# RC Legion Chaplain Resigns After 11 Nov Speech Deemed Too Political



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2014)

This from CBC.ca, shared under the "Fair Dealing" provisions of Canada's _Copyright Act (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-42)_


> The Royal Canadian Legion in Kenora, Ont., accepted the resignation of its chaplain on Monday, after some members and the local Conservative MP complained her remarks about Veterans Affairs and Afghanistan War veterans at a Remembrance Day service were too political.
> 
> During the Nov. 11 legion service, Rev. Sandra Tankard spoke out about concerns that veterans who fought in Afghanistan are not getting proper care, and then talked about cuts to Veterans Affairs.
> 
> ...



FYI, here's the notes to her speech shared w/CBC (realizing, like any other speech notes, it's "check against delivery" - or "what's written may not always be exactly what's said"):


> REMEMBRANCE DAY: Nov. 11, 2014
> 
> Each one of us, and many others across the country and around the world, are wearing the Poppy of Remembrance today.
> 
> ...


**** - This appears to refer to a sermon by the Rev. James Dugan of St. Alban's Anglican Cathedral in Kenora - can't find a text to that.


----------



## TCM621 (19 Nov 2014)

So a member of the national legion leadership publicly advocates for veterans and takes the government to task for their actions? Can't have that.


----------



## Cloud Cover (19 Nov 2014)

@Tcm621: my read on the matter is different. Yes, the MP staffers objected as did the MP himself, that is one thing and it does to some degree validate your statement. However, it is very clear from the statements of the RCL executives and some of the members themselves that they felt that Tankard went too far by suggesting or inferring which political party deserves to govern. Let's not forget, Afghanistan was the Liberal Party of Canada's war, the current support regime for Afghanistan vets is a system put in place by the Liberal government. The foregoing does not erase the failure of the CPC to correct a shitty system, but none of that matters to Tankard, who clearly cannot find it within herself to be factually objective and politically non-partisan even on a day of solemn remembrance. Lots of shame to go around, no need to single out any particular entity.


----------



## PuckChaser (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> So a member of the national legion leadership publicly advocates for veterans and takes the government to task for their actions? Can't have that.


Remembrance day is not for politics. Right idea, inappropriate time.


----------



## George Wallace (19 Nov 2014)

Interesting.  She was not the only Padre using the Remembrance Day platform to chime in.  The Padre at the Beechwood Cemetery was also making statements referring to the recent suicide rate.  I wonder if this may have been in collusion with other Padres.


----------



## TCM621 (19 Nov 2014)

whiskey601 said:
			
		

> @Tcm621: my read on the matter is different. Yes, the MP staffers objected as did the MP himself, that is one thing and it does to some degree validate your statement. However, it is very clear from the statements of the RCL executives and some of the members themselves that they felt that Tankard went too far by suggesting or inferring which political party deserves to govern. Let's not forget, Afghanistan was the Liberal Party of Canada's war, the current support regime for Afghanistan vets is a system put in place by the Liberal government. The foregoing does not erase the failure of the CPC to correct a shitty system, but none of that matters to Tankard, who clearly cannot find it within herself to be factually objective and politically non-partisan even on a day of solemn remembrance. Lots of shame to go around, no need to single out any particular entity.


I didn't read anything partisan there. Maybe the reference to Dalliare could be seen as pro Liberal but it could just be pro Dalliare. I read it as an indictment of the Government, which is more than just the CPC.  They are responsible but there hundreds of unelected government employees who are recommending these policies to the various ministers.  They are part of the government too. Treasury Board, Veterans Affairs and Public Works and DND have all had a hand in the state of affairs for the military and veterans.  

She may have been making a political, partisan statement, I don't know. But she was more importantly taking a stand for members and veterans.  And Remberance day is the appropriate time for that.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2014)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Interesting.  She was not the only Padre using the Remembrance Day platform to chime in.  The Padre at the Beechwood Cemetery was also making statements referring to the recent suicide rate.  I wonder if this may have been in collusion with other Padres.


Was the Padre in question Anglican?  It _may_ have gone out on their "net" if that's the case.

The Kenora Legion padre, as far as I can see, is an "independent", not linked to any church in particular.

BTW, more on this from Sun Media, and the Kenora media here and here.


----------



## Rocky Mountains (19 Nov 2014)

I am always cynical when someone accuses a federal government of budget cuts.  Seriously, when has the federal government ever reduced any spending.  Looks like a 30 % increase over the last 9 years despite a whole whack of WWII veterans dying off.

http://www.veterans.gc.ca/eng/news/vac-responds/info-graphics/expenditures

Veterans Affairs spending is like health, education, Indian Affairs, etc.  It is never enough and people are constant vocal critics, whatever amount is spent.  A little fact checking is always in order.


----------



## ModlrMike (19 Nov 2014)

The pulpit, particularly on Remembrance Day, is not the place to politic. 

The separation of Church and State etc. Had she made a speech extolling the virtues of the government, the commentary would be the same, albeit from the opposite end of the spectrum.


----------



## Loachman (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> But she was more importantly taking a stand for members and veterans.  And Remberance day is the appropriate time for that.



No, it is not.

It is a day to remember and honour our Dead.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> She may have been making a political, partisan statement, I don't know.


If she spoke the words in her notes, this may have been the most eye-drawing remarks in that respect:


> Like many other members of the Royal Canadian Legion, I claim my right to dissent against this action, both with my voice and a letter to my MP and with the promise of my vote to the party that would restore that funding to the people and programs it has supported!


Subtle criticism of government is one thing, even on Remembrance Day, but counselling people to vote for or against a party might be crossing the partisan line.



			
				Tcm621 said:
			
		

> And Remebrance day is the appropriate time for that.


As much as some like to overlap the messaging (examples here and here), Remembrance Day is still the day to honour and remember _the fallen_.


----------



## TCM621 (19 Nov 2014)

milnews.ca said:
			
		

> As much as some like to overlap the messaging (examples here and here), Remembrance Day is still the day to honour and remember _the fallen_.



Unlike the US, we don't have Veterans Day so we roll that and memorial day into one day and call it Remembrance Day. If Nov. 11 isn't the best day to highlight the plight of Veterans what day is? 


To the person who mentioned separation of church and state, the principle does not apply here. That principle if purely about governments interfering with one's faith, the RCL chaplain is within her rights, and one could argue responsibilities to her "flock" (ie Veterans), to criticize the government. 

While I certainly don't agree with a message of "Vote Liberal, the Conservative Party has screwed veterans", a reminder to the government that they are responsible for the treatment of Veterans and serving soldiers and beholden to the people is appropriate IMO. I don't read it as a partisan message but a reminder (or even a subtle threat) that veterans and military are a big voting block and treatment of Veterans and soldiers could be a deal breaker.


----------



## Loachman (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> If Nov. 11 isn't the best day to highlight the plight of Veterans what day is?



The other 364 days of the year (365 on leap years).

Less, of course, significant holidays for those that mark them.


----------



## kratz (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> I don't read it as a partisan message but a reminder (or even a subtle threat) that veterans and military are a big voting block and treatment of Veterans and soldiers could be a deal breaker.



Tcm621,

You are NOT reading the subtext of what "everyone" is agreeing to. For over 80+ years, parisian politics are put aside to respect those who have fallen, and recently to acknowledge those who have sacrificed in service. It has never been acceptable to make political messages from any angle through this time of remembrance.


With the growing dissent from veterans, I could very well view understand motivation of the padre's comments and may entertain them as a planted message. She knew she would have to resign. Were the comments tasteful, approved or appropriate in any manner, NO.  Despite the message, and when the message is lost...as in law, so is the court case.


----------



## The Bread Guy (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> While I certainly don't agree with a message of "Vote Liberal, the Conservative Party has screwed veterans", a reminder to the government that they are responsible for the treatment of Veterans and serving soldiers and beholden to the people is appropriate IMO. I don't read it as a partisan message but a reminder (or even a subtle threat) that veterans and military are a big voting block and treatment of Veterans and soldiers could be a deal breaker.


As much as I'm with you 1000% re:  how much we should be keeping vets' issues front and centre, a subtle delivery of the message in yellow _can_ be OK in that kind of a setting, while the bit in orange is more political, therefore impolitic, in that setting.

In fact, in one media account a couple of days after November 11th, she sort of admits the "time & place" issue:


> .... “I will apologize to Greg Rickford and to the legion for the embarrassment they believed I have caused. I think it’s fair that I apologize for when and where I said it, but not for what I said,” she related in an interview with the _Daily Miner and News_. “I was not anticipating this reaction. I didn’t regard the statements as political but I was asking people to be aware of the fact that many of our veteran soldiers are not getting the support they need.” ....



In another story after the Legion decided to fire her:


> .... “Apparently some people interpreted my message as telling them how to vote,” she said, adding that wasn’t the case. “But rather to get out and vote as an obligation of citizenship.” ....


----------



## TCM621 (19 Nov 2014)

Maybe I am the one misreading it. That is entirely possible. As for the message as I understand it, we will just have to disagree on whether Nov 11 is an appropriate time to advocate for veterans.


----------



## kratz (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> Maybe I am the one misreading it. That is entirely possible. As for the message as I understand it, we will just have to disagree on whether Nov 11 is an appropriate time to advocate for veterans.



Veterans have the entire year to advocate.
Our nation for many decades has agreed, that we should respect, remember and reflect on our fallen one day a year.
Just because veterans are nearly front and center, remembering their comrads in arms, does NOT offer them the platform you advocate one day a year.

The laws of unintended results would be catastrophic if we bowed to what you are advocating for when it comes to both remembering out past (wars / comrades) and respecting our veterans. Once politics enters the realm, both are lost the vagaries of current sentiment. Consider the "White poppy campaign", review uniformed comments from online MSM regarding the military or their benefits. Once remembrance becomes political, we can not even offer an honest check to balance things we normally can not influence within Canadian culture.


----------



## TCM621 (19 Nov 2014)

I guess I just don't see advocating for veterans and serving members as political. I see it as patriotic and the right thing to do.


----------



## George Wallace (19 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> I guess I just don't see advocating for veterans and serving members as political. I see it as patriotic and the right thing to do.



There is a proper time and a proper place.


----------



## Loachman (20 Nov 2014)

Tcm621 said:
			
		

> I guess I just don't see advocating for veterans and serving members as political. I see it as patriotic and the right thing to do.



If a padre delivered a political rant at a funeral, would you consider that appropriate as well?

I would not consider _any_ political speech delivered by a padre at any function at which he/she was officiating - baptism, marriage, funeral, sermon - to be appropriate or seemly. What they say at other times and places, however, is up to them.

We cannot, nor should we be able to, do that sort of thing while in uniform either. Off-duty, and in civilian clothes, and acting in the capacity of a citizen-in-general is (usually) another matter.


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Nov 2014)

I am on Loachman's page.

Remembrance Day is to pay respects to our war dead.  Not to the physically maimed, not to the emotionally scarred, not to those who went to war and returned, not to those who spent some time in uniform, not to emergency services workers or other public employees or whoever else got mentioned at this year's services.

Quit diluting it.  It is not too much to ask that a simple and short ceremony be restricted to its purpose instead of becoming a hat tree for everyone else with a cause.


----------



## The Bread Guy (20 Nov 2014)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> Quit diluting it.  It is not too much to ask that a simple and short ceremony be restricted to its purpose instead of becoming a hat tree for everyone else with a cause.


Especially when even the speaker herself said:


> *I think it’s fair that I apologize for when and where I said it*, but not for what I said.


----------

