2 with two questions: Was Jasper National Park as beautiful as I remembered from a 1970s visit? And second, how has the Canadian spirit responded to threats of annexation from the United States? Article content Article content Article content We had heard at least one American tour company was skipping Jasper—citing logistical concerns, but perhaps also with doubts that the area had recovered from last year's wildfires. The park indeed lost some forest. Guides estimated that three to five per cent of parkland was affected. As Canadians undoubtedly know, we learned that the town of Jasper, however, suffered much more—nearly 30 per cent of its property was destroyed. Article content Article content Yet, the spirit of Alberta is one of resilience. Some residents are still in temporary shelters, but are awaiting permanent housing; some businesses haven't reopened; others feared a loss of tourists. But visitors from all over the world are hearing that Jasper remains a magical place, not a site to be avoided. Article content On June 29, three days before we embarked for Calgary, the American president once again told Time magazine that he intended to annex Canada as the 51st state. An American friend of ours wondered whether Canadians only tolerate American tourists for their money. Article content Article content We found the opposite. People in Alberta were eager to share one of the most beautiful places on Earth —wanting us to share in the spirit of adventure that the Canadian Rockies offer. Though we mostly avoided politics, I did say 'I'm sorry' to two Canadians, neither voiced anger at the sovereignty-attacking words by our president. Article content Canadians appear to like understatement. One example came from a historical marker by the Bow River. A sign recounted how a hiker fell into a ditch. He reportedly told his mates, 'It would be good to deal with this situation with haste.' Article content That gentle understatement felt quintessentially Canadian — echoing Britain's enduring 'stiff upper lip' influence. Another example: a wildlife guide telling us of a tourist trampled by an elk, commenting: 'We find a range of intelligences here.' Article content What amazed me most in terms of Canadian attitude was what we didn't see: there were no protest signs, no anti-American buttons or stickers. At least in the parts of Alberta we visited, political expression was invisible. Had the situation been reversed, fierce anti-Canadian protest messaging would be very prominent, and I would fear for the safety of Canadians visiting the States.
