I never was much of a tweeter until earlier this year, when another columnist accused me of taking my marching orders from the Prime Minister’s Office. The attacks were in the Twittersphere, so I decided to fight fire with fire. Like everyone, I am anxiously awaiting the Monday’s election outcome. And on Monday evening, I am taking a break from that vicious medium, Twitter.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 21, 2019.

OTTAWA—Goodbye Twitter! I can’t wait until this election is over.

Like everyone, I am anxiously awaiting the outcome. And on Monday evening, I am taking a break from that vicious medium.

I never was much of a tweeter until earlier this year, when another columnist accused me of taking my marching orders from the Prime Minister’s Office.

The attacks were in the Twittersphere, so I decided to fight fire with fire.

For weeks, the word war was abuzz with contradictory stories of SNC-Lavalin and former attorney general and justice minister Jody Wilson-Raybould. My question at the time, still unanswered, was “why does Wilson-Raybould want to deliver the election to Andrew Scheer?”

The Twitter response was brutal. I was deemed anti-women and anti-aboriginal. I was so discouraged at the vitriol emanating from that universe that I vowed to get out.

But a friend made me promise to hang in there until the election was over.

She believed that social media interventions would play a major role in the election outcome.

At her request, I agreed to stay active on Twitter until Oct. 21. It has been a debilitating and exhausting experience. It is impossible to influence anonymous participants who are so filled with hate.

I am a great believer that negativity breeds negativity. To be happy in life, you should surround yourself with positivity.

That isn’t possible on Twitter. I found myself getting more and more negative by the day. But people should vote on the positive program of a government.

Trudeau has made more than his share of mistakes. But as for his agenda, never in the history of the country has a prime minister embraced Indigenous reconciliation so wholeheartedly. Never has a prime minister taken the issue of climate change to heart, and developed a real plan to turn the situation around. Never has a prime minister aggressively tackled poverty and embraced minority sexual communities.

Trudeau’s vision is exemplary. He definitely deserves the second term that former U.S. president Barack Obama recommended.

Obama’s words speak for themselves. “I was proud to work with Justin Trudeau as president. He’s a hard-working, effective leader who takes on big issues like climate change. The world needs his progressive leadership now, and I hope our neighbours to the North support him for another term.”

With that endorsement from such a respected world leader, Trudeau should be rewarded with re-election. Maybe the experience of the last four years will also strengthen his backbone.

One of his biggest mistakes was not dealing with the poison festering in his own cabinet.

Trudeau’s patience with two cabinet ministers who were attacking him publicly was, without a doubt, a reflection of his commitment to do politics differently.

On the surface, that vision inspired a whole generation of political agnostics to get involved.

But in the end, Trudeau learned what every prime minister has known since the beginning of Canada. There is only one way to do politics.

Governments need to lead, and if that means being tough from time to time, so be it.

The Liberals naively set up a committee to review the voting system, with the New Democrats in the chair.

But the failure to deliver on that voting promise is Trudeau’s and Trudeau’s alone.

He cannot waste precious election time explaining why there was no consensus in a Parliament where the Conservatives sought a referendum, and the New Democrats insisted on consideration of only one option, that of proportional representation.

Had a member of the government with political experience led the discussion, the voting system could have been changed.

Trudeau recruited fresh faces, including Canada’s first aboriginal attorney general. Wilson-Raybould had only three years experience working as a prosecutor.

He also named other newbies, talented people with incredible backgrounds, but zero political experience.

One of those was the minister responsible for delivering on Trudeau’s promise to change the voting system. Maryam Monsef went from Afghani refugee to a seat at the cabinet table with only eight months membership in a party.

To manage an electoral reform agenda, you need a broad and deep understanding of how elections work.

The “mantra” of doing politics differently has convinced former ministers Jane Philpott and Wilson-Raybould to run as Independents. They both believe Canada should be governed like a giant citizen’s assembly with members voting their constituents’ wishes.

In a country as diverse as ours, that would be chaos.

There is something to be said for a Westminster system that has functioned for more than 400 years.

Successful Parliaments are not about doing politics differently.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Timing is everything in politics. Four months ago, the election question would have been on trust, mistrust of the prime minister because of his handling of the SNC-Lavalin request for a deferred prosecution agreement. Not anymore.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 15, 2019.

OTTAWA—Timing is everything in politics.

And the lifespan of a political trajectory is about six months.

Bluntly put, if the cabinet exit by Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott had occurred this month, the Liberal election goose would have been cooked.

The government would have had too little time to turn around negative public reaction to the loss of two high-profile women ministers.

In the fullness of time, people forget about internal party feuds and bloodbaths. They make voting decisions based on the future. They also mark their ballot based on their own economic self-interest.

In the olden days, the Conservative carbon tax mantra would have carried that day. A hike in gas prices used to be the line that politicians crossed at their peril.

Back in 1979, the short-lived government of prime minister Joe Clark fell when finance minister John Crosbie introduced an 18-cent a gallon excise tax on gas.

His budget was voted down, and leaderless Liberals convinced prime minister Pierre Trudeau back from retirement to win another four-year mandate that ended in 1984.

The next politician who dared to tackle the issue of carbon pricing was Liberal leader Stéphane Dion, who launched a bold election platform called the Green Shift, less than four months before the 2008 election.

Conservatives attacked the plan with the same vehemence they are now reserving for the current Liberal carbon-pricing plan.

Pre-election Conservative advertising was effective in caricaturing Dion’s geeky leadership style and Stephen Harper eked out a minority government.

But that election also saw the edges starting to fray around the Conservative anti-environmental message.

Jack Layton’s orange crush fell short of lapping the Liberals, but the New Democratic leader’s surge deprived the Conservatives of a majority.

More than a decade later, the sides on this environmental fight have not changed much. But the population has.

Multiple examples of extreme climate change have convinced Canadians that the warming of the planet is real, and caused by human activity.

Spring flooding gripped Eastern Canada this spring and the ongoing risk is so great that the Insurance Bureau of Canada is calling for an integration of flood planning into the National Emergency Plan. The bureau is recommending government support for homes in flood-prone zones to be raised or relocated. The bureau is also proposing a change in land use planning rules to ban all construction projects on identified flood plains.

Summer fire evacuations are becoming the norm. Just last week roughly 4,350 residents from two northern Ontario communities, Pikangikum First Nation and Keewayin, were airlifted to safety. That follows similar evacuations this year in British Columbia, Alberta, and Manitoba.

People can’t forget the most destructive wildfire in Alberta’s history, which displaced 88,000 people and razed the town of Fort McMurray.

More than a decade ago, these predicted catastrophic events had not become the norm.

Now, even the most hardened anti-environmentalist is usually not a climate change denier, at least not in Canada.

Canadians understand that while there is certainly a cost in pricing carbon, there is also a bigger cost in doing nothing.

A study released last week by EnviroEconomics and Canadians for Clean Prosperity says the Conservative climate plan would reverse Canada’s greenhouse gas reductions and cost the average household $295 in provinces where the federal government is backstopping the provincial refusal to price carbon.

Tories are banking on the fact that, according to a recent CBC poll, most Canadians do not want to be personally out-of-pocket more than $100 to fight climate change.

But the more Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer aligns himself with provincial leaders like Jason Kenney and Doug Ford, the more his party’s numbers are dropping in the polls. Liberal numbers are on the rise.

Kenney cannot lose in Alberta by playing to his base, but he risks losing the rest of the country. His recent decision to hold McCarthyesque hearings into foreign environmental influences, coupled with the multiple unsuccessful carbon pricing court challenges, have caught people’s attention and not in a good way.

The general consensus is that the Liberal government has a serious plan to price carbon and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Critics on the left say the government is doing too little too late.

Four months ago, the election question would have been on trust, mistrust of the prime minister because of his handling of the SNC-Lavalin request for a deferred prosecution agreement.

Now the composition of the next Parliament will depend on how much Canadians are willing to nurture the health of our ailing planet.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Tory growth appears to be slowing. Canadians are asking about Andrew Scheer’s right-wing alliance with Doug Ford and Jason Kenney. That leaves an opening for the Liberals.

By Sheila Copps
Published first in The Hill Times on May 20, 2019.

OTTAWA—What is up with the CBC?

I woke up to a shocking CBC headline last week. It was an analysis of recent provincial election defeats stating, “Not since the Great Depression have more governments been defeated on one PM’s watch.”

The hyperbolic headline went on to state that if the Liberals lost the Thursday Newfoundland election, “that would make Trudeau’s term in office the bloodiest for an incumbent government in Canadian history.”

The analysis, by the CBC’s Éric Grenier, purported to be an opinion piece on the popularity swings of the current federal government.

It rehashed how many provincial governments had fallen during the past four years.

According to Grenier, Trudeau is to be tagged for the defeat of New Democratic premiers in Alberta and Manitoba, both of whom lost to the Tories.

Grenier fingers the prime minister for Liberal losses in Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia and Prince Edward Island.

The same morning the CBC “election feed” did not stop there. A second Grenier story claimed recent Green breakthroughs could redraw the electoral map.

That conclusion came from another analysis piece claiming the Greens could be heading for the mainland after storming Vancouver Island in the Nanaimo-Ladysmith Green byelection win.

The media spent weeks predicting Greens were poised to form government in Prince Edward Island, vaulting that story to worldwide attention. In the end, the Green Party formed official opposition, polling one point ahead of the Liberals in the popular vote.

Greens garnered 30.6 per cent of the vote compared to 36.5 for the Tories and 29.5 per cent for the Grits. It is pretty hard to explain a six-point vote gap on the same day multiple pollsters predicted a Green government.

When that did not materialize, the incorrect prediction was merely attributed to small samplings in pre-election surveys by local polling firms.

Grenier’s piece on Trudeau failed to mention a factor that loomed large in British Columbia, P.E.I., Ontario and Quebec Liberal takedowns. All four involved voters suffering one-party, multi-election fatigue.

In British Columbia’s case, the Liberals even won the popular vote. That was quite a shock, considering Grits had been in power in that province for 16 years. But the Greens made common cause with the New Democrats to replace the Liberals in a coalition arrangement.

In Ontario’s case, the Liberals had also been in power for 16 straight years. Premier Kathleen Wynne pulled off a surprise victory in the previous election but her personal unpopularity matched that of her predecessor when Doug Ford’s Conservatives toppled her government.

The same phenomenon was repeated in Quebec. With the exception of an 18-month interregnum period for the Parti Québécois, the Liberals had been in power in Quebec for 16 years.

And as for P.E.I., Liberals had dominated the province since premier Rob Ghiz was first elected in 2007. So 12 years of uninterrupted Liberal island rule ended with an unexpected Tory victory.

What is perhaps more surprising, is that after more than a decade in office, the Liberals were only one point behind “government-in-waiting” Greens.

So four provincial governments that had been in power for an average of 15 years were defeated in a “change” vote.

It is hardly a reason to claim Trudeau has authored a provincial “bloodbath.”

Reporting on polls is one thing.

But the growing propensity of pollsters to try and shape the narrative should be disturbing for every political watcher.

There is no doubt; a surge in Green support affects other parties. But one party at greater risk is the NDP.

In the last P.E.I. election, the NDP leader came fourth in his own riding and the party garnered only three per cent of the vote, a 70 per cent drop since 2015, when the combined Green-NDP vote was almost 22 per cent.

Considering the Liberal vote dropped 25 per cent, it is a pretty sure bet that the balance of the winning Green surge came from the Grits.

Even in victory, Prince Edward Island Conservatives lost one per cent in popular vote from 2015.

Disgruntled Liberals are not switching to the Tories.

Instead, they are choosing parties that offer a counterbalance to the backward Conservative agenda on issues like climate change, immigration and women’s reproductive choice.

Tory growth appears to be slowing. Canadians are asking about Andrew Scheer’s right-wing alliance with Doug Ford and Jason Kenney. That leaves an opening for the Liberals.

Trudeau needs to convince progressive voters that Liberals are the only antidote to a Scheer shift.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

To win, Justin Trudeau needs the Herb Gray crowd. He should listen to political elders, privately spilling their guts about feeling excluded. A small tent reaps a small voter turnout. A small turnout spells defeat.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May. 13, 2019.

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Justin Trudeau better hit the reset button to reverse his fading fortunes.

That should include mending fences with long-time Liberals who believe Trudeau’s quest to do politics differently has been exclusionary not inclusionary.

It is one thing to want new faces to reinvigorate a party. It is another thing to marginalize the old faces that have been supporting the party through thick and thin.

Remember the prime minister’s decision to take party politics out of the Senate? That decision was lauded by media observers as a way of doing politics differently. But now we are faced with independent Senators who do politics, with zero loyalty to anybody but themselves.

The government is having trouble passing an environmental assessment bill because it lacks Senate support.

Just last week, there was a gathering of the Liberal clan. The sold-out first annual Herb Gray Lecture Series, organized by Carleton University, featured MSNBC’S Ali Velshi in an articulate talk entitled “The Weaponization of Culture.”

Velshi’s first job was at Queen’s Park in Toronto working for minister Mavis Wilson in the government of David Peterson. He ultimately took a job with CNN and moved to the United States on the same day the World Trade Centre twin towers were downed by terrorists.

Velshi believes the weaponization of culture is leading to the decline of the American influence around the globe.

His two-hour presentation at the Library and Archives Canada included a historical overview and a conversation with the audience, moderated by journalist Susan Delacourt.

The occasion gathered those who knew and loved the late Herb Gray, the hardworking minister, deputy prime minister and second-longest serving Member of Parliament in the entire Commonwealth.

Herb Gray mentored many young Liberals who went on to establish their own political careers, including former Ontario finance minister Dwight Duncan and former tourism, culture, and sport minister Eleanor McMahon, both in attendance.

Herb, as he was fondly known by colleagues, practised the art of the big tent. Canada’s first Jewish federal cabinet minister, he embraced Windsor Muslims with the same enthusiasm shared for the rest of the community in his beloved hometown.

That big tent made Liberalism the most successful national movement in the history of the country.

But fragmentation of that tent could end up costing them the election.

The last time Liberals suffered a body blow was when the party dropped from frontrunner to third place under leader Michael Ignatieff.

The danger is not necessarily that Liberals will switch sides. But if they are not fired up, they may simply stay home.

During Ignatieff’s time, more than 600,000 supporters did not vote.

At the Gray lecture, the biggest complaint from many Grit attendees was the fact that they felt left out of a shrinking Liberal tent.

Trudeau needs to get loyalists back on side if he intends to form government.

The first step is to replace departed Gerald Butts with someone with broad and deep political experience running a national government—and soon.

Trudeau’s self-inflicted messes are a result of inexperience in running the massive operation of a national government.

From the SNC-Lavalin debacle to the Huawei extradition to the Marc Norman case, there are too many amateurs in the wheelhouse.

Trudeau is also overexposed. His team needs to be front and centre, with the leader spending less time in front of the camera minus selfies and socks. But a communications reworking is only part of the necessary reboot.

The problem goes beyond messaging to substance.

Climate change is one area where Liberals can contrast themselves favourably with the surging Conservatives.

The government also needs to draw another line in the sand. A handgun ban would definitely get the public’s attention and support.

Notwithstanding Border Security and Organized Crime Reduction Minister Bill Blair’s claim that the country is divided, the groups Trudeau needs to attract are in favour of a ban. It would definitely provide a sharp contrast with core values of the Conservative Party.

Even rural women favour a handgun ban. Trudeau needs those women if he has any chance of returning his party to power.

Menstruation pads in federal establishments are not going to cut it.

Trudeau has feminists, the LGBTQ community, and is likely supported by the majority of Indigenous people.

But that matters little because the massive voting centre is where victory sits.

To win, Trudeau needs the Herb Gray crowd.

He should listen to political elders, privately spilling their guts about feeling excluded.

A small tent reaps a small voter turnout. A small turnout spells defeat.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.