The boost in polling that Democrats have enjoyed since U.S. President Joe Biden dropped out of the race would not be shared by the Liberals if Justin Trudeau were to do the same.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 2, 2024.

OTTAWA–The post-Biden bump for the Democrats in the United States has not passed unnoticed in Canada.

One of the first questions asked of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the summer cabinet meeting in Halifax last week was just that: Could the Liberals get a similar bump if the prime minister were to step down, and the voters were presented with a different face at the head of the party?

Trudeau sidestepped the question, and continued to insist that his job was to “be there to invest in Canadians.” But his close friend and cabinet colleague Marc Miller did say that robust conversations were taking place within the confines of the caucus, without public disclosure.

Other ministers, including potential leadership candidates Mélanie Joly and Chrystia Freeland, were quick to support the prime minister’s leadership. But the party is roiling, as ministers and Members of Parliament seek their own Canadian bump.

It has been a year since the Conservative lead entered into double-digit territory, and nothing the government does seems to narrow that gap. But the notion of a parallel result if Trudeau were to resign is misdirected.

First of all, the hike for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has resulted in an increase of three to four per cent for her party.

Three to four per cent in Canada would not be enough to return to government, as the current polling differential between the Liberals and the Conservatives is much higher.

The United States is essentially a two-party system, so a small shift can make or break a victory. Even an independent with the name recognition of Robert Kennedy Jr. managed only six per cent support at the apex of his campaign. It is doubtful that six per cent would even follow him into an election. Now that he has thrown his support behind Republican candidate Donald Trump, his supporters will probably split between the two main parties.

Also, a two-party system lends itself to a smooth transition. In the U.S. case, the Democrats were able to replace U.S. President Joe Biden with Harris without a full leadership convention because opponents were edged out by the current vice-president.

The fact that she would have replaced Biden in the event of a presidential illness or incapacity made it simpler to rally around her at a national convention less than three months from the election.

In Trudeau’s case, his succession would trigger a full leadership process. Contrary to some media reports, Mark Carney is not a putative leader in waiting. There are several current cabinet ministers who have been quietly setting the stage for their own leadership ambitions.

Pundits would suggest that it is better to have someone from outside the current crop of politicians, and Carney certainly has a polished Canadian and international pedigree. But the Liberal Party’s previous experience with global pedigree has not been positive.

Michael Ignatieff is a brilliant scholar with a renowned global reputation who was supposed to be the party’s saviour. Instead, he was quickly rejected as someone who came back to Canada only to run for office. Carney has declined multiple offers to run for office, and that doesn’t sit well with those working in the trenches.

While the public may be tired of Trudeau, the party’s volunteer base is actively working to explain why his leadership and the current government are worth supporting.

The checklist is long for Liberals. National childcare, dental care, pharmacare and school lunch programs send a message that the party is working for all the people.

But the government has been telling that story for several months, and so far, it seems to be falling on deaf ears. Party members are ready for a leadership change, but also realize that the decision is in the hands of the prime minister.

Meanwhile, from François-Philippe Champagne to Dominic LeBlanc, many are weighing their future chances. Former parliamentarian Frank Baylis, who sold his heart-device business for $1.75-billion in 2021, is also actively assessing a potential campaign for the top job.

Baylis, son of a Barbadian immigrant, served in Trudeau’s government for one term, from 2015 to 2019, as the member of parliament for multicultural Pierrefonds-Dollard in Montreal, Que. If successful, he would be the party’s first non-white leader.

All of the foregoing means Liberals will not follow the American example and force out their leader. Multiple candidates are already planning their own robust campaigns, so there would be no shoo-in for Carney.

No huge bump, and multiple candidates rule out a smooth post-Trudeau transition in Canada.

Vive le Canada.

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

Hamas is a horrific butcher of Jews. But the death of thousands of innocent Palestinians serves to promote these antisemitic militants. Heaven forbid a Member of Parliament should speak his mind.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 19, 2024.

OTTAWA—If you want to know why politicians are loathe to speak out, just ask Rob Oliphant.

The CBC reported last week that the parliamentary secretary to the foreign minister was having a private telephone conversation with a constituent when he “ripped into” his own government’s position on the war in Gaza.

In a telephone call recorded without his consent or knowledge, Oliphant was particularly critical of the government’s decision to defund the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees after it was alleged that 12 of its employees participated in the massacre of Jewish civilians on Oct. 7, 2023, that prompted the current conflict.

Oliphant also ruminated openly about quitting his job, telling the person on the other end of the line: “I’ve come many times thinking, ‘Do I quit that job? Do I just go on being an MP?’ “

The constituent declined to be identified publicly for fear of job repercussions, and Oliphant explained his comments, saying he was dealing with a constituent in crisis, and hoped the comments would remain private.

No one would expect a private conversation to go viral but, unfortunately, in this day and age, there is no such thing as privacy.

That is why politicians are so loathe to air their own feelings in public, whether on the phone, in an email, or in ordinary conversation.

Of course, there is no unanimity in the Liberal caucus over all the actions that have been taken following the Oct. 7 massacre.

The constituent who released the telephone recording said they were pushing for a ceasefire, but I am not sure how the Oliphant exposure promotes their position.

Instead, it simply underscores the divisions that exist within the government on this issue.

And that should come as no surprise. Just as Jewish and Palestinian supporters in caucus have been outspoken in their views, so it would be ludicrous to assume that Oliphant is in favour of every aspect of his party’s foreign policy.

Oliphant also said he was willing to defend his statements in public, including his opposition to the defunding of UNRWA.

He told the CBC: “You don’t stop aid to Gaza because of 12 or 13 employees out of 13,000. It drives me crazy. … It is opportunistic, unfair, and it is maligning the operation of a UN organization that is doing, not perfect work… .But it is the best we have for education, medical care, for food, all of those things.”

Oliphant is a United Church minister as well as a Member of Parliament, and he has travelled to refugee camps managed by UNRWA in multiple countries, including Lebanon and Jordan. He told the constituent that even if the aid were cancelled directly, there should have been an immediate indirect method to secure food and medicine for those trapped in Gaza through no fault of their own.

History is proving Oliphant right. The death toll of women and children in Gaza rises daily with no end in sight.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has made it very clear that his goal is to annihilate Hamas and push all Palestinians out of the region.

He has the support of the majority of Israelis traumatized by the murderous, orchestrated attack on civilians Oct. 7.

But the enormity of the Israeli response has drawn criticism from around the world, including from those Israelis hoping their family members who are currently in Hamas’ clutches are returned home alive.

The United States and United Kingdom have both recently spoken about the full recognition of Palestine once the war ends.

NDP foreign affairs critic Heather McPherson is moving a motion that will ask the Canadian government to do the same thing.

Her motion was to be tabled last week, but would likely not come to a House vote anytime soon. However, the pressure will mount on the government to bridge the caucus gap between those on either side of this challenging issue.

Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly will have to navigate this mess all the while trying to keep Canadians on both sides of the issue on board.

As she is a potential future leadership candidate, her international decisions will also be weighed against domestic political considerations.

With the NDP on one side and the Conservatives on the other, it is not surprising that the centrist Liberals have divided views on the war.

Hamas is a horrific butcher of Jews. But the death of thousands of Palestinian innocents serves to promote these antisemitic militants.

Heaven forbid a Member of Parliament should speak his mind.

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

The government would like nothing more than a channel-changer on foreign interference investigations. Even if the Liberals succeed, with the appointment of a special rapporteur and multiple committees, all eyes are still on government foibles. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 13, 2023.

OTTAWA—In one month, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will celebrate 10 years as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

That celebration will be fêted in early May at the party’s national convention in Ottawa.

There will be much to celebrate. Back in 2013, pundits were writing off the Trudeau leadership.

He was leading a third party that was supposed to be on the verge of extinction.

Then came the blockbuster campaign of 2015, in which he was able to ignite the youth vote and encourage many non-Liberals to swing over to support the prime minister’s vision, including the legalization of marijuana and a commitment to end the current first-past-the-post voting system.

Back in 2015, Liberals moved ahead with their promise to legalize marijuana, but shelved their promise to change the voting system.

One out of two ain’t bad.

But in the lead-up to a potential election later this year, a 50 per cent success rate won’t help the government attract more swing voters.

Some say the Liberals promised to bring in proportional voting. But that is not accurate. In the prime minister’s mind, he was looking at the possibility of a weighted vote, with Canadians choosing to rank their choices in every local election.

Whatever Trudeau’s vision, the change was not accomplished and that failure is one of the issues that will affect the next election.

The promise to change the voting system appealed to those in smaller parties, like the New Democrats and the Green Party, as neither realistically hoped to form government.

Instead, they would be satisfied to have direct influence in shaping government policy.

Minority government has given them that opportunity. The New Democrats have been key to the introduction of dental care and potential pharmacare.

But whether the third party will be rewarded by the electorate for promoting these initiatives remains to be seen.

New Democrat supporters who switched to the Liberals in 2015, left in 2019 and did not return in 2021.

Green Party voters may make a switch as their party’s internal challenges have definitely damaged their credibility.

Looking forward, voters can be expected to make decisions on what parties will do in the future, not what they promised in the past.

Liberals will be particularly challenged since, as government, the party has been in power for eight years, and politics is the only job where the more experience you have, the more voters want to dump you.

Trudeau hopes to make history as only the second prime minister in Canada to be elected four times in a row.

He would follow in Liberal Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s footsteps by pulling off a four-peat.

But it is a daunting task.

The government is working hard to put some successes in the window. The recent health-care agreement is a great win.

It will help assuage Canadians’ fears about access to health care: from primary providers through to mental health and continuing care.

The next election will not be fought on political successes.

Public attention is focused on allegations of foreign interference in elections, in particular from the Chinese government.

Most Canadians don’t follow the allegations closely. They will be aware that the heated political temperature in Ottawa is putting pressure on the current government.

Trudeau stepped up earlier last week with a series of measures to respond to the allegations, but whether that is enough to cool things down remains to be seen.

If not, the Liberals may be positioning to move to an election sooner rather than later.

The official opposition has been searingly critical in recent exchanges in the House of Commons. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has been clear and concise in his attacks, and is obviously trying to keep the issue front and centre in the public mind.

The Liberal hope is to dampen down the heat and move the issue to the back burner.

Conservative MP Michael Cooper may have inadvertently helped the Liberals when he made a clearly sexist attack at Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly while she appeared before committee.

Even New Democrats demanded an apology.

The government would like nothing more than a channel-changer on foreign interference investigations.

Even if they succeed, with the appointment of a special rapporteur and multiple committees, all eyes are still on government foibles.

With that in mind, a successful Liberal convention in May and a summer spent travelling and rolling out budget announcements may mean we are heading for a fall election.

That could be the only way to douse the parliamentary fires.

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 in The Hill Times on December 3, 2018.

OTTAWA—Premier Doug Ford’s French-language smack down has just begun.

And if he thinks his problem is going to go away any time soon, he does not understand the deep roots and the strength of the francophone community in Ontario.

The last time the provincial government moved to reduce services was when the government of Mike Harris vowed to shut down the only full-service francophone hospital in the province.

That decision spawned SOS Montfort, which is one of the legendary stories of survival in a community that had to fight tooth and nail for every right it achieved in the past century.

Ten thousand francophones and their supporters took to the streets of the nation’s capital, led by a diminutive dynamo Gisele Lalonde. Key organizers included the late Mauril Bélanger and journalist Michel Gratton.

Coincidentally, Gratton was also a close friend of prime minister Brian Mulroney who was a strong supporter of minority rights, having grown up as an anglophone in northern Quebec.

Most francophones thought we were past that. With Ontario Progressive Conservative Minister Caroline Mulroney as attorney general and minister of francophone affairs, observers were assuaged about the possibility of a potential attack on francophone rights.

The SOS Montfort movement also spawned a tightening up of the conditions where the Government of Canada sends transfers for minority language services to the provinces.

The federal government tops up the cost of minority language education and ancillary services through an agreement, known as the Canada-Ontario Agreement on Minority-Language Education and Second Official-Language Instruction, renewable every five years. The funding is based on the principle that offering services in a second language, including school board and curriculum development, is more expensive to deliver, based on economies of scale.

The theory behind the second-language action plan transfers is that the federal government assists in supporting development of minority language services vis-à-vis the action plan that is negotiated in the transfer package.

In some instances, that means expansion of the university system. The federal government has already announced its support for the south-western Ontario French language university, a project that has been in the making for more than two decades.

The other element that Premier Ford failed to understand in his hasty decision to cut French language services is that the francophone demographic has changed drastically since SOS Montfort.

The original supporters were primarily old-stock French Canadians, who fought for services even as their numbers dwindled as a result of intermarriage, decreasing birthrate and anglicization.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau pictured with NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, Official Languages Minister Mélanie Joly, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer, and Green Party Leader Elizabeth May in his Centre Block office on Nov. 28, 2018, to discuss francophones in Ontario. Image courtesy of Twitter

That core has been buttressed in the last two decades by waves of immigrants from French-speaking countries who have made Ontario their home.

They live and work in French, and the Association des Canadiens Francais de l’Ontario has built strong links with the newcomer community.

ACFO has worked to integrate francophone newcomers into the support system of schools and hospitals, with the hope that dwindling local populations would be buttressed by an influx of immigrants.

Ford is now dealing with a monster of his own making. The francophone presence is felt in some 40 ridings across the province and they organized a Resistance rally in all of them Saturday to let the Conservatives know that they are hopping mad.

The only francophone in the Tory caucus, articulate, 29-year-old newcomer Amanda Simard, quit last week as a result of the cuts. That will put pressure on more to follow.

Ontario New Democratic Party Leader Andrea Horwath has mustered her troops to fight the decision and enlisted the support of her federal cousin NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who is calling on the federal government to do more.

In that regard, Singh is right. Canada’s federal Minister Responsible for La Francophonie, Mélanie Joly, needs to send a clear message to Queen’s Park that this decision is not without financial consequences.

It is not just a question of prioritizing the university. The most egregious mistake by the new Ford government was the decision to eliminate the Office of the French Language Services Commissioner.

The position of commissioner sends an important signal, not only to government ministries but also to the whole province. If minority rights are not respected in the delivery of language services, there will be consequences.

Folding that office into the ambit of the ombudsman is an absolute slap in the face to those who have spend decades fighting for minority rights.

Joly and Prime Minister Justin Justin Trudeau need to let the premier know that cutting back on minority language services will cost him dearly, and not just at the polls.

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