Category: Chairman’s Desk

“A society grows great when elders plant trees under whose shade they know they will never sit.” Versions of the proverb trace their roots to many cultures for a reason: it is bloody good advice.

And it is advice the Trudeau government should take when it comes to making long-term, expensive — and yes, likely politically unpopular — investments in Canada’s national security framework.

At a time when voter priorities are understandably focused on things like affordability and housing, some political strategists may see this as a difficult call. However, the reality is that if our government fails to address this file — even if it is one that does not deliver them a short-term political win — our domestic security will not only be compromised in the future, but now as well.

A report this week from the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) laid bare the shortcomings of Canada’s national security apparatus. Governed by archaic legislation and neglected by generations of politicians, it is now brutally ill-equipped to deal with the array of mounting security risks posed by increasing geopolitical tensions, climate change and technological advancement.

It was in 2004 that a Canadian government last formulated a comprehensive national security strategy. If the world was a threatening place then, it is a tinderbox now.

British Columbia is suffering dire climate issues, yet our security frameworks do not adequately incorporate climate risk. Furthermore, the geopolitical outlook is as tense as ever; autocratic regimes are becoming increasingly emboldened, posing real threats to the free world.

Vladimir Putin has amassed hundreds of thousands of troops on the Ukrainian border, prompting emergency talks with the U.S. president and provoking anxiety across Europe. While in Canada we often see ourselves as immune to these threats, we are not — and we can be sure such complacency will one day haunt us if not eradicated.

CSIS, our own security service, has increased the intensity of its warnings to Canadians and to our government over the past year. Autocracies, particularly China, and various non-state actors are continually looking to exert influence in Canada through shadowy propaganda campaigns and cyberwarfare. What’s more, global security experts have been sounding alarms over the rise of “killer robot” technologies — artificial intelligence with deadly military capabilities never seen before.

The challenge is that the legislation governing CSIS is almost four decades old, yet today’s environment barely resembles the world back then.

The question for our politicians is how to respond to these real-world threats, when Canadians are unlikely to support the massive funds required. Firstly, our government must remember that its foremost duty lies in protecting Canadians, not in winning popularity contests. Second, as recommended in CIGI’s report, they must act with greater transparency to convey just how acute these threats are. It is the only way to do two things: ensure appropriate oversight, and avoid bewildering Canadians in their pursuit of drastic and necessary changes.

Last week the head of MI6 explained that the British intelligence service had to “become more open in order to stay secret.” In Canada, this is even more important. Our government must collaborate with its security forces to explain the threats we are facing, and the action required. As our intelligence chief David Vigneault aptly put it, “people might not care about geopolitics, but it cares about you.”

By not prioritizing foreign policy at election time, Canadians repeatedly give our governments a free ride on national security. Those days are over — time is of the essence to address a changing world.

In its throne speech, the government promised to “review diplomatic engagement.” I hope they will go a great deal further. Only a wholesale restructuring of our security apparatus will protect us from tomorrow’s threats.

Doing so would not only be an act of true leadership, but would honour their oaths to be faithful and true servants of the Crown.

Like so many Canadians, I sat transfixed and seized with emotion on Wednesday, as Canada’s House of Commons unanimously passed legislation to ban the long discredited and violent practice of conversion therapy.

It is rare for such an important issue to be handled with such grace in modern politics. Even more remarkable is what Canadians witnessed as they focused their attention on the opposition benches.

It is one thing to see an Opposition leader behave like a prime minister. It is another thing entirely to see an Opposition caucus legislate with the authority and urgency of a sitting government. Make no mistake, the accomplishment here is not just one of policy-making, but also of caucus leadership.

That leadership starts, of course, with Erin O’Toole, but the surprise is it now extends to a wider team of Conservative MPs who are authentically attuned to LGBTQ issues. What’s more, the unanimous motion points to a significant shift in parliamentary strategy and the caucus policy that underlies it.

The moment highlighted rising talent on the Conservative bench. Politicians like Eric Duncan and Melissa Lantsman represent a recent generation of gay and lesbian Conservatives determined to advocate for LGBTQ-focused legislation emerging from either side of the aisle. It’s clear that Duncan and Lantsman are finding their voices in caucus. With a leader keen to support their work, we should all be watching what they do next.

For obvious reasons, this vote was personal for me.

Any LGBTQ Canadian is aware of the nightmare of conversion therapy. Even without first-hand experience, there is a visceral reaction to the idea of being “changed” or “fixed” for something that is inherent to who we are.

Imagine: at the precise moment when young people most need support to understand their feelings and desires, they have those emotions dissected and judged instead. As so many survivors have told us, the fallout can last for years.

But beyond the horrors of conversion therapy itself, Wednesday’s events in Parliament ultimately reaffirmed something I have always known: the Conservative ranks are filled with allies of LGBTQ Canadians.

Indeed, alongside MPs like Duncan and Lantsman were long-standing allies of our community, like Michelle Rempel Garner and Erin O’Toole himself. Their voices, and those of countless other Tories, rang out on Wednesday as loudly as their LGBTQ colleagues.

Even prominent social conservatives in the party should be applauded — perhaps quietly, in private — for coming around to the notion of pragmatic opposition. There were genuine differences of opinion regarding this legislation, and however misguided I feel they may have been, for many MPs they were sincere. The fact that those differences were tamed — every member of caucus was brought on board — is a very positive sign for an Opposition too easily accused of “not wanting to govern.”

It was a sign of decisive leadership, of effective collaboration, and, most of all, a sign that Erin O’Toole’s Opposition government is ready to show its new face to Canadians. A face that is more dynamic, competitive, inclusive and primetime-ready than it has been for a very, very long time.

As a Conservative, it’s exciting to see. But more than that, as an advocate for conservative principles, it’s an encouraging sign that Canada’s centre-right party will be able to focus on the issues that matter most: fiscal stewardship, personal liberty and fairness. For too long, the brand of “conservative values” has been tarred with the stench of hate and social division. Wednesday’s motion puts the lie to that notion.

Looking back on an emotional and historic week, I believe Canadians saw the best of their Parliament. While it remains to be seen how the Senate treats Bill C-4, it actually matters not. Even if a few unelected senators cause trouble, it will only serve to underscore what Team O’Toole has managed to pull off in the House. We all should be very grateful.

History is once again convulsing Europe. As COVID cases surge, the continent is gripped by crisis after crisis, triggering an ugly collision of public health issues and social conflict. Meanwhile, the leadership of Belarus, along with Vladimir Putin, have manufactured a destabilizing humanitarian crisis at the continent’s eastern border.

Canadians can count ourselves fortunate to see a slight ebb in our “fourth wave” rather than the exponential rise seen elsewhere, not to mention the absence of such threats from autocrats.

Nevertheless, experts keep reminding us that the virus isn’t going anywhere — there will be spikes throughout the winter and the holiday season. And as in Europe, these spikes will bring political and social crises with them.

Sudden lockdowns and vaccine mandates have created major issues in Europe. Mass protests are occurring across the continent. Hooligans provoked violent clashes with police in Rotterdam, and the far-right dominated coverage at other large gatherings.

The Austrian chancellor blamed vaccine skepticism as he moved to implement a total vaccine mandate, the first western country to do so. The German health minister offered a warning that eventually “everyone will be vaccinated, recovered or dead.”

The concept of herd immunity has gone full circle to become political dynamite, as leaders in current hot spots grapple with the issue in different ways. France’s government, seeing roughly 30,000 cases a day, has acted similarly to ours — requiring proof of vaccination at many spaces, while shying away from drawing a tougher line.

In Britain, restrictions are virtually non-existent as cases soar over 40,000 a day. While a top health adviser to the government has framed this as a step in reaching herd immunity, one might also pose that Prime Minister Boris Johnson is in no position to implement controversial measures as questions swirl around his leadership.

At home, we need not see this all as a harbinger of doom, but instead must remember managing COVID is largely a game of expectations. And those expectations must be firmly grounded in reality. Pollyannaish thinking will only result in a greater political price later on.

Lockdowns, in the minds of many Canadians, would represent a political failure. Our vaccine uptake has been strong, but questions remain over how politicians can or will act if we see significant surges in cases.

Vaccination mandates are already a source of aggravation for Conservatives, raising the topic again and again — and in so doing, creating space for the People’s Party of Canada and other fringe advocates. Keeping a grip on this issue will be no easy task for the Tories.

Incumbents like Justin Trudeau and Doug Ford are once again in the precarious position of managing another holiday season — and with it, another consequential wave of the virus.

To shut down the economy again would be risky for any leader, undoubtedly compounding the anxiety brought on by market indicators, inflation, supply chains and labour shortages.

In September, Doug Ford called vaccine passes our “best chance” at avoiding another lockdown, and it seems unlikely the premier — who is facing an election in June — would risk irking Ontarians again with mass restrictions.

As Ontario sees around 600 new cases a day, Ford must get out in front of this issue and demonstrate that he is working proactively to mitigate both public health risks and public dismay.

Just this week, the premier took steps in this direction, with his government announcing its plan to rollout the vaccine to children ages 5-11, and maintaining control over the proof of vaccination system by extending certain emergency orders until March.

Sustaining this arm’s-length-but-authoritative approach, while continually putting his government and himself front and centre of vaccination efforts, is the right approach for Ford and his peers.

Chaos in Europe has shown that drastic actions without adequate forewarning will activate deep divisions and further jeopardize public health, at a time when there are already more than enough fires to put out.

Inflation is a slippery foe.

In politics, it is one of the few enemies that can’t be outcampaigned, outspent or outmessaged. It does not conform to the electoral calendar, and it can’t be brought to the table for another round of bargaining. Most slippery of all, no amount of ingenious policy can ever truly stop it in its tracks.

Like a force of nature, inflation promises to return and to astound us with its accelerated pace and its growing magnitude. And like a force of nature, it has the potential to be deadly for those in its path. Presently, that seems to include Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

As Trudeau decamped for Washington, D.C. to rub shoulders with President Joe Biden and congressional leaders, the news arrived that inflation in Canada has reached its highest levels since 2003. The consumer price index has increased 4.7 per cent since one year ago, surpassing the Bank of Canada’s target range for the sixth consecutive month.

That is a big problem for Trudeau. In politics, everyone knows “it’s the economy, stupid” — but the economy means different things to different constituencies. For many, it means jobs and economic growth. For others, long-term investment and stimulus. But regardless of which camp you’re in, every Canadian can agree that no aspect of the economy is more personal than the price we all pay for goods and services.

Since the pandemic began, a vast swath of Canadians has been indifferent to deficits, or the repercussions of massive government spending. The government has behaved accordingly. But now, compounded by global trends, those chickens have come home to roost. And while recent government policy may not be to blame, you can be sure that Canadians will start to care a whole lot about that spending.

For a long time, the Trudeau Liberals have excelled at managing economic issues in a micro capacity, by choosing policies that have a personal impact in the lives of Canadians. CERB payments are a good example, but so are their latest big-ticket items like child care and affordable housing.

Unfortunately for the government, the biggest issue in the lives of Canadians today is one that must be met with a macro response — and largely through monetary, rather than fiscal, policy. Mr. Trudeau and Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland are about to learn that you cannot fix every political issue with direct payments to your voters. In fact, that “fix” may actually make things much worse.

The jury is out on the extent to which major spending programmes like CERB have exacerbated inflation. Responsible economists may disagree on that point, but the question remains: Where will Canadians turn when they need someone to blame? If history is any indicator, I’d bet that the sitting prime minister is as good a scapegoat as anyone — especially on the tail end of his government’s historic spending.

What’s more, this rising threat finds Trudeau stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, his fiscal critics decry massive government spending; on the other, his quasi-coalition partners in the NDP demand exactly that.

If the pace of inflation continues, even many Liberals will be uncomfortable with billions in increased spending, as outlined by our increasingly orange minority government. For a party that centred its last campaign on delivering several transformative — and hugely expensive — new programs, this reality constitutes a clear and present danger.

It may be that while he was in Washington, Trudeau commiserated with Biden on the issue of inflation, which threatens to define this president’s administration — much as it did that of his predecessor Jimmy Carter.

Biden has publicly taken an aggressive posture on addressing the root causes of inflation, as when he ordered clogged ports to extend hours. If Trudeau learned anything in Washington, I hope it’s that he must do the same. And for the sake of our wallets, I only hope the lesson is not too late.

No one seems to be cutting Erin O’Toole any slack. The small faction of Conservative MPs who this week claimed to be forming a “civil liberties caucus” within the party must have had their leader banging his head against the first wall he could find at Stornoway.

And who on earth could blame him? On the cusp of recovering from a pandemic that has engulfed us for two years, and approaching a much-anticipated return to Parliament, one could not envision a more ludicrous hill to die on for these caucus members.

Since her bizarre comments last week, MP Marilyn Gladu, the leader of this so-called civil liberties caucus, has predictably and thankfully backtracked her comments and apologized to O’Toole.

But despite the lack of substantive support for their grandstanding, the event was vexing for O’Toole just the same. When the Opposition leader takes his seat in the House this month, he will be setting the tone for holding the new government to account. He simply cannot afford to be undermined by this chicanery.

Thankfully, Erin O’Toole did not shrink from this test. Indeed, he faced it head on: effectively nipping the movement in the bud, exiling the outliers to the backbenches and bolstering both his public image and his control of the party. Every living Tory leader in Canada was cheering. Each could tell you about wrangling caucus divisions, but the sheer unpopularity of the position these MPs took was a uniquely existential challenge for the party’s electoral chances.

Modern conservatism in Canada has been plagued by division and identity crisis, but the actions of Gladu et al. were more akin to a suicide vest than a principled stand on policy. With 80 per cent of Canadians and 75 per cent of Conservative voters supporting vaccine mandates for federal public servants, the fringe position of this bunch threatened to tank the entire party at a critical juncture.

But Erin O’Toole has learned some important lessons since September’s election. While certain ambitious Conservatives believe there is some value in sticking their necks out on vaccines, blessedly their leader realizes just how damaging it is in the long run.

While destined to never garner widespread support, the “civil liberties” charade raises an issue known to rouse some libertarians, a demographic that looks accessible at first blush. But in reality, this group are a fickle bunch. They are as likely to vote for a Green or PPC candidate — or not at all — as they are to remember the Tories’ stand on vaccines.

Staring down this dilemma, O’Toole acted with a controlled, calm authority that once again demonstrated his mastery of his role. It speaks volumes that most of his response played out behind the scenes, with the leader stepping in publicly just enough to make his views known.

No grandstanding, just a firm and sincere condemnation of vaccine skepticism and an even firmer signal that it has no place in his shadow cabinet. What’s more, the response was both clever and wise enough to avoid affording any further oxygen to his potential leadership challengers.

Erin O’Toole’s choices portend well for managing future caucus divisions, but the whole debacle goes to show that sadly, like so many of his predecessors, his tenure will be marked by obstacles and challenges from within his own party.

While the effective denunciation of rebellious vaccine skeptics is a feather in his cap, the episode still provides fodder for those who would claim the party is less than focused on providing substantial opposition come Nov. 22.

If, on that day, certain Conservative MPs are barred from the House due to their vaccination status, O’Toole will have to act with equal strength, authority, and most importantly alacrity to distance himself from their wrong-headedness.

Having passed this crucial test, he is no doubt anticipating the next. Those banished backbenchers would do well to get behind their leader and focus on providing an effective and fearless opposition if Conservatives are to have a credible future in Canadian politics.