Trudeau and Scheer reduce Canada’s national politics to a game of legal chicken

HALIFAX—As Justin Trudeau and Andrew Scheer reduce Canada’s national politics to a game of legal chicken, a remarkable statement was made by the prime minister. In reference to the opposition leader’s alleged lies about the PM in the SNC-Lavalin scandal, this is what Trudeau had to say: “You can’t be lying to Canadians, and I think highlighting that there are consequences, short term and long term, when politicians choose to twist the truth and distort reality for Canadians, it’s not something we’re going to put up with.” Of course the PM is right. But the words are hard to take, coming from a leader who has done more twisting than Chubby Checker. Calling out the Conservative leader for his alleged distortions, while ignoring his own, is gobsmacking hypocrisy. The sheer gall of it would stop a charging rhino at 50 paces. It was Trudeau who personally and unconditionally promised an end to the first-past-the-post electoral system in the 2015 campaign. You will be seeing a lot of that TV clip in the 2019 campaign. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is right to ask the PM about that “lie.” The Liberals also promised to end subsidies to the fossil fuel industry. They didn’t. Instead, they dished out another $72-million taxpayer handout, ostensibly so that the industry could come up with clean technology projects. Trudeau continues to make extravagant claims for his climate policy, despite the fact that it is based on Stephen Harper-era targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The PM’s pipeline obsessions, including the purchase of a multi-billion clunker from Kinder Morgan, also make it impossible for Canada to meet the commitments it made in Paris. Selling more “garbage oil," as journalist and energy expert Andrew Nikiforuk has described tar sands bitumen, is hardly evidence for a commitment to the war on global warming. Yet the PM continues to present, maybe the better word is masquerade, as the leader who has turned the climate file around. More twisting. The PM’s stretchers are catchy. This past week, Canada’s environment minister announced that the federal government was doling out $12-million to Loblaw. The taxpayer donation will be used to retrofit refrigeration systems in 370 of the grocery giant’s stores. Catherine McKenna personally made the announcement at a Loblaw Super-Store—in her own riding. How selfless. Whatever this may be, it is farcical to characterize loot for Loblaw as a green initiative. In 2018, Loblaw made a profit of $754-million. They didn’t need to have McKenna pick the taxpayers’ pocket to advance this corporate boondoggle. Not that the idea behind it isn’t laudable. It is. But Loblaw should be spending its own money, not the money of people who don’t get shareholder dividends, just a bill. Besides, as reported by Amanda Connolly of Global News, this company has not exactly been a corporate Boy Scout. Loblaw fought against raising the minimum wage, took part in a price-fixing scheme for bread that lasted for 14 years, and was recently ordered to pay back taxes of $368-million. The company is appealing the court decision. As Charlie Angus tweeted, whether it's Loblaw, Kinder-Morgan, or SNC-Lavalin, the Liberals seem to be most generous to people who don’t need generosity. A kick in the pants would often be more appropriate. So with everybody twisting in our national politics, what should be done to make debate more civil and fact-based? Trudeau’s answer is to wave around threatening lawsuits, while ignoring his own distortions on a variety of issues. History provides some context here. The Liberal Party of Canada did not always hold the view now being flogged by the PM as a political virtue. Back in their opposition days, when Stéphane Dion was leader, the Liberals accused then Prime Minister Stephen Harper of what amounted to a crime. The Liberals claimed that in his own opposition days, Harper knew about an alleged attempt to bribe an MP in exchange for his vote against a Liberal budget in the spring of 2005. The deal could have brought down the government. The late-Chuck Cadman, a former member of the Canadian Alliance, had left the Conservative caucus and been elected as an Independent. The Liberals claimed that Harper knew about the alleged bribery attempt. The alleged carrot for Cadman was a million dollar life-insurance policy. Harper admitted that Conservative operatives approached Cadman, but steadfastly denied he knew of any offer of a life insurance policy to the dying MP. In 2008, Harper actually sued the Liberals. This is what the Liberal Party had to say back in those days about Harper’s use of libel chill against then-Grit leader Stéphane Dion and then the party: “What we are witnessing is yet another example of the PM silencing his critics and shutting down debate by threat and intimidation....Rather than using the courts to intimidate critics, the PM should simply provide credible answers to straightforward questions.” Could there be a better description of what Justin Trudeau should do in the SNC-Lavalin scandal—and so far hasn’t? Instead of providing “credible” answers to “straightforward” questions, the PM has smothered the work of two parliamentary committees. No trifling matter, since they were tasked with finding out whether or not he and others exerted improper pressure on attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould to change her decision in an ongoing criminal prosecution against SNC-Lavalin. Despite the mantra that Trudeau gave unprecedented permission for Wilson-Raybould to tell “her truth” to the justice committee, a claim repeated ad nauseam by Government House Leader Bardish Chagger, that is a shameless half truth. The truth is that Wilson-Raybould was never given carte blanche to give Canadians all the facts she knew. Her testimony before the justice committee was restricted to events that happened while she was attorney general. It is obvious that something happened after she was dumped from the justice portfolio and accepted the cabinet post as minister of veterans affairs that caused her to resign. Canadians still don’t know what that is. Nor have they been able to hear from key players in the PMO who played a part in this scandal—people like chief of staff Katie Telford, and senior Quebec adviser Mathieu Bouchard. With the exception of some texts provided by former principal secretary Gerald Butts, none of the internal emails or texts from other PMO officials dealing with the SNC-Lavalin affair and Jody Wilson-Raybould have been disclosed. How important is that? Just remember how crucial the disclosure of emails from the PMO in the Nigel Wright/Mike Duffy affair was in getting a factual picture of what actually happened to the Senator. In any healthy and open democracy, information is eminently preferable to lawsuits for defamation. As it is, Justin Trudeau is following in the footsteps of Stephen Harper. Funny Ways? Michael Harris is an award-winning journalist and author. The Hill Times