Your March 5 #LavScam roundup

— 03.05.2019 10:51 AM

Above: a Trudeau supporter physically attacks a protestor at Justin Trudeau’s rally in Toronto last night. Where – I’m not making this up! – they played Michael Jackson songs – on the same night ‘Leaving Neverland’ was airing.

And the great reviews keep rolling in!

  • Globe Ipsos poll: “Most Canadians side with Wilson-Raybould, believe Trudeau has lost moral authority to govern: Ipsos poll…A majority of Canadians are keeping tabs on the SNC-Lavalin affair and that doesn’t bode well for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, according to a new Ipsos poll conducted exclusively for Global News. If an election were held tomorrow, Trudeau would receive only 31 per cent of the decided popular vote — down three points from a couple of weeks ago — while Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer would receive 40 per cent, according to the poll of 1,000 Canadians carried out between March 1 and March 4….“This is the first time we’ve actually seen the Conservative Party resuscitated and looking like they could potentially form the government,” said Darrell Bricker, CEO of Ipsos Public Affairs. “The Liberals, on the other hand, have been dropping precipitously over the space of the last few weeks. The question is have they hit bottom yet?”
    • Susan Delacourt, Toronto Star: “Justin Trudeau has no political playbook to counter this rare implosion…Philpott has exited Trudeau’s cabinet in the same way that Jody Wilson-Raybould bolted: explosively, unexpectedly and clearly in full recognition of the massive damage it would cause to the boss, the government and the chances of the Liberals being re-elected this fall. Together, they are a double-barrelled shot to the heart of all that was supposed to be the shiny new brand of the Trudeau government: one far more friendly to women, Indigenous people and rookie politicians such as Philpott and Wilson-Raybould.”
  • Chantal Hebert, Star: “Justin Trudeau was damaged goods before Treasury Board President Jane Philpott followed her friend and former colleague Jody Wilson-Raybould out of his cabinet. It is far from certain that he can recover from this latest blow to his moral authority and repair his reputation as a competent prime minister in time for the election. [Losing Philpott may be] politically fatal. It certainly screams ineptitude at crisis management on the part of a prime minister. With Philpott’s resignation — offered in support of Wilson-Raybould — the SNC-Lavalin affair enters a new lethal phase for the prime minister. Until further notice, all bets are off as to its outcome.”
  • Star editorial board:  “So far the prime minister has failed to present a robust counter-narrative to the damning story about political interference in judicial matters told by his former attorney general, Jody Wilson-Raybould…It’s plain that Trudeau’s commitment to a gender-balanced cabinet and to making progress on Indigenous affairs had significance that eluded him at the time. He ended up with ministers at the cabinet table who took his rhetoric about change seriously and weren’t prepared to compromise their principles just to get along. There is abundant irony in how Trudeau’s professed principles have come back to bite him in unexpected ways.”
  • Campbell Clark, Globe and Mail:  “Losing one cabinet minister who resigns on principle can be considered a misfortune. Losing two smacks of crisis. If any other cabinet minister had quit Justin Trudeau’s cabinet after Jody Wilson-Raybould’s stand in the SNC-Lavalin affair, it would have been bad. When it is Jane Philpott, a paragon of principle who is no pie-eyed dreamer, it is Mr. Trudeau’s government falling apart from the inside.”
  • John Ibbitson, Globe:  “This is a civil war, one Mr. Trudeau may not survive. Just to start, what kind of government shuffles its cabinet three times in two months? There are those who say the SNC-Lavalin scandal is a tempest in a teacup – or a nothingburger, to update the cliché. No it’s not. Granted, most people don’t follow the day-to-day jousts of the blood sport known as politics. But this is a political crisis like no other, because of the characters involved…We are witnessing a personal vote of non-confidence in the Prime Minister by some of his most senior cabinet ministers, based on his handling of the SNC-Lavalin affair, but also over disillusion with Mr. Trudeau’s leadership.”
  • Lori Turnbull, Globe: “Ms. Philpott’s resignation from cabinet is nothing short of catastrophic for the government…One effect of Jody Wilson-Raybould’s testimony is that there’s now a clear line in the sand and the beginnings of a civil war in the Liberal fold. The grey area in which MPs could plead to be both loyal to the Prime Minister and sympathetic to Jody Wilson-Raybould is quickly disappearing. They have to choose a side. Ms. Philpott has made hers clear. If others follow her lead, the Prime Minister’s confidence problem worsens.”
  • Matt Gurney, National Post: “It’s not just the women quitting in disgust that’s going to cause Prime Minister Justin Trudeau so much trouble. That’s bad enough, to be sure. But it’s what they’re saying as they head out the door that’ll do the real damage…Philpott’s been watching and learning. She’s seen what happened to Wilson-Raybould. She did this anyway, and at a time and place of her choosing, even after the Liberals tried to hurt Wilson-Raybould’s reputation with whispers, whispers that got so bad Trudeau felt compelled to apologize for what his own colleagues were saying. Philpott knew that might be coming, so she made her case clear as day — and it’s devastating for Trudeau.  Like I said, Liberals — have fun spinning this one.”
  • Kelly McParland, Post: “Justin Trudeau wanted strong women. He sure got ’em.  That they’ve found him wanting and are willing to say so is proof of his success. It clearly never occurred to him they might take their job seriously enough to question his own performance…It turns out women really aren’t just like men, and aren’t necessarily afraid to stand by their beliefs. Philpott’s public declaration that she no longer has confidence in the prime minister — specifically his handling of the SNC-Lavalin controversy — is as damaging an assertion as can be made by a senior government minister against her leader. As she points out in her resignation letter, “the constitutional convention of Cabinet solidarity means, among other things, that ministers are expected to defend all Cabinet decisions. A minister must always be prepared to defend other ministers publicly, and must speak in support of the government and its policies.” Given the convention “and the current circumstances, “ she writes “it is untenable for me to continue to serve as a Cabinet minister.”
  • Brian Lilley, Toronto Sun:  “For a government that has branded itself as feminist, as gender balanced, as supportive of women, the loss of yet another powerful woman around the cabinet table is beyond bad news.  On the SNC-Lavalin file, the Trudeau Liberals have shown that they don’t know what “no” actually means and now the women in the party are fighting back.  Losing Philpott is no small matter for Justin Trudeau.”
  • Robyn Urback, CBC News:  “If Jane Philpott doesn’t have confidence in Justin Trudeau, why should anyone else?…A million more Freeland-type ovations can’t undo what Philpott did in a few hundred words: she told the doe-eyed #TeamTrudeau hangers-on that their faith in this government is misplaced. And she said she would not be able to fulfil her duties as a minister if it meant publicly defending the government. That’s a devastating message from her especially; Philpott is capable, venerable and widely respected both in and out of Liberal circles. She can’t be written off as a cabinet minister disgruntled about a demotion or an opposition leader out for blood. Philpott is a Liberal — a widely admired one — and she doesn’t have faith in the prime minister. And if she doesn’t, as someone privy to the conversations around the cabinet table about this whole affair, why should anyone else?”
  • Paul Wells, Maclean’s:  “With Jane Philpott’s resignation from the cabinet, Justin Trudeau’s government is now in a crisis that ranks with the coalition challenge to Stephen Harper in 2008 and Jean Chrétien’s dismissal of Paul Martin in 2002. That probably understates matters, actually: Those two previous shocks were about ambition; they engaged matters of principle almost by accident. This one is a direct challenge to a government by two (and counting?) ministers with no perceptible ambitions beyond their former posts—though buckle up, because they’ll both be accused of scheming—on the gravest grounds of ethics….Every cabinet minister, and every Liberal member of Parliament, has a decision to make right now. Today. We are about to find out who is serious, and who merely plays serious on Instagram…A country gets into trouble when it turns every question into an electoral question. The party stripe of the government is not the only interesting question. Here’s another: is the government we have, the Prime Minister we have, so deep in moral denial that they can never find their way back?”

Comments (18)

Jane Philpott: you are so, so amazing

— 03.04.2019 03:25 PM

I fundraised for her, before she was elected.  I have remained friends with her since.

And I am so, so proud of her today.

“I have lost confidence in how the government has dealt with this matter.”

This government is falling apart before our eyes.


Comments (32)

Your morning #LavScam roundup

— 03.04.2019 08:30 AM

There’s been a lot going on since the last round-up.  It’s all going swimmingly, as you can see.

(If you’ve got one to share that I’ve missed, do so in comments with source, please.)

  • Richard Martineau, Journal de Montreal: “And was it because of empathy for workers that Trudeau wanted to save SNC-Lavalin? No. Because Justin needs votes in Quebec to win his next election…If Quebecers continue supporting Trudeau now, in spite of this attack on the independence of the justice system, we are imbeciles.”
  • “David Olive, Toronto Star: “The Trudeau “war room” is dug in, expecting the current outrage to subside. But the Grit brand will be further weakened by still more allegations to come of unseemly conduct by Trudeau and the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO). The unpopularity of the PMO is widespread in this government. The PMO’s pressure on Wilson-Raybould is but one of countless acts of meddling in the work of cabinet officers, committee chairs and backbenchers.”
  • Toronto Star poll: “57 per cent said the situation has “worsened” their opinion of Trudeau, versus 36 per cent who said it has had “no effect” and 7 per cent who said their view of the prime minister has been improved by the situation.”
  • Chantal Hebert, Star:  “Another week of political drama on Parliament Hill finds the SNC-Lavalin affair no closer to closure. In the aftermath of Jody Wilson-Raybould’s appearance at the Commons justice committee, even the future of the prime minister as Liberal leader has become fair game for speculation.  If anything, the former attorney general’s testimony has left many Canadians with more questions than definitive answers.”
  • Royson James, Star: “[The]prime minister is throwing the woman under the bus. And the clerk of the Privy Council, a top bureaucrat on nobody’s radar except political animals, tries to undercut her by suggesting that if she felt pressure in her job as attorney general, that’s par for the course. In short, “Suck it up lady. That’s how the big boys play the game. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.” Indigenous advocates and women’s groups and Canadians attuned to the issues and now confused by the black cloud threatening the sunny ways they’d welcomed just yesterday responded with outrage and concern.”
  • Globe and Mail poll: “More than half of Canadians say fraud and corruption charges against SNC-Lavalin Group Inc. should go to a criminal trial rather than a negotiated settlement where the Montreal engineering and construction giant would pay fines and avoid prosecution, according to a new survey.”
  • John Ibbitson, Globe: “In the absence of doing the right thing – calling an election to let the people decide this issue – the smart thing for the Liberals is to do nothing that will prolong the agony of this scandal. Fresh testimony, even if it bolsters their case, will only drag things on, increasing the risk that Mr. Trudeau himself might be forced to testify, requiring him to do something he has refused to do for three straight weeks: respond to a direct question with a direct answer.”
  • Shelby Blackley, Globe: “Courage is clearly innate for Ms. Wilson-Raybould, but maybe it was bolstered by the support of women near and far. After Ms. Wilson-Raybould resigned from the federal cabinet on Feb. 12, the hashtag #StandwithJody began trending. Fellow MPs such as Jane Philpott, and Celina Caesar-Chavannes, among others, voiced their support.”
  • Campbell Clark, Globe: “Firing attacks at Ms. Wilson-Raybould…clearly backfired. Mr. Trudeau had made a milestone of her appointment as the first female Indigenous justice minister in 2015. Accusations that the PMO was “smearing” Ms. Wilson-Raybould dented Mr. Trudeau’s political brand. She has seized the high ground.”
  • Globe editorial board:  “If the Trudeau government has any hope of seeing the back of the SNC-Lavalin scandal, it has to put its full version of the story, all of it, in front of the Canadian people. Perfunctory denials won’t do. The allegations made by former justice minister and attorney-general Jody Wilson-Raybould are too serious. That the allegations go to the very top, and come from one of the government’s most senior members, makes them unprecedented.”
  • Kelly McParland, National Post: “Jody Wilson-Raybould was clear, credible, straightforward and eminently convincing. Anyone outside a hardened partisan would have to conclude this was a strong woman who held firm beliefs and had stood by them under extreme duress from powerful men.”
  • Andrew Coyne, Post: “Unless you think Wilson-Raybould is flat out lying, something has gone very wrong with the culture of this government. I don’t mean the desire to spare the company’s employees from hardship, or even the concern for the political repercussions in Quebec, but the apparently widespread assumption that the way to attend to these was to corrupt a prosecution and trample over the independence of the attorney general.”
  • National Post editorial board:  “What is the prime minister waiting for? His friend and confidant Butts will have a chance to speak, as will Wernick, for a second time now. Wilson-Raybould, for her part, should be given the chance to flesh out what Liberal MPs have been dismissing as her inaccurate version of things, unfettered by potential self-serving limits imposed by the prime minister.  That would be the prime minister, you’ll remember, who once pledged to lead the most transparent government in Canadian history. The people of Canada are eager for answers, and there are numerous people willing to speak. Let’s hear what they have to say — all of them, and all of it.”
  • CTV News Nanos poll: “One in four Canadians say the SNC-Lavalin scandal will influence their vote in the next federal election – and the political fallout appears to be growing, according to a new Nanos survey…Before the former attorney general testified, 14 per cent of respondents said they considered Trudeau the most ethical federal leader. At the time, Trudeau ranked third behind Green Party Leader Elizabeth May, at 23 per cent, and Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer, at 21 per cent. But by Friday, Trudeau had sunk to 10 per cent support, putting him in the fourth spot behind NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who held 11 per cent.”
  • Paul Wells, Maclean’s:  “THE MORAL CATASTROPHE OF JUSTIN TRUDEAU…Unless the Trudeau Liberals can produce persuasive evidence that Jody Wilson-Raybould is an utter fabulist (and frankly, I now expect several to try), her testimony before the Commons Justice Committee establishes pretty clearly that the hucksters and worse were running the show. Led by the grinning legatee who taints the Prime Ministers’ office…What the former attorney general described is a sickeningly smug protection racket whose participants must have been astonished when she refused to play along.”
  • Anne Kingston, Maclean’s: “We’re talking Grand-Master-Jedi-level gaslighting here. Clearly the “No” registered on the SNC-Lavalin DPA on Sept. 4, Sept. 17, Oct. 7, Dec. 19 did not register as an actual or final decision. As for pressure? She must be imagining things! After all, the decision was Wilson-Raybould’s alone to make. And the insurance kicker:  If Wilson-Raybould did feel she was being pressured to override the decision to prosecute, it was up to her to protest to the very office applying pressure, or resign. If she didn’t, well, it’s nobody’s fault but hers. Her behaviour is the problem. As I said, it’s an age-old template.  As for “How many times did Jody Wilson Raybould need to say ‘No?’ before being heard?” It’s a trick question. The correct answer: Zero.”
  • Leah McLaren, The Guardian: “Liberal prime minister Justin Trudeau – proud feminist, defender of minority rights, advocate for transparency, inclusivity and decency, and prince of the one-armed push-up – was morally eviscerated over four-hours of astonishing testimony by his own former attorney general and justice minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould – a woman of great integrity and a rare Indigenous Canadian cabinet minister…Trudeau’s behaviour was way beyond the bounds of what was fair or decent. It was sleazy, plain and simple. And for a leader whose entire brand identity, right down to the toes of his cotton rainbow socks, is based on fairness and decency, that’s pure political poison.”
  • Paul Wells, Maclean’s: “Long story short, the government of Canada was telling one story to itself and another to Canadians. To themselves, they said they were protecting jobs. To the rest of us, they said they were getting tough. A government that indulges in that much sustained double-talk clearly thinks it has something to hide. It’s being disingenuous. It’s being phony. And since the lot of them never stop calling themselves #TeamTrudeau on Twitter, I guess we can, without fear of contradiction, say the Prime Minister of Canada has been the phony-in-chief…She wanted to back the country’s public prosecutor, to let a court do what courts do every day: weigh and judge. He wanted to change the rules mid-game and hope we wouldn’t notice.  And the problem for Trudeau—who came to power promising a new era of transparency—is that this phoniness is a trait he shows all too often.”

Comments (27)