Who’s in charge: Trudeau or Freeland?
A curious division of labour has grown during the crisis, Lori Turnbull writes.
In the time of COVID-19, are our governing institutions actually functioning as they ought to? The Queen’s University School of Policy Studies has created a Governance Working Group of leading scholars and practitioners to help answer that question. Second in a weekly series.
Today: Accountability and a powerful deputy prime minister.
Prime ministers in Westminster systems have extraordinary power, so much so that they have sometimes been referred to as “elected dictators.” In this context, it is counterintuitive, to say the least, for a prime minister to cede power voluntarily to someone who could be a contender for the job. But this is precisely what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau appears to have done in appointing Chrystia Freeland as deputy prime minister and minister of intergovernmental affairs.
To be fair, Freeland was a “contender” from Day 1, and would have been even if she never had been appointed to cabinet in the first place. Her CV is among the most impressive in the House of Commons. Her intellectual prowess, work ethic, confidence and grit are daunting. Her writings on economic inequality and the “rise of the plutocrats” make her an even more authentic bearer of Trudeau’s “grow the middle class” messaging than he is himself. She is a prime minister in waiting, whether she covets the position or not, and her appointment as deputy prime minister only serves to bolster this perception.
Regardless of Freeland’s ambitions, her current job description confers enormous power and responsibility upon her. Unlike other ministerial positions, the role and responsibilities of a deputy prime minister are not set out in statute and, instead, are determined entirely by the prime minister of the day. In Freeland’s case, it has been combined with intergovernmental affairs, another position without a clear legislative mandate but with the potential for disproportionate influence around the cabinet table. Such influence is clearly reflected in her mandate letter, which gives her the leverage to reach into any and all of the government’s most critical files.
The mandate letter gives Freeland responsibility for what are always the most important files on the prime minister’s desk: national unity and the Canada-U.S. relationship. And that’s not all. She plays a lead role in co-ordinating cabinet and its committees. Given her intergovernmental responsibilities, she also plays a key role in meeting the government’s platform objectives on files as diverse as health care, child care, Indigenous reconciliation and carbon reduction. Is there anything critical that she is not, at least partially, responsible for? And why does Trudeau not take principal ownership of some of these files himself?
As the federal government has communicated with the public during the COVID-19 crisis, we have seen a curious division of labour between Trudeau and Freeland. The former mostly has given briefings alone, from his driveway at Rideau Cottage. His messages consist of spending announcements, warnings about the need for physical distancing, empathetic words and gestures, and hope for better days ahead. In contrast, Freeland heads news conferences from the West Block with other ministers and officials working on the federal government’s efforts. She is the chair of the cabinet committee on COVID-19, which meets regularly to co-ordinate a federal response to virus. It is she, rather than he, who is doing briefings with Chief Public Health Officer Theresa Tam.
Both Freeland and Trudeau have made public statements that reveal their thinking on her position. Following the cabinet swearing-in ceremony, the prime minister was asked how Freeland’s role would compare with that of previous deputy prime ministers. He said that he sees it as “very much being a Freeland-ish role.” Freeland has spoken publicly about being pleased to assist the prime minister in bearing the “burdens” of the country, but has also made it clear that she “did not take on this job to be a spokesmodel.” If being deputy prime minister only meant filling in for the prime minister during question period, she would not bother. In light of her statements, the implications of her dual role as deputy prime minister and intergovernmental affairs minister, and the contents of her mandate letter, there is reason to ask: Who is really in charge here, Trudeau or Freeland? Who is the real prime minister?
Because the breadth and depth of her responsibilities is outlined only in a mandate letter, as opposed to statute(s), it is not clear exactly what she will be held to account for and how. There is a decisiveness and an authority in Freeland’s public image that risks overshadowing the presence and authority of the prime minister. Perhaps this is more perception than reality, but Canadians deserve to know where decisions are being made and by whom. Lori Turnbull is director of the School of Public Administration at Dalhousie University, adjunct professor at Queen’s University School of Policy Studies and a former policy adviser in the Privy Council Office of Canada.