Dead cats and other diversions
Is there a dead cat on the table? I think it’s a fair question. But first, a little background. Here’s London mayor Boris Johnson, explaining a tactic used to turn elections when they’re going bad.
“Let us suppose you are losing an argument. The facts are overwhelmingly against you, and the more people focus on the reality the worse it is for you and your case. Your best bet in these circumstances is to perform a manoeuvre that a great campaigner describes as ‘throwing a dead cat on the table, mate.’
“That is because there is one thing that is absolutely certain about throwing a dead cat on the dining room table — and I don’t mean that people will be outraged, alarmed, disgusted. That is true, but irrelevant. The key point, says my Australian friend, is that everyone will shout ‘Jeez, mate, there’s a dead cat on the table!’; in other words they will be talking about the dead cat, the thing you want them to talk about, and they will not be talking about the issue that has been causing you so much grief.”
Boris Johnson’s Australian friend and great campaigner? Lynton Crosby, who successfully threw a dead cat and helped Johnson win his election.
You may remember the name: there was a minor flurry earlier in our federal campaign when Crosby was brought in to help the flagging fortunes of the federal Tories.
And then, ever so fortunately, came the niqab.
On Sept. 15, the Conservatives announced that they would appeal the federal government’s second consecutive court loss over a 2011 policy that required people to uncover their faces before taking the Canadian oath of citizenship.
The Tories also immediately promised to reintroduce legislating a ban on the niqab at citizenship ceremonies within 100 days, should they be re-elected.
Forget Mom and apple pie: if you wrapped yourself any tighter in the flag, you’d strangle yourself.
And the issue seems to be getting traction.
So, how many people have actually refused to take the oath because they wanted to keep their faces covered? Exactly, precisely two women. So let me get this right: we are now into what will be our third court challenge, paid for with taxpayers’ money, plus the time it will take to bring in and pass legislation on an issue that will effectively focus on the behaviour of two people?
Andrew Coyne of the National Post put the foolishness of the issue particularly well: “No one else’s life is made the poorer because, somewhere in Canada, a woman is swearing allegiance to this country with her face covered. If the federal Conservatives hadn’t made an issue of it, none of those now raising blue hell at this insult to their tender sensibilities would even have been aware of it.”
You could not get a dead cat less connected to the real issues in this election if you tried.
What about the issues the Tories were getting kicked over, their apparent disdain for refugees and the condition of the precious economy?
What about health care with its looming and massive problems of a rapidly aging population that will need more, not less, health care? The availability and quality of health care affects all of us, and is virtually a non-issue because two people want to wear head scarves?
What about the spiralling increase of prescription drugs?
What about the virtually Canada-wide dismantling of strong pension plans that will leave many Canadians scrambling for cash in their old age — and likely far poorer than their parents were?
I don’t know for sure if this was Conservative strategy or blind luck and timing.
But if we find out later that it was strategy, just imagine how betrayed Canadians might feel.
If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a duck …
This looks and smells like a dead cat. Well thrown, Lynton, well thrown.