Disruption is the new normal

It is not unusual for the House of Commons to resume post-holidays having reshuffled its front bench. What is unusual is that this government’s recent reorganization is, for the most part, a reaction to an election that is not our own. This reasonable but somewhat disconcerting reality speaks to the systemic disruption at play in our political system as a direct result of the U.S. election. When the House of Commons adjourned on Dec. 14, Barack Obama was still the U.S. president while Donald Trump waited in the wings. Millions of women and men all over the world had not yet marched in opposition to Trump’s policies and style. Stéphane Dion was still the minister of Global Affairs. Chrystia Freeland was still the trade minister and John McCallum, the former immigration minister, had not yet been appointed ambassador to China. The Keystone pipeline was dead.

But in a few short weeks, disruption has become the current paradigm as the world scrambles to adjust to a reordering of alliances and partnerships. The isolationist password of “America First,” not seen since the 1930s, appears dismissive of the rest of the world while Trump’s disruptive personality has already led to massive confusion. Four years of this type of turmoil will tax everyone’s patience.

Disruptive personalities are not new in politics. Toronto managed to cope, in spite of the often unruly behaviour of the late Rob Ford. The danger is that angry personalities may enable and empower others to act in a similar fashion.

The theory of disruption is not the same as a disruptive personality. Rather, it is a tool that generally applies to business, rather than politics. Donald Trump and Kevin O’Leary, both businessmen, would have found disruption to be a familiar and innovative modus operandi when dealing with competitors, supply chains and consumer behaviour. However, Michael Kelly, the dean of the Laziridis School of Business and Economics at Wilfrid Laurier University, notes “that the theory might not be robust enough to handle the complexity of politics and government operations.”

In other words, a strategy of disruption might create a winning campaign, but a governing model requires discipline and focus.

All governments are used to unpredictability, but with the additional uncertainty about Brexit, the continued aggression of Putin and the Chinese push for expanded influence, we have reached a new bar of uncertainty.

How does this churn affect our domestic politics? The statements in Question Period this week will begin to set a pattern as each leader attempts to find a winning narrative.

Justin Trudeau must continue to combine professional outreach to the Trump administration while simultaneously keeping a wary distance. The values that put the PM in office in the first place — values of inclusion and diversity — are not the values of the Trump administration. Fortunately, the PM has already drawn a welcome line of demarcation with his support of the women’s march.

Secondly, the issue of Canadian sovereignty is looming on at least two fronts. The expected deregulation of the American economy could quickly lead to arguments for further integration between our two economies — an issue that has always been a flashpoint for many Canadians. Furthermore, the government’s strategic interest in doing business with China must not be at the expense of human rights and national security, issues that even the Harper government articulated.

Rona Ambrose, as interim Opposition leader, is equally in a tricky position. As the May deadline for the Conservative leadership looms closer, she will be hard-pressed to keep control of the caucus and candidates, who have their own mini disrupters in O’Leary and Kellie Leitch. Will they be able to throw a disruptive wrench into the Conservative Party, tailoring it to their personal styles, as Stephen Harper did? Or will the party fight back in an effort to find its own identity again?

The NDP, who have traditionally been the party of protest, have been missing in action, after their decision to turn Tom Mulcair into a lame-duck leader.

But will the election of Trump and all he stands for throw them a life raft? Could it provide them with a new purpose? They too are hobbled by a leadership race but time may be on their side as they watch events unfold.

Without question, global disruption and powerful disruptive personalities have become the new norm, a norm that will challenge us all. We must confront this reality with pragmatic relationships but as well with a resolve that our values of equality, diversity and compassion are non-negotiable. They don’t need to be disrupted.