Just last week, the Liberals and the New Democrats both launched their environmental platforms. But analysis of those platforms did not even manage to make the front page of most newspapers.

OTTAWA—Former prime minister Kim Campbell once said an election is no time to discuss policy.

Her party went on to face a historic defeat, saving only two seats in the House of Commons.

In this election, Campbell’s viewpoint seems to be shared by some journalists on the campaign trail.

Just last week, the Liberals and the New Democrats both launched their environmental platforms. But analysis of those platforms did not even manage to make the front page of most newspapers.

Instead, The Globe and Mail chose to print a front-page story allegedly exposing insider details of why a former Liberal Member of Parliament was not re-offering.

The piece, by the same journalist who broke Jody Wilson-Raybould’s story, reflected a similar message. Strong woman, who would not defend the PM, are allegedly shown the door.

Delving deeper into the details, the MP claimed that all three colleagues in ridings neighbouring her own had been bullying her. She claimed intimidation and harassment starting in 2016.

She also showed The Globe the screenshot of a text conversation with Montreal Minister Mélanie Joly. She said the minister called to ask why she wasn’t supporting the prime minister when his feminist credentials were under attack by media during the SNC-Lavalin case.

Presumably The Globe published the piece on the front page because editors believe this “Liberal woman as victim of Trudeau” narrative was relevant.

But voters are smart enough to make decisions based on current issues, not on fake personality politics.

That explains why Justin Trudeau’s Liberals did not lose ground following the revelations that he costumed himself in blackface and brownface on more than one occasion 20 years ago.

Media blackface coverage dominated the airwaves in Canada and around the world for a week. Trudeau tackled the issue head on, with a town hall meeting in Saskatchewan on the evening after the revelations. He also apologized immediately and appeared to genuinely understand the gravity of his childish actions.

It was a shocking news story. But the notion that somehow Trudeau is a racist did not ring true.

Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi put it best in an op-ed he wrote for The Washington Post. “He should be judged on the totality of his record and whether Canadians believe in his ability to do good in the future.”

When Trudeau demoted Wilson-Raybould, he was accused of being a fake feminist. Nothing could be further from the truth.

He was the first prime minister in the history of the country to deliver a gender equal cabinet. Andrew Scheer has refused to commit to doing the same, if he forms government while NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has committed to a gender equal cabinet in the unlikely event of a New Democratic Party victory.

Journalists attacking Trudeau’s feminist credentials in the Wilson-Raybould case included so many misogynists that the claim was obviously fake news. When the sexist Sun chain decried misogyny, women laughed.

Differing viewpoints on the use of the deferred prosecution agreement has nothing to do with sexism.

So attacks on Trudeau required caucus and cabinet women to come forward and set the record straight. That is how politics works.

There are many strong women in Trudeau’s caucus and cabinet.

The decision of Wilson-Raybould to quit the cabinet had nothing to do with feminism or sexism.

Although the minister was upset to lose her “dream job” as attorney general, she accepted another ministerial post in veterans affairs. She even tried to remain in caucus, all the while secretly taping conversations and breaching the trust of all those who served with her on the team.

When you are part of caucus, you don’t screenshot internal texts and you don’t secretly tape conversations. You trust each other and work as a team.

As a minister, you do not write copious notes about cabinet conversations because they are supposed to be confidential discussions between trusted colleagues. This is the normal functioning of a healthy political team.

In an election campaign, the public is not focused on the internal machinations of a caucus. They are interested in what policies differentiate the political parties.

On Sept. 27, thousands of young people gathered in a huge strike in Montreal with Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg.

Young Canadians want to know what the parties are doing to confront the climate crisis that, if unchecked, will destroy their futures.

Trudeau, who has actually submitted a substantive climate plan, joined the young people in this march.

Scheer took a pass. That is real news.

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

By SHEILA COPPS

First published on Monday, February 19, 2018 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—Long live the right to bare arms, NOT.

Conservative Member of Parliament Michelle Rempel felt the need to cross hairs with her party’s former leader last week by contradicting Canada’s first woman prime minister on the question of gravitas and female flesh.

Kim Campbell kicked up a Twitter storm when she linked to a blog post citing a study suggesting people who wear more clothing are considered smarter.

Campbell tweeted the following observation: “I am struck by how many women on television news wear sleeveless dresses—often when sitting with suited men. I have always felt it was demeaning to the women and this suggests that I am right. Bare arms undermine credibility and gravitas!”

Campbell is right.

Flip on any national news network and the amount of flesh exposed by women stands in stark contradiction to their fully clothed male counterparts.

Move south of the border, and not only do you get plenty of flesh candy, most of it is fake.

It is incomprehensible how many women on Fox and CNN news networks appear to have breast enhancements, bottled hair and perfectly toned bare arms. Can you imagine Peter Mansbridge reading the news in a muscle shirt? The idea is laughable.

It used to be the same way for women. When I was elected to Ontario’s provincial parliament back in 1981, we were given a day-long media briefing by the local Canadian Broadcasting Corporation team in Toronto.

I was told, in no uncertain terms, cleavage was a no-no when it came to dressing for prime time.

Now cleavage is a normal part of women’s exposure on television.

Years ago, Campbell herself drew attention to the anomaly of women’s flesh and power, when the former justice minister posed for a portrait holding her judicial robes just below bared shoulders.

The photograph was very controversial at the time as it appeared to the naked eye that the future prime minister was in the buff behind those robes.

Some of the Twitterverse reaction last week recalled that earlier portrait and suggested that somehow Campbell had forgotten previous views on skin exposure.

Campbell made short shrift of that perspective, tweeting “Photo was art-juxtaposition of bare shoulders (femininity) and legal robes (male-dominated power structure). No, I haven’t forgotten!”

And again, how right she was. Women should not have to bury their feminine side to succeed, but nor should they have to bare their skin in pursuit of journalistic excellence.

Cleavage, fake or not, bare arms and tight clothing put the media focus exactly where it should not be, on the person’s body instead of their mind.

A newscaster whose main attribute is perfectly coiffed hair and pearlized white teeth reinforces the notion that the most important aspect of their job is looking good.

And when it is juxtaposed against the obvious image of serious male broadcasters, fully clothed from head to toe, it sends a message to young women that the key to their success is based on buff arms, not sharp minds.

A few days ago, I was chatting with a young journalist on the question of sexual harassment on Parliament Hill.

While very knowledgeable about what is happening today, she had little understanding of just how difficult it was for the women who came before her. I reminded her that as a young Member of Parliament, I was called “baby,” and “slut” to peals of laughter amongst the majority of male colleagues. That would not happen today.

But what I did not have to do was to bare my body. In that sense, the message for women and men was equal.

A long-sleeved business suit was de rigueur for both genders, and nobody cared what colour my hair was or whether my breasts were perky.

Today’s additional pressure forces women to look good while working and reinforces body shape as a key element of the job.

Painted finger nails, blow-dried hair, tight clothing, exposed skin and perfect makeup are onerous requirements for today’s women in broadcasting.

As well as honing their reporting skills to make a breakthrough into a male-dominated world, women have to be ready to bare their shoulders and more.

It is just one more clear illustration of sexual inequality in the workplace. If we are serious about stamping out predators, we need to start by stamping out sexist work practices.

The need to bare female flesh has no place in the workforce, on television news or anywhere else.

Bravo to Kim Campbell for telling it like it is.

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