The Liberal MP PM couldn’t control
Memoir reveals final angry call ended in profanity, hang-up
The Liberal filibuster of the ethics committee was a master- class in droning inactivity on Monday. Government MPS intent on frustrating the inquiry into the WE Charity affair talked down the clock, focusing instead on a Liberal proposal to study elections and cyber interference.
Quebec Liberal Brenda Shanahan ruminated on electric cars and the history of the Rhinoceros Party, before advocating the committee study the U.S. election, state by state, to see if there are any lessons for next year’s municipal elections in Canada.
The futility of the debate helped illustrate how far short Canada’s Parliament — the most rigidly partisan of all Westminster- style legislatures — has fallen from the ideal offered by 19th century English essayist Walter Bagehot. He saw the House of Commons as the one body able to give voice to “the sentiment, the interests, the opinions, the prejudices, the wants of all classes of the nation."
In this instance, the government MPS on the committee were simply obeying their master’s voice, like a pack of docile Jack Russells. As former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff observed: “Loyalty is the moral core of partisanship, the value that trumps all others.” It is a value that is rewarded, while disloyalty brings rebuke and demotion.
The disappointment is made all the more stark by the departure from the political stage of MPS who refuse to perform the role of trained seals.
Celina Caesar- Chavannes, one such former parliamentarian, has laid out her short-lived life as an MP in a new memoir, Can You Hear Me Now?
It is an account that does not reflect well on our prime minister — or on our parliamentary institutions.
Caesar- Chavannes was a young Black entrepreneur operating her own research company in Whitby, Ont., when she decided to run for politics in her local riding. She was attracted by the Liberal message on inclusion and diversity, so first ran in a byelection in 2014, after the death of local MP Jim Flaherty, which she lost, and then again in the 2015 election, when she triumphed.
Justin Trudeau’s office got an early taste of what it had taken on when she was overlooked for cabinet.
Trudeau had made it known it would be a cabinet that “looks a lot like Canada.” Caesar- Chavannes said publicly it didn’t look like the Canada she knew.
She said she arrived in Ottawa ready to play for the Liberal team but “I had my own point to make.”
The problem was, while her party said it valued her unique voice and perspective, it was not keen to promote views it could not control.
While the prime minister hailed the diversity in his caucus, even naming Caesar- Chavannes as his parliamentary secretary, she was not encouraged to speak on his behalf in the Commons, or make appearances in his stead, unless it was the opening of the National Museum of African American History in Washington or the inauguration of the Republic of Ghana’s new president.
When she took the parliamentary secretary job, Caesar- Chavannes told Trudeau she didn’t want to be a token. Yet it is clear that is exactly what he had in mind for her, as with so many other members of his caucus who ticked electoral boxes.
She complained to senior staff that to be an effective parliamentary secretary she needed to be on the same page as the prime minister, and asked for a 15- minute meeting once a month — a request that was ignored.
“Our leader always said that he wanted to engage with all caucus members but even in the last year of his first term, there were some that had never met him,” she said.
She was suspicious of his tendency to reward friends with ministerial positions, saying he was blinded by his own privilege.
“When the whole controversy over his dressing up in blackface emerged in the 2019 election campaign, I thought I should have seen that one coming,” she said.
By her own admission, Caesar- Chavannes was guilty of erratic behaviour, as she battled mental health challenges and attempted to adapt to a House of Commons she felt was designed to reinforce power and privilege.
But this was a government that promised to “do politics differently,” that pledged to shake up the status quo, and one that was elected at least in part because it championed unconventional candidates like Celina Caesar- Chavannes.
“In some ways, these flaws were my superpowers,” she said, as she realized she was not destined for the political heights and she should instead use her platform to “amplify the voices of quiet, little Black girls who felt and saw injustices but could not say anything.”
She said her feminism required her to be bold.
“It requires me to have uncomfortable conversations and to speak my truth.”
Matters came to a head after an ugly online confrontation with People’s Party leader Maxime Bernier. Some of Caesar- Chavannes’ colleagues expressed support, using a #Hereforcelina hashtag.
Trudeau was noticeable by his absence until the hashtag started trending on Twitter. She was upset that he had not come to her aid but agreed to meet him, at his request. The meeting lasted three minutes, “which I felt was more of my time than he deserved.”
As the SNC Lavalin affair unravelled, Caesar- Chavannes became ever more disillusioned and told the Prime Minister’s Office that she did not intend to run again. Coincidentally, she planned to make her decision public on the same day that Jody Wilson-raybould resigned from cabinet. Trudeau called to say he couldn’t have two powerful women of colour announcing they were leaving at the same time and asked her to delay.
He pointed out the help he had given her in the byelection and “ranted” about how his own family had been affected by life in politics.
“The more Justin spoke, the angrier I got. The manner in which he was speaking to me took me back to my childhood, when my mother would correct me forcefully for behaviour I didn’t think was wrong.”
By Caesar- Chavannes’ account, she had her own “mad as hell and not going to take this anymore” moment.
“Motherf---er, who the f--k do you think you are speaking to?” she howled and hung up.
It was the ultimate career- limiting move for any politician. MPS depend on the good graces of the prime minister and Caesar- Chavannes was soon sitting as an Independent member, in a far corner on the other side of the House.
She remained unapologetic, except for her remorse that she and her colleagues were all “accomplices” in a system that allowed the prime minister to “verbally admonish” MPS who expressed ideas in caucus that ran counter to his own; a system that saw MPS who voted against the government removed from their duties; a system that saw dissenting MPS intimidated by their own colleagues.
A week later, after yet another strong, principled, independent woman, Jane Philpott, resigned, Trudeau gave a speech: “I believe real leadership is about listening, learning and compassion … Central to that leadership is fostering an environment where my ministers, caucus and staff feel comfortable coming to me when they have concerns.”
The inconsistency between those words and the account of his former parliamentary secretary is glaring, if not surprising by this stage.
The greater misfortune is that Caesar- Chavannes felt there was no future for her in Parliament.
“I was acutely aware that the space was not made for me, as I signed my name into history under the ornately framed pictures of the Fathers of Confederation,” she said.
Yet by her own account, she found her voice, “my authentic self, in the House of Commons.”
This hallowed institution is falling short of what its citizens might expect, with its filibustered committees, tragicomic Question Period, docile members and rigid party discipline.
But it has always adapted to changing circumstances — and changing demographics. In the end, what alternative is there to this glorious, flawed, representative democracy?
The Canadian Parliament may not have been made for a “strong Black woman with a big mouth” but it would be improved if more of its denizens were prepared, like Caesar- Chavannes, to talk truth to power.