National Post (National Edition)
No national plan left premiers to improvise
`On vaccines, on treatments, on testing, our top priority is making sure you and your family get through this crisis,” says the latest Liberal Party online publicity material, accompanied by a photograph of the prime minister looking suitably tousled and troubled.
The compassionate sentiments were somewhat undermined by a news story in the Huffington Post the same day that suggested the top priority for up to 10 political staffers one day last May was to ensure the wording of a “friendly” question from an unfortunate backbencher to the health minister was sufficiently obsequious.
New documents tabled at the health committee offer a rare glimpse behind the curtain of government, revealing political email exchanges normally exempt from Access to Information requests.
The wording of the question that veteran Liberal MP Francis Scarpaleggia was to put to Patty Hajdu was judged to be “going too far” by one guardian of Liberal fortunes.
The first draft said: “Given the obvious fears about the procurement of personal protective equipment, can the minister of health tell us whether the federal government will play a direct role in the supply chains for this crucial equipment …?”
That version was shared with a further five political staff in the Department of Public Services and Procurement, who pronounced themselves perturbed.
Even when sugared by a preamble that included the words “… under the excellent leadership of the prime minister….,” it was judged “very strong.”
In the event, Scarpaleggia read out a version that dropped any suggestion that “obvious fear” was stalking the land.
It was a complete waste of time for all concerned.
That 10 well-paid political staff members spent their day debating the issue gives lie to the claim that the government's priority is public safety. As the email chain makes clear, it is, was and always will be about getting re-elected.
All governing parties indulge themselves with these redundant underarm lob questions, but one might have hoped they would be extirpated during an emergency.
I mention all this in the context of my article published on Wednesday, asking why Canada doesn't appear capable of doing hard things anymore? Why has our COVID response been so lethargic, incoherent and opaque?
The “friendly” question incident offers a hint of an explanation.
Scarpaleggia rose a day or so after the government unveiled its supply council, a group of private and notfor-profit sector experts who agreed to provide advice on establishing supply chains for items like masks, gloves and disinfectants.
The Liberal MP's question went on to ask Hajdu to explain the role of the board.
The minister articulated the words written down in her talking points.
“The council is part of our collaborative approach,” the government press release said. “Our government is working every step of the way with provinces and territories, workers and businesses to ensure we are taking the actions necessary.”
And therein lies at least part of the explanation for Canada's COVID-related policy failures.
A federal government that had not shown much interest in collaboration prior to the pandemic, suddenly tried to make nice with everyone.
The supply council was touted with great fanfare as a way to secure valuable input from business. Yet it met just a handful of times, offered no formal advice and was promptly forgotten, having achieved its goal of giving the relevant minister a “deliverable.”
As we have seen with the issue of rapid testing, a genuine collaboration with business would have produced better results. In the absence of government direction, companies have taken it upon themselves to come together with the University of Toronto's Creative Destruction Lab, to develop a strategy and roll out rapid tests in the workplace.
But it is the failure of real collaboration between the provinces and feds that is the contributor to the disjointed COVID response.
The “Team Canada” effort has been a source of frustration for both sides.
It is the provinces' role to deliver health care and make decisions on quarantines and lockdowns.
The Trudeau government has attempted to herd this bunch of grumpy grimalkins in the same direction. But regional jealousies and philosophical differences were always going to make that a hard task.
Trudeau tried to mask the frostiness many premiers feel for him by asking Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland to set the tone with the premiers. She established such an unlikely rapport with Ontario's Doug Ford that she used to phone him first thing every other day to catch up on the latest news.
But the need to retain that cosy relationship has prevented the feds from dropping the hammer when need be. As a consequence, the provinces have defended their jurisdictions to the detriment of a coherent COVID response.
The protection of residents in long-term care homes has been an absolute policy miscarriage but even here the federal government has made no headway in its quest for national standards. In Quebec, where, by my count, 5,500 people have died in long-term care homes, Premier François Legault warned Trudeau he is “playing with fire” if he tries to impose national standards.
How can we be debating constitutional niceties in the wake of such carnage?
Yet even as the body count rises, the age-old dance of provinces trying to wring cash from the feds with as few strings as possible waltzes on.
As an analysis from the Canadian Centre of Policy Alternatives made clear last week, six provinces haven't disbursed all the $24 billion the federal government sent their way to be spent, in part, on safely reopening schools, daycares and businesses. Alberta has around $336 million sitting in its coffers, the report said, despite failing to match the feds in topping up the wages of essential workers. Governments in the Maritimes have not met federal requests to match funding for municipalities. Quebec has received one million rapid antigen tests and used just 18,400.
The federal government has provided $8 out of every $10 spent in COVID relief but has not used that spending power to co-ordinate a clear national COVID plan, even one that is flexible enough to accommodate regional variations.
Ottawa should have the necessary cordials to ensure it prevails when first ministers fall out. The feds are planning to spend up to $100 billion in post-COVID stimulus.
But the prime minister lacks the leadership skills to persuade premiers he can be relied upon to lead the country in its darkest hour.
This is not a federal government crisis, it is a national emergency and it requires collaborative national leadership.
What we have instead is a patchwork of improvisation across the country.
As Canadian author Malcolm Gladwell noted, good improvisers develop action, while bad improvisers block it.
On vaccines, treatments and testing, it is the premiers who have been the key players in determining whether their citizens face triumph or tragedy.