Just what was the prime minister trying to say?
Experts offer their perspectives on what message PM was sending
They saw things differently. There was an “erosion of trust.” There are some lessons to be learned, but nothing to be sorry for.
That was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s message, as he spoke publicly for the first time about allegations he and senior members of his government pressured former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould to intervene in criminal proceedings against SNC-Lavalin.
But what exactly was he trying to accomplish with this response? And did it work?
Robin Sears, a principal of the Earnscliffe Strategy Group, said the prime minister seemed to be “trying to cover two bases” with his nationally televised appearance before reporters Thursday morning.
“Which is always not a good idea.”
Trudeau seemed to waffle between referring to jobs he said he was trying to save, and expressing contrition for not paying enough attention to the file soon enough, Sears said.
That’s because, Sears believes, he was pressured by competing points of view internally and tried to “split the two down the middle and connect them.”
A straightforward apology for the handling of the SNC-Lavalin affair would have been most effective, he added.
“It would have sent a very clear message to Canadians, who are, queasy, I suppose is the way I would put it, about the sight of the government of Canada at war with itself.”
During his appearance at the National Press Theatre in Ottawa, Trudeau for the first time admitted that he had asked Wilson-Raybould to “revisit her decision” not to cut an out of court deal with Montreal-based engineering firm SNC-Lavalin.
He also referenced the 9,000 Canadians the company employs, and the potential job losses criminal charges might have caused. He mentioned reflection and the “many lessons” he will take from recent weeks.
But he did not apologize for anything or anyone.
Sears, a veteran communications pro, said he always advises clients if they realize they’ve done something wrong and they’ve learned something, “you don’t insert buts, or ifs or other subjects in the sentence in the presentation, because it just means people will wonder which is the part you really believe.”
As for how Trudeau fared with his message, Sears says he’s “stopped the bleeding for now.”
“But the outcome of this totally self-inflicted wound will only be determined by how they conduct themselves over the next few weeks,” he said.
“He didn’t make the situation worse but he didn’t significantly improve it, either, and the rest of the tale is yet to be told.”
Andrew McDougall, lecturer in political science at the University of Toronto Scarborough, said Trudeau was clearly trying to “get this affair past him,” while acknowledging that maybe there were some things that didn’t go the way he wanted them to go.
McDougall said he can understand why Trudeau didn’t want to apologize. “What he did not want to do was suggest that he or anyone else around him did anything wrong.”
But Jaime Watt, executive chair of crisis management firm Navigator Ltd., said he was “surprised” at the prime minister’s approach.
“I think he needed to apologize to Canadians,” said Watt.
“Canadians are hugely accepting of that, I don’t think they would have thought less of him. I think they would have thought more.”
Watt praised Trudeau’s former principal secretary Gerald Butts for his testimony to the Commons justice committee, for creating “some momentum.”