Don Cherry's Ongoing Exclusion from Order of Canada Highlights Institutional Bias
If membership in the Order of Canada were truly awarded based on significant contributions to national culture, hockey legend Don Cherry would have been honored long ago. Yet at 92 years old, the iconic broadcaster and coach continues to wait, his absence from the prestigious order exposing what many see as partisan and elitist biases within the institution.
A National Fixture with Lasting Impact
Whether loved or loathed—and there are passionate advocates in both camps—Cherry served as a cultural fixture for decades, transcending his role as a hockey commentator with extravagant suits and loudly voiced opinions. Beyond television screens, he established himself as a successful businessman, dedicated philanthropist, and enthusiastic supporter of hockey at all levels while championing Canada's military and historical heritage.
Cherry approached conversation with the intensity of a barroom brawl, firmly believing in his abundant "common sense" while dismissing alternative perspectives. His persona thrived on taking uncompromising stands on hockey matters and broader national issues, creating a figure who simultaneously frustrated and delighted Canadians in equal measure.
The Problem with "Bland Test" Selection Criteria
According to official nomination guidelines, Order of Canada membership should recognize "outstanding contributions to a particular community, region or field of activity." However, in practice, the selection process often functions more like an exclusive upper-middle-class rotary club where candidates must pass what critics describe as a "bland test"—essentially determining whether they offend anyone sufficiently to derail their application.
Cherry's entire public identity revolves around being opinionated and divisive, qualities that apparently disqualify him from consideration despite his undeniable cultural impact. The hypocrisy becomes evident when examining who does gain admission to the order.
Selective Acceptance of Divisive Figures
The Order of Canada has repeatedly demonstrated that having firm opinions and dividing people is acceptable—provided one divides and frustrates in the "right" way. In 2008, the order granted membership to Dr. Henry Morgentaler, whose role in ending legal restrictions on abortions created deep divisions even within Liberal political circles prior to Justin Trudeau's leadership.
Similarly, supporters of Quebec separatism have found acceptance within the order. Alice Parizeau, the Polish-Canadian writer prominent in separatist literary circles and married to former Quebec Premier Jacques Parizeau, received the honor despite her association with a movement that nearly dissolved Canada in 1995. Parizeau famously blamed the referendum loss on "money and the ethnic vote," yet this divisiveness didn't prevent her recognition.
Contemporary Double Standards in Recognition
More recently, Indigenous rights activists like Abenaki filmmaker Alanis Obomsawin have been welcomed into the Order of Canada. Obomsawin openly rejects filmmaking objectivity in favor of strongly opinionated interpretations of Canadian politics and history, offering critiques as one-sided as any Don Cherry commentary. The crucial difference lies in her message aligning with what Canada's elite class now considers acceptable and necessary—guilt-inducing narratives about national history.
This selective application of standards reveals an institutional bias favoring certain types of divisiveness while excluding others, regardless of comparable cultural impact. Cherry's continued exclusion at age 92 serves as a stark reminder that the Order of Canada operates with partisan preferences that undermine its stated mission of recognizing genuine national contributions.
