A deceptive, but skilful, campaign
I’ve come to admire Justin Trudeau, who could be Canada’s prime minister-designate by this time next week.
How could I not? As a student of politics for more than 40 years, how could I avoid quiet admiration for anyone who could run a campaign as sneakily unprincipled as Trudeau’s, and get away with it? Teamed with his very own master of the dark arts — a graduate of the Dalton McGuinty school of unprincipled power — Trudeau has pulled off one of the great campaigns of recent history: a flagrantly dishonest run for office, based on a pledge of honesty. It’s brilliant. If I were Hillary Clinton, I’d be consulting Gerry Butts three times a day. Despite 23 years in the U.S. spotlight, Clinton still hasn’t learned to mesmerize innocents with the skills of the Liberal campaign.
I had to concede Justin’s skills after reading his remarks on Tout le monde en parle, the Radio-Canada interview show renowned for its tough treatment of politicians. Asked if he’d cancel the $15-billion deal to sell light-armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia — condemned by human rights advocates due to that country’s lengthy record of abuses — Trudeau justified his refusal by insisting “they’re not arms, they’re Jeeps,” and claiming the sale isn’t a deal between Canada and the Saudi governments, but is “an agreement between a manufacturing company here and Canada and Saudi Arabia.”
While Trudeau’s claim that the vehicles aren’t being sold by Ottawa but by General Dynamics of London, Ont., is marginally — technically — true, the deal was brokered by Canadian Commercial Corporation, a Crown corporation, as part of a determined push to expand military sales, and approved despite export control regulations that require a human rights assessment of the purchaser.
Trudeau’s third explanation for standing by the deal —“I will not cancel a signed contract” — didn’t stop former prime minister Jean Chretien, who has campaigned with Trudeau, from cancelling a Mulroney agreement to buy new combat helicopters in 1993. Evidently, it can be done. So why won’t Trudeau do it?
Trudeau’s ability to evade honesty has been in evidence throughout the weeks of this campaign, and well before. The Liberal leader says he’d end Canada’s activities in Syria because it’s not a justifiable use of Canada’s military. He insists he’d be willing to use troops in an appropriate instance, but won’t say what qualifies as “appropriate.” Pressed on why the brutalities of the Islamic State don’t justify intervention, he dismissed the question as “nonsensical.” He still hasn’t answered it. He advocates a return to Canada’s glory days as UN peacekeepers, insinuating Conservatives are to blame for its end, although it was a Liberal government that got Canada out of peacekeeping after the Somalia scandal and Rwandan genocide.
Trudeau continues to defend voting for Bill C-51, the government’s anti-terrorism bill, while simultaneously attacking it. He says he voted for it despite disagreeing with it, and would alter it if he forms a government. He says the Liberals are a “pro-trade party” but won’t say if they’d support the Trans-Pacific Partnership, the biggest trade agreement to date. He couldn’t possibly pay for all the spending promises he’s made, even with his pledge to run $30 billion in deficits, but won’t say how he’d make up the gap. He’s barely been pressed on it, in fact.
He denounces the Conservatives for letting the provinces take the lead on measures against global warming, though his policy is to leave the issue largely in provincial hands. He maintains there’s no need to worry that his pledge to run deficits will become an extended plunge into new debt, insisting: “It is Conservatives who run deficits; Liberals balance budgets. That’s what history has shown.” But Liberals set off Canada’s 25-year run of deficit budgets in the 1970s under Pierre Trudeau, who managed precisely one balanced budget in 15 years of trying. Justin Trudeau criticizes Harper’s seven deficits; his father had 14. Justin Trudeau insists his borrowings would be used to kickstart Canada’s economy through heavy spending on infrastructure, though only a small portion of the money would actually go to bridges and transit and other recognized infrastructure. The rest is a slush fund for favoured Liberal social and environmental schemes.
He pledges a Trudeau government would end the concentration of power in the leader’s office, though his campaign has focused almost exclusively on its leader. Despite a pledge to lift the muzzle on MPs that Liberals say has been imposed by Conservatives, several Liberal candidates have been forced to apologize or stand down for their remarks. Favoured candidates have been pressed on ridings, despite Trudeau’s pledge not to interfere in such choices. The Liberals ban candidacy to anyone who disagrees with Trudeau’s position on abortion, while heralding the right of Canadians to hold personal views.
None of this has impeded Trudeau’s climb up the polls. He has passed the NDP and lately the Conservatives. Trudeau has insisted repeatedly that he would never agree to a coalition with the NDP if that’s what it takes to form a government. It should be impossible now, since the two hold opposing positions on the TPP, but if Trudeau finds himself in range of becoming prime minister next week, and the only option is to do a deal with Thomas Mulcair, does anyone doubt he’d do it?
He could always deny he was doing what everyone could plainly see he was doing, after all. And a lot of Liberal voters would accept it as part of the new, open, honest Liberal government. You have to give credit where it’s due: It takes skill to pull off such brazen deceit.
WHO COULD RUN A CAMPAIGN AS SNEAKILY UNPRINCIPLED AS TRUDEAU’S, AND GET AWAY WITH IT?