What Has the Trudeau Government Done, July-December 2016?

My single most popular post last year was my listing on July 5th of the Trudeau government’s accomplishments, to date. Six months later, it is useful to take up the catalogue again, with a little help from my stash of newspaper clippings, my increasingly informative e-news sources, and related webpages. Here is another list: what the government has done in the second half of its first year in office. I apologize in advance that this is more wordy than the previous one. Skip the details, if you like. Or print the post as a hard copy.

1. The government developed a transparent, predictable process for appointing Justices for the Supreme Court of Canada, and defined criteria for qualities of the judges they wanted. The criteria included “functional bilingualism” in both Canada’s official languages, and sensitivity to the diversity of Canada’s population. Although the Prime Minister retained the right to make the appointment, an independent Advisory Committee chaired by former Prime Minister Kim Campbell was struck to vet applications and make recommendations. The competition was opened to any lawyer in Canada who applied for the position. The existence of a pool of candidates who self-identify as potential Supremes is very useful. Future candidates are on notice about the qualifications expected for the job and the government will be able to make future appointments more expeditiously

2. In the face of widespread pressure to retain the customary regional allocation of Supreme Court judges, the government appointed Canada’s first Supreme Court of Canada justice from Newfoundland. Mr. Justice Malcolm Rowe is a white male from a rural fishing family who is more than “functionally bilingual” in French and who has a personal track record demonstrating his appreciation of Canada’s diversity. His appointment has been widely applauded.

3. On October 20th, the government appointed 25 new s.96 justices across the country. One to the Tax Court, three to the Superior Court of B.C., two to the Alberta Court of Appeal, five to the Alberta Court of Queen’s Bench, three to the Manitoba Queen’s Bench, three to the Superior Court of Nova Scotia, one to the Ontario Court of Appeal, five to the Ontario Superior Court and one to the Quebec Court of Appeal. These appointments do not expand the complement, nor even fill all existing vacancies, but they are a start. Biographical information about all new appointments is available on the Department of Justice website.

4. On November 23rd, they appointed 22 Deputy Judges for the Superior Courts of Yukon, the Northwest Territories and Nunavut. These part-time positions were appointed from existing jurists across the country.

5. The government defined a new transparent procedure for future s. 96 judicial appointments. Each province will have an Advisory Committee to solicit and vet applications. Committees will consist of representatives from the provincial Attorneys General, the major legal professional bodies, and three lay representatives. Anyone interested in serving as a lay member of these committees had to submit an application by mid-November. Clarifying the process and broadening the base of input into judicial recommendations will encourage the diversity that a responsible judiciary requires.

6. The process of building a new independent Senate was initiated. The government established an Independent Advisory Board for Senate Appointments consisting of a chair, two federal members and fourteen members representing the provinces. The role of the Advisory Board is to receive applications and provide recommendations on Senate appointments to the Prime Minister. The board is to advertise vacancies as they occur, and apply public, merit-based criteria “in order to identify Canadians who will make significant contribution to the work of Parliament.” On October 27th, the government announced nine individuals named to the Senate under the new procedure to fill vacancies in B.C., Manitoba, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Prince Edward Island. Their biographies are on the webpage of the Advisory Board.

7. The Terms of Reference of the Advisory Board require a report to the Prime Minister within three months of submitting names for appointments. On December 21st, the Advisory Board published its report on the first cycle of their permanent process from July to November 2016. The report indicates that 2,757 applications were received, 308 from B.C., 145 from Manitoba, 127 from New Brunswick, 174 from Nova Scotia, 1169 from Ontario, 768 from Quebec, and 66 from Prince Edward Island, 39.9 % female, 60.1% male, 67.9% English, 31.3% French, 21.08% unknown, self-identified diversity of 3.74% LGBTQ, 19.59% ethnic/cultural group, 13.57% Indigenous, 24.99% visible minority, and 9.03% people with disabilities. All of this information is also found on the website of the Board.

8. Canadians can now apply online “until 23:59 Eastern Time on January 25, 2017” for six Senate vacancies expected in 2017 in New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Ontario. The assessment criteria, forms and templates, frequently asked questions, and guidance on how to create a profile and submit an application are all on the website of the Advisory Board, as above.

9. The initiatives above are described in great detail on government websites which are user-friendly and readily accessible. These are a welcome contrast to the opaque government websites under the previous regime, notable for their singular lack of accessible information. 

10. The government concluded and ratified the Canada Europe Free Trade Agreement. Minister of International Trade Chrystia Freeland is generally credited with having acquitted herself well in the last-minute negotiations.

11. In September, Prime Minister Trudeau and Minister of the Environment and Climate Change Catherine McKenna both met with officials in China to encourage more bilateral trade, address climate change initiatives, and deal with more specific issues between them. Canada renewed its commitment to support of the CCICED (an international advisory body established in 1992 to provide China’s State Council with research-based policy recommendations on environment and development issues). During Prime Minister Trudeau’s official visit to China (August 30 – September 6, 2016), the two countries agreed to address climate change through the Paris Agreement, and signed a statement of cooperation between Parks Canada and the National Development and Reform Commission of China regarding establishment, conservation, and management of protected areas.

12. In October, the government announced a pan-Canadian approach to pricing carbon pollution. Provinces and territories will have flexibility in deciding whether to implement the policy by a direct price on carbon pollution or by adopting a cap-and-trade system. Although the provinces will choose the specific nature of their own climate change policies, the federal government has set a national “floor price” on carbon that all provinces must levy by 2018. The price is to be $10 per tonne of carbon dioxide emissions in 2018, rising by $10 each year to $50 a tonne by 2022. The federal policy provides that all proceeds from carbon pricing will return to the provinces implementing the policy. See CBC news coverage of this initiative. 

13. In October, they announced plans for a “Canada Infrastructure and Development Bank” to be promoted with large international institutional investors in a conference featuring Trudeau and Moreau in November. See my previous post, “Private Money for Public Infrastructure?” 

14. In late November, the government approved twinning of the Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline from Edmonton to Burnaby. If constructed, the number of tankers carrying diluted bitumen travelling through Vancouver harbour, the Salish Sea and Juan de Fuca Strait will increase from approximately five to 34 a month. The project is almost universally opposed by local municipal governments, environmentalists and Indigenous groups. Trudeau said the government expects Kinder Morgan to “meet and exceed” the 157 conditions imposed by the National Energy Board in April. Earlier in the month, the federal government announced a $1.5 billion ocean protection plan to improve responses to tanker and fuel spills in coastal oceans.

15. The same day, Trudeau announced that the government is approving the new Enbridge Line 3 renewal to transport oil from a terminal near Hardisty, Alberta to Gretna, Manitoba, near the Canada-US border. There, it will continue through northern Minnesota to refineries in the USA. A 1,659-kilometre project worth $7.5 billion dollars, the renewal will double the volume of oil carried by the existing pipeline, funnelling nearly three million barrels a day of Alberta oil to the United States. The National Energy Board approved that project in April with 89 conditions affecting the Canadian section. The project will need further permit approvals from the state of Minnesota where there is considerable opposition to running a pipeline through environments important for their water supply.

16. At the same time, Trudeau announced that the federal government would not approve Enbridge’s Northern Gateway pipeline from Alberta’s oil sands to Kitimat in northern B.C for export via the northern coast of B.C. He also announced that the government will introduce a new law in 2017 to impose a moratorium on crude oil tankers along B.C.’s North Coast.

17. Opponents of this pipelines policy vow continued opposition to the government’s decision so that they may never be built. Environmentalists are also concerned that pipelines for fossil fuels undercut Canada’s commitment to climate change. Trudeau replied that the pipelines were in the national interest, support the Canadian economy and help the Alberta economy to access foreign markets. He also insisted that transporting oil by train (the current practice) is more hazardous to the environment and public safety than use of pipelines.

18. In December, Trudeau met with heads of the Assembly of First Nations, the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami and the Manitoba Métis Federation. The Prime Minister committed to an annual meeting with the heads of the organizations, “to develop shared priorities and to monitor progress” on implementation of the recommendations of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission on residential schools. In addition, similar meetings with key cabinet ministers will take place at least twice a year. Indigenous leaders were pleased with, at least “a strategy and plan moving forward.” Senator Murray Sinclair, former head of the TRC, was pleased with the announcement. See Gloria Galloway’s article from the December 16, 2016 Globe and Mail.

19. In December, Canada contracted with Polaris Industries ($28 million) to deliver 78 of its Ultra Light Combat Vehicles (DAGOR), described as “dune buggies on steroids,” to Canada’s Special Operations Forces Command. The first 52 vehicles were purchased immediately for delivery in 2017, the remaining 26 will be delivered in early 2018. The vehicle will add a weapons turret for off-road operations and will be transported by a variety of military aircraft, including helicopters. The contract includes technical and logistics support for two years through Black’s Corners Motorsports (BCM), in Carleton Place, Ottawa. See David Pugliese’s recent article in the Ottawa Citizen.

20. In December, Science Minister Kirsty Duncan announced a ban on asbestos and asbestos-containing products by 2018. Canada’s last asbestos mines closed in 2011, but Canada has been slow to meet international anti-asbestos standards. The government announced that it will draft a new regulation under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act to ban “manufacture, use, import and export” of asbestos-containing products including building materials and brake pads. It will also introduce new federal workplace health and safety rules to “drastically” limit the risk of on-the-job asbestos exposure, expand the current list of asbestos-containing buildings owned or leased by the Canadian government, and work with the provinces to include a prohibition on use of asbestos in building codes, affecting new construction and renovations. Read Tavia Grant’s Globe and Mail article, where she reports that advocates have termed the ban “a win for public health,” but long overdue. Note that “under its proposed regulation, the mining and processing of asbestos tailings and residue in Quebec” will be excluded from the ban.

21. In December, the government received the Report of the Task Force on Cannabis Legalization and Regulation chaired by Anne McLellan. Even Chris Selley in the National Post (“The clock starts now for pot legalization retitled for web-posting) said it “is the picture of bold common sense: set a minimum age of 18 for purchase, leaves to the provinces to determine retail models preferably keeping weed separate from alcohol, enforce labelling standards for higher strains and potency, allow people to grow a few plants at home, get busy studying the implications for impaired driving.” To meet the problem of higher potency marijuana, there will be a higher tax on higher potency. As Selley noted, “this file remains an opportunity for the Liberals to expend some capital doing the right thing, coherently and backed by evidence, for the right reasons—freeing up justice system resources, liberating people from ridiculous and counter-productive threat of criminal sanction, putting gangsters out of business.” Anne McLellan indicated that the consultations of her Committee were comprehensive and intensive, open to hearing all interests. The age group 18-24 is the age cohort most using cannabis, which they now obtain from the illegal market. The CMA had recommended 25 years of age (after the developing brain is intact) as the minimum legal age. The government compromised, 18 or 19 years of age, like alcohol, as determined by the provinces, in the expectation that young people of that age can make an informed decision after considering the risks.

23. In December, Minister of Innovation, Science and Economic Development Navdeep Bains announced further details of a program called “Connect to Innovate,” a five-year program to invest $500 million in expanded broadband internet access in 300 remote and rural communities. Companies seeking funding under the initiative have until March 13, 2017 to make their applications.

24. The government prepared plans to respond to the election of Donald Trump as president of the United States. They publicly adopted an international stance in favour of trade, immigration and diversity. Paul Wells, in the Toronto Star December 16th, noted that Trudeau told reporters from the Guardian, Britain’s leading centre-left newspaper: “If we can show—as we are working very hard to demonstrate—that you can have engaged global perspectives and growth that works for everyone, then that diffuses a lot of the uncertainty, the anger, the populism that is surfacing in different parts of the world.” Pie in the sky? Or a real new role for Canada? It’s too early to tell, but at least the Trudeau government has staked out the Canadian alternative.

25. Patrick Gossage for CBC News on December 30th suggested that “the celebrity status of Trudeau and Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau in the United States” will be to their advantage in dealing with president-elect Trump. They are very popular there and, just as Reagan got along with Pierre Elliott Trudeau, Trump will likely get along with Justin. He also noted that their shared support of the Keystone XL pipeline in the USA will be “a gift” for Canada, and that Trump’s nominee for secretary of state, Exxon CEO Rex Tillerson, “knows Canada well, and Exxon has large holdings in Canadian oil retail, exploration and development.”

25. In December, Health Minister Jane Philpott and Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale introduced Bill C-37, a new law and regulations amending the Controlled Drugs and Substances Act, the Customs Act and the Proceeds of Crime and Terrorist Financing Act. These changes will make it easier for safe injection sites to open and make it harder to smuggle fentanyl into the country. Empirical data based on the Vancouver Insite clinic shows that such facilities save lives, allow addicts to access appropriate services, and do not have any negative impact on criminality. The new law repeals entirely the 26 criteria the previous government had passed which made it next to impossible for additional sites across the country to adopt the elements of the Vancouver model. The new strategy also puts drug policy back under the Health ministry and away from the Department of Justice.

26. The government made numerous changes in Canada’s taxation laws, which I will leave aside for the moment, as they are undoubtedly complex and I would need to defer to my son who is the tax specialist in the family. I do note, however, that my favourite children’s toy shop and bookstore is advertising the new “Teacher and Early Childhood Educator School Supply Tax Benefit.” This tax change will provide a cash benefit of up to $150 for purchases of supplies and materials up to $1000 made by all certified teachers and educators for their classes. I am normally opposed to tax “expenditures” of this kind but, if they must exist, providing some compensation for teachers is a good thing. Apparently, “the list of allowable school supplies will draw on best practices in Prince Edward Island, which has already implemented a provincial school supply tax benefit.” There are many ways to craft cooperative federalism. Imitating best practices from other jurisdictions is one of them. According to the promotional material, this tax benefit “will apply for the 2016 tax year and subsequent taxation years, and will generate $60 million annually in tax savings for teachers and early childhood educators across the country.”

27. In August, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan and a team of Ministers announced that the federal government would spend $450 million over three years on a peace and stabilization fund that will be used for renewal of Canadian participation in United Nations Peacekeeping Operations. The allocation will extend to 150 police officers, an increase to $47 million in the RCMP stabilization fund, and up to 600 Canadian troops, the provision of air transport, medical, engineering and training components. During the fall, consultations continued with the United Nations and NATO allies about where deployment(s) would occur. The countries reviewed by the Defence Minister include Mali, the Congo and the Central African Republic. In January, Global Affairs, the newly renamed Department of Foreign Affairs, has scheduled a day-long strategy session with government officials and experts to give flesh to this policy. Expect details of how the new deployment will be “branded” and where it will occur. See the article by Mike Blanchfield in National Observer.

28. In November, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan announced that the government would purchase 18 Boeing Super Hornet fighter jets, in addition to holding a competition down the road for replacement of the C-18 fleet. The Super Hornet is considered to be a cheaper alternative to the F-35 stealth fighter jets selected by the Conservative government. Both types of jets are used by Canada’s allies. There is concern, however, that punting the decision about the F-35s down the road amounts to a “final decision” on the issue for the foreseeable future.

I don’t know about you, but I consider this list a pretty full agenda. Not bad at all for the second six months in office.

Understandably, there is disagreement over the specifics of particular policies. Partisans on all sides have strong positions. Whether for or against, I think that the government has done a great deal. Theirs may be a middle position, even a conservative position, but at least they have taken a position on many issues and are prepared to go forward. To say, as does Paul Wells in the Toronto Star in his December 16th article, “Global darling Trudeau fails to deliver at home,” that the Liberal government has done nothing is incorrect. “False news,” even.

“Failures” to date:

  1. The Special Committee of MPs studying Electoral Reform recommended that the government hold a referendum that pits the current First Past the Post system against a system of proportional representation, but apparently did not recommend a particular method of proportional representation. Notwithstanding this result, the Liberal members of the committee do not agree that a referendum should be held and the NDP and Green members issued a joint supplementary report which also questions the need for a referendum. Minister of Democratic Reform Maryam Monsef rebuked the committee for failing to recommend a specific type of proportional representation system. Among other things, she said they had “shirked their responsibility.” It is not surprising that she was later forced to apologize for her remarks. I have not read the reports, but clearly the government looks bad on this issue. They benefit from the FPTP system and have little incentive, except fulfilling an election promise, to change it. I agree that previous referenda about electoral reform have all failed. In my view, they failed because more resources were spent on the consultation process than on educating the public about the nature of the alternative proposal. When the electorate is confused, and comes out in low numbers, any referendum is useless. If a referendum were desired, it strikes me that ours should follow the Irish model. There, they have high voter turnout and have made significant constitutional changes. See my previous posts entitled “Lessons from the Irish Referendum for Canada” and “Revelling in the Results of the Irish Referendum.” If nothing else, maybe the Liberal government could pass legislation making it mandatory that people vote. That would be an excellent “electoral reform” to implement before the next election. Who would disagree with that? There are precedents in other parts of the world.

2. In late December, Finance Minister Bill Morneau began negotiations with the provinces and Territories about the new federal Canada Health Transfer (CHT). The current federal contribution of 6% is scheduled to end next year. He offered to raise the minimum annual increase the government had previously offered from 3% to 3.5%, add an extra $8 billion over ten years for home care and mental health, as well as $544 million over five years for prescription drug and “innovation” initiatives. Talks broke down and that offer is now off the table. Most provinces rejected the offer because provincial demands for the base CHT were considerably higher, and because the extra funds came with federal strings attached. Later in the week, Newfoundland and Labrador, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia broke ranks with the rest of the provinces and entered into bilateral agreements with the federal government. They accepted the federal offer of 3% plus the add-ons, with the proviso that should other provinces receive a higher base transfer, they too would get the higher rate. Moreau had said before the meeting that that if no deal could be reached, federal support would revert to an annual increase in health transfers of 3%, or nominal economic growth, and provide $3 billion for home care. This federal “take it or leave it” approach angered most provinces and, in my view, is a bluff. Expect further negotiations in January. I’m betting that all provinces will be on board eventually, and that some arrangement will be made so that “strings attached” will accommodate “the special nature of Quebec.”

3. The primary concern of the opposition parties and the media seems to be “access in exchange for political funding.” Trudeau may not be living up to his lofty standards, and certainly not the standards imposed by Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne. But, as Tom Flanagan argued in the Globe and Mail on December 16th, what they are doing is no different from the same thing done by other parties. As Flanagan warns, and Andrew Coyne took up in the National Post this morning, if critics are not careful, the Liberals may well restore government financial subsidies to political parties based on the vote, first implemented by Prime Minister Chrétien and later terminated with relish by Harper. The Tories would hate that, although the NDP, Green Party, and Liberals would be delighted. Wouldn’t that be an interesting twist?

In my view, that the opposition (and the conservative media) is obsessed with this issue, in the face of all the other things the government has done August to December, speaks to their weakness. Preoccupied as they are with choosing new leaders, the Trudeau government can get on with its agenda.

back to top

 

Advertisements

3 comments

  1. Sara

    Add poor grammar to your ‘failures’ list. His latest Tweet is “Mine and Sophie’s hearts are breaking for the Desmond family, the community and all those affected in this terrible tragedy.” Mine and Carl’s eyes bleed at such abuse of the English language.

    Also, the speaking on behalf of ‘all’ Canadians in mourning the death of Castro was a failure.

  2. Bob Smith

    Oh dear, where to begin. Let’s ignore the fair degree of double or triple counting of “accomplishments” and the fact that many of those “accomplishments” are purely symbolic (Quick question: How many of the newly appointed “independent’ Senators do you think voted Liberal in the last federal election? Yeah, that’s what I thought). And let’s set aside that some of the “accomlishments” have not yet been accomplished (pot legalization?).

    Let start with #9, the alleged increased transparency of government websites. Being a fairly active user of government websites, I can’t say I’ve noticed a difference. But certainly, there’s little reason to think that this government is any more transparent than the ones before it. Case in point, all three of today’s papers discuss a report prepared and released by the Department of Finance last month about the future of the federal government’s finances. Why are we reading about it today? Could be because it was posted to Finance’s webpage on Friday, December 23rd – the day before the Xmas long weekend – and, unless most government release, was not accompanied by a press release or media notice or distributed to the Department of Finance distribution list. No doubt the fact that the report concludes that, as a result of the Trudeau government’s fiscal policies (to which I will return), Canada will be running deficits well into the 2050’s.

    Ok, what about #10, the Canada-EU Trade Agreement (CETA)? Well, that is certainly an accomplishment, although since CETA was wholly negotiated by the Harper government, it’s an accomplishment for which the Tories, not the Liberals, can take considerable pride. Counting that as an accomplishment of the Liberals is like giving Finland (which changed sides and declared war on Nazi Germany in April 1945) credit for winning WWII. Granted, we may give Freeland some credit for arranging the last minute fudge to get CETA ratified by the EU over Walloonian objections. But, let’s wait on that, since the fudge was to delay the implementation of the dispute resolution mechanism. That mechanism was a key Canadian demand, and if that doesn’t get implemented, CETA is a dead letter (or worse), and the Liberals will have squandered a decade’s worth of work by the previous Tory government. Freeland’s “fudge” may have “fudged” Canada.

    There’s #19, entering into a procurement contract to purchase $28M glorified dune bugeys. How is this an “accomplishment”? This is the sort of routine, ordinary course, procurement contracts, governments are expected to enter into in the ordinary course. This is the functional equivalent making a cup of coffee every morning. This is an accomplishment only if you think – as well you might – that the Trudeau government is too incompetent to do the most basic things.

    Of course, if you were looking at their handling of the infinitely more significant and important procurement contract to replace Canada’s CF-18s, you might well be justified in thinking the Trudeau government incompetent. Trudeau promised that they would cancel the previous contract entered into by the Harper government to buy F-35s to replace Canada’s aging CF-18 fleet and that it would hold a competitive bid process for a replacement plane. But, having cancelled the F-35’s (the plane, by the way, being purchased by every other first-world country), it has now punted the replacement process into the 2020’s – largely, it is believed, because any competitive bid process would be won by the F-35 in a repeat of the costly EH-101 fiasco by the previous Chretien government (Tory government enters into procurement contract, Liberal government cancels it, dooming Canadian soldiers to using ancient equipment for another decade or two, before ultimately buying the same damned helicopter anyways). As a result, in all likelihood Canada’s CF-18 fleet won’t be replaced until well into the 2030’s. Worse, as a result, they’ve ordered – on a sole-source basis – 15 new F-18 SuperHornets as a temporary stop-gap to fill the hole caused by their delay in replacing the CF-18. No explanation has been provided as to why they’ve had to defer the procurement of the CF-18 replacement – as David Pugliese noted in today’s National Post online, India and Bulgaria are in the process of replacing their fighter fleets, they expect to finish their competitive bid process in two years: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/bulgaria-and-india-are-buying-new-fighter-jets-and-unlike-canada-it-wont-take-them-10-years. Maybe they should outsource procurement to India…

    I won’t even both discuss #24 and #25 – neither are accomplishments as that term is used in the English language. Nor has Trudeau’s response to Trump been particularly impressive. Perhaps he will get along fine with Trump – given that his first response to Trump’s election was to state that Canada was open to re-opening NAFTA, a key Trump demand that does precious little for Canada, that might even be likely. But personally, I’d prefer to have a Prime Minister who doesn’t try to ingratiate himself with bloviating foreign ass-clowns by bending over (I will come back to this).

    Similarly, the “Education Supplies tax credit” in #26 isn’t an accomplishment, it’s a sop to teacher’s unions who voted for him. It shares all the attributes of the worst tax expenditures, and has no redeeming features. I can’t help but think that the foregone revenue might be better spent on other education initiatives (um, First Nations? Though as I mentioned in response to your first “accomplishment’ post, they were kicked to the curb pretty quickly by the Trudeau government). More to the point, it’s such a piddling change, even if it were meritorious, it’s hardly worth counting.

    What’s remarkable about the whole list of “accomplishments” is how hard you have to stretch to come up even with them.

    What then about the failures. Election reform, definitely (although, since reform was always a bad idea, I’m fine that he’s failed to do something stupid). I do get a certain satisfaction from the fact that so many lefties abandoned the NDP during it’s last, best, chance to form a government, to vote for Trudeau, in large part due to his election reform commitment, a commitment that no thinking person could possibly have believed that the Liberals would abandon an electoral system that has served them well for over a century. Serves them right.

    Health care funding with the provinces – well, on Trudeau’s terms, that’s definitely been a failure, since he’s adopted the allegedly outrageous policy of the Harper government (again, since the Harper government had it right, I’m fine with that failure). Note, the Liberals are not bluffing on health care. If you want to know why, go read the report from the Department of Finance I mentioned above: http://fin.gc.ca/pub/ltefp-peblt/report-rapport-eng.asp. As a result of previously announced tax and spending changes, the Liberals have saddled Canada with a generation of deficits running into the 2050’s. Like father, like son, I suppose. And as the report makes clear, even a small increase in federal spending (or a small increase in interest rates) could result in rising and ultimately unsustainable levels of government debt as a result of changing demographics and productivity. Note, the last time this report came out, under the fiscal regime of the previous Tory government, it was expected that Canada’s federal debt would be repaid in full by the late 2030’s and that by the 2050’s, the feds would have substantial fiscal space available to engage in new spending or to clear fiscal space for the provinces. Within two years, the Liberals have torpedoed Canada’s finances.

    Which brings us to a lamentably unmentioned failure of the Liberal government. Last election, they ran on a commitment to increase the deficit to $10B for two years, before returning to a balanced budget. According to the report I cited above, this year it will be $25B, rising to $28B next year, and still above $20B as we head into the next election. As noted above, based on current trends, it is not expected that the budget will be balanced in a generation. This is a shocking failure on the part of the government, and one which leaves Canada vulnerable to economic shocks. For example, it is widely expected that one result of the Trump election in the US will be rising interest rates. By virtue of having committed to adding another $100B in debt during their term, the Trudeau government has ensured that this will mean that we will have less money to spend on the social programs Canadians care about (but, on the bright side, we’ll be making the Gnomes of Zurich rich). Note, if this sounds familiar, it should, the Trudeau government is repeating the fiscal follies of his father, mistakes that took a generation to fix.

    What about party finances? No one disputes that the antics of the Trudeau government are sleazy as all hell. And given that they contract the ethical commitments Trudeau himself made, we can add hypocrisy to the charge of sleaziness. That “everyone else did it” (a) isn’t a defense, and (b) really isn’t true (the Tories, for example, have always relied far more heavily than the Liberals on grass root fundraising – people giving $100 here or $200 there. Ditto the NDP). In contrast, the Liberals have never mastered grass root fundraising, so have had to rely on big money fundraisers. There is a real difference between selling tickets to a rubber chicken dinner for 100 people at $150 a head to hear a party leader speak, and selling tickets to 10 people at $1500 a head to have an intimate dinner with the Prime Minister.

    And, as I mentioned Trudeau seems to have a thing for foreign leaders who are bloviating assclowns. His eulogy for Fidel Castro spawned a minor classic internet meme #trudeaueulogies (https://twitter.com/hashtag/trudeaueulogies) meaning a fawning homage to a deceased villain that fawns over or ignores all the wicked things they did (a-la: “While controversial, Stalin will be long remembered for reducing obesity in the Ukraine”). I’ll give him this, he certainly put Canada on the map, his Castro eulogy was noticed – and mocked mercilessly – by people all over the world. The Washington Post gave him three Pinocchios for his claim that Castro brought significant improvements in health and education to Cuba (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2016/12/01/justin-trudeaus-claim-that-castro-made-significant-improvements-to-cuban-health-care-and-education/?postshare=8981480602285715&tid=ss_tw-bottom&utm_term=.6bab3cfa5790). In actual fact, both heath and education stagnated in Cuba following the communist revolution (in 1955, Cuba was one of the healthiest countries in the world – on par with Canada by measures such as infant mortality. In 2016 is emphatically is not). Moreover the Castro eulogy was revealing in other respects, apart from exposing Trudeau to be broadly ignorant of the world outside of Canada – again, no educated person could make the claims he did about Cuba with a straight face – his friendship with the Castro family speaks poorly of his personal character and moral fiber – is it too much to ask of Canada’s leaders that they not be personal friends of murderous dictators?

  3. Pingback: So, What Has the Trudeau Government Done Since Its Election? | The Effervescent Bubble

Comment?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s