Front Burner - Frustration, hypocrisy and the SNC scandal

Episode Date: April 4, 2019

On Wednesday, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was protested by dozens of young women with political aspirations who were visiting the House of Commons. This came just hours after expelling Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott from caucus. It's just one example of the kind of frustration that's surrounded the SNC-Lavalin controversy. CBC opinion columnist Robyn Urback and freelance journalist Jen Gerson share their thoughts on that, and what it means for Canadians' expectations of government.

Hey there, I'm David Common. If you're like me, there are things you love about living in the GTA and things that drive you absolutely crazy. Every day on This Is Toronto, we connect you to what matters most about life in the GTA, the news you gotta know, and the conversations your friends will be talking about. Whether you listen on a run through your neighbourhood, or while sitting in the parking lot that is the 401, check out This Is Toronto, wherever you get your podcasts. This is a CBC Podcast. For years, men were disappearing from Toronto's gay village.

I feel terrorized. I'm Justin Ling, this season on Uncover. If we see this is happening, how can you not see this? They suspected a serial killer. And they were right. Police arrested 66-year-old Bruce MacArthur. But this wasn't the first time the village was targeted. You don't start killing at 66.

You start killing when you're in your late teens or early 20s. Uncover. The Village. Available now wherever you get your podcasts. Hello, I'm Jamie Poisson. I'd say for the last 50 days or so, the SNC-Lavalin scandal has been holding down a solid silver medal in the Olympics of political symbolism. Until yesterday. Yesterday, it strode to the podium and snatched the gold. It's just so wonderful to see this chamber so filled with the future of this country right here. Because that's when more than 330 young women with aspirations of political leadership

made a visit to Parliament Hill, less than 24 hours after Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott had been tossed out of the Liberal caucus. I am, to put it lightly, disappointed. And when the PM stood in front of these young women, and he started to talk about SNC-Lavalin. I know nobody in here wants to have to pick who to believe between Jodi Wilson-Raybould

and Chrystia Freeland. A few dozen of them stood up and turned their backs on Justin Trudeau. Male feminist Justin Trudeau. Because it's 2015 Justin Trudeau. Reconciliation Justin Trudeau. Sunny Ways Justin Trudeau. It was this incredible moment

that really captured one of the two big narratives at play here. The one where Jody Wilson-Raybould is a hero. Someone who spoke truth to power, only to be punished by the prime minister, who sold himself as something really quite different. Integrity is missing in politics. And for someone to stand up for what she believes in, it takes a lot of guts. And then, of course, there's this other narrative, where Jody Wilson-Raybould overreacted to the normal functionings of government

and is pushing this government, that has very good intentions on many different files, to the brink. You have to work together to solve the problems. And if you cannot for any capacity, I think you should leave. Today, I want to tap into some of the ideals and emotion that have been driving this whole thing. Essentially, why are people mad at Jody Wilson-Raybould? And why are they angry at the Prime Minister?

And what does all of this say about what people want out of their government? Today on FrontBurner, perspectives from two very smart people, Jen Gerson, who's a freelance journalist in Alberta, and the CBC's head of opinion, Robin Urbach. And so when I hear the leader, yourself, speak about being a feminist, to me, you cannot be a feminist if you are raising a land. speak about being a feminist. To me, you cannot be a feminist if you are raising a land. This just happened Wednesday afternoon, right before we began this conversation.

Over 330 women have descended on Parliament Hill in Ottawa as part of an initiative to inspire more women to become involved in politics. The Prime minister addressed these women. He addressed this controversy. This is part of what politics needs to be about. Hearing different voices, listening, learning from each other, growing together and figuring out a path forward. And it's not going to be easy. Our colleague David Cochran is reporting as many as 40 women turn their backs on him. Robin, what do you think that this has done to Justin Trudeau, the brand? I think it has effectively demolished the image of a new type of government that Canada was sold back in 2015. Sunnyways.

Sunnyways. Sunnyways, my friends. Sunnyways. Please, my friends, sunny ways. Canadians from all across this great country sent a clear message tonight. It's time for a change in this country, my friends, a real change. So this government came about based on a campaign that was all about, and it sounds cheesy to even repeat it now, but doing politics differently. So we were promised transparency, accessibility. MPs would be emboldened to vote based on their conscience, not whipped in terms of matters of grave importance.

That's why we loosened the rules around whipped votes, why we recognize that within a same party we can have absolutely differences of opinion. And I think what this scandal has done is effectively undermine every one of those promises. And the irony of all of this is this whole SNC-Lavalin affair, this is all grounded in one very simple broken promise, which was a promise that the Liberals made ahead of the 2015 election, that they would get rid of what they called the undemocratic practice of tabling these omnibus legislations, the kitchen sink bills with everything in there. Not so long ago, the man from Papineau said this about omnibus bills, and I quote, I wouldn't use them, period. Papineau said this about omnibus bills, and I quote, I wouldn't use them, period. Well, that seems pretty clear. And he also said the kitchen sink approach here to me is a real worry.

And that's exactly what happened last year when the Liberals tabled their budget implementation bill. It had this change to the criminal code, essentially introduced DPAs into Canadian law. So I think that's the irony of all of this, that this scandal shows from one element to the next. And if we want to talk about transparency and open by default government, we don't need to look further than last week when the Liberals on the Justice Committee essentially closed the door on this and said, OK, we've heard everything that we need to hear. There's nothing else to say. We respect the work that the Justice Committee did for five weeks, hearing hours and hours

of testimony. And indeed, we even took the unprecedented step of providing a waiver for solicitor-client privilege. Jen, what's your take on this, the idea that this is a prime minister that campaigned on aspirational values of feminism and inclusion? Does he look like a hypocrite?

Yeah, I mean, everything that Robin said there, I think, is correct. I mean, the one thing that bothers me about this scandal is that everybody wants to talk about the damage it's done to his brand more than the damage it's done to the fundamental democratic principles.

I also want to get there. I also do want to get there. And that bothers me because, I mean, branding is about optics, but judicial independence is ultimately way more important. You know, Jester DeRoe, I think, has always been a bit of a bro to the manner born. And he got sort of consumed by this party that then elevated him into an avatar for reconciliation and feminism and all of the types of progressive virtues that people, particularly in my age bracket, really want to signal their connection with.

But personally, I was never judging this government based on how well he upheld a brand. You know, I was judging this government based on what they actually did. That was what was interesting to me. Whether or not the brand was disingenuous was irrelevant to me because I just assumed it was disingenuous. I mean, I guess we're splitting hairs because I would argue, you know, if you're going to campaign on this brand, then your policy should back it up. Do you find that the policies back it up? Well, I mean, I would say some of them do and some of them, well, I mean, the actions of late obviously don't. I mean, you could say that having a gender equal cabinet, for example, was

a really great big step for Canada and a good step for women in politics. Why was that so important to you? Because it's 2015. You could say that bringing in, for example, gender-based analysis and to be a Bill C-69 potentially could have huge impacts in areas where there's resource development and women might be affected. There are gender impacts. When you bring construction workers into a rural area, there are social impacts because they're mostly male construction workers. How are you adjusting and adapting to those? So it's like, you know, some of those policies aren't necessarily bad, but they're just really easy to do. I don't think the internals of this government are very feminist. What I see are very old boy club style dynamics at play. Go ahead, Robin. I think the brand was more than just talk, however.

Like part of what made the Sunnyways brand so appealing, especially to young voters, and we saw that in the numbers of voters that came out for the Liberals the last time around, was that it came with tangible promises of change. The way that we elect our government was supposed to change. We were supposed to see electoral reform. There is no consensus. There is no clear path forward. It would be irresponsible for us to do something that harms Canada's stability.

And then I'm really glad we didn't. Well, that's a whole other conversation. We have seen certainly through what's happened over the past couple weeks, really throughout the tenure of this government as one promise after the other is abandoned that it wasn't just the idea of a new government that was left behind. It was actually the implementation of a new government that was left behind. And however, I would play devil's advocate with you a little bit on that one. Because I mean, what we have seen from this government are cannabis legalization. We have seen, for example, the euthanasia bill, the assisted death and dying bill. This is an historic day for our country.

This legislation would apply to mentally competent adults who are in an advanced stage of irreversible decline. are in an advanced stage of irreversible decline. So, I mean, like there have been some fairly significant legislative wins for this government. Some of the really key legislative promises they have followed through on. And I think that if people are going to be voting in this election, you know, you've got to weigh all this stuff out. But you're right. Has this been a fundamentally transformative government in terms of how it runs?

No. You know, I think for some people who follow this story, they see this very strong woman speaking truth to power and that it contravenes the ideals that Justin Trudeau ran against. For other people who are maybe following it a little bit more closely, this is also about the power of lobbyists and corporations. And do you think that that has also played into the frustrations with this government that promised to do things differently? Yeah, 100%. I mean, I don't think that it should be news to anybody

that there is a kind of powerful, oligarchic, deeply interconnected political media and intellectual elite who have a disproportionate amount of power in this country. What I think is shocking to me about the SNC scandal is just to see how that whole system works laid bare. One of the most intriguing things about this scandal is that it has opened the door, essentially, to the back workings of government. Not to give away political strategy in this form, but my main political concern was our position in Nova Scotia. If Minister Bryson had not resigned, Minister Wilson-Raybould would still be Minister of Justice today. I think that's what a lot of people have found so interesting about it. And not just the back workings of government, but the interrelationship between lobbyists, between government,

between corporations, between media, like how do all of these things connect in order to create a consensus about what must be done in all capital letters, right? We checked out the lobby registry and it shows over 50 communications between SNC-Lavalin and the government dating back to just the start of 2017. Justice and law enforcement issues are always listed as a subject of their communication. Let's move on to Jodi Wilson-Raybould because there is also a lot of frustration that's been directed at her. And, you know, I have heard a lot of people say she could essentially cause the liberals the election.

They are dropping in the polls over this. And, Robin, can we continue to flesh this out before? I think Jen was getting at it earlier when she was talking about how there have been policies that this government has put in place that people like. Right. And I think a lot of the frustration with Jody Wilson-Raybould, especially within caucus, is that she was seen as, for lack of a better phrase, pissing within the tent. And the fact that she was being kept within caucus for as long as she did and the Prime Minister was going around the country saying, well, it's not just about diversity superficially, it's about diversity of opinion as well.

We recognize that diversity of perspectives, of experiences, of opinions is extraordinarily important if we're going to fully reflect the extraordinary diversity of Canadians. There were a lot of MPs who were frustrated on actually two levels. They have been reporting that in terms of their local writings, things that they've been hearing from their constituents. things that they've been hearing from their constituents. And then they were frustrated that Jody Wilson-Raybould was still in cabinet and effectively undermining both the prime minister and the party by saying, look, things aren't functioning as honestly as you think it is. I don't have confidence in the prime minister, and here's why you shouldn't either.

Do you have confidence in the prime minister today? I'll say this. I resigned from cabinet because I did not have confidence to sit around the table, the cabinet table. That's why I resigned. We'll be back in a second.

At Franklin Templeton, we help you invest in companies that believe good enough is never far enough. Reach for better. Franklin Templeton Investments. One question I did want to get to and ask both of you is this idea that how do you change the system, right? Do you change it from within or do you light a match to it? And whether or not this speaks to some of the frustration directed at Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott, who were given these incredibly powerful positions at the table and walked away from them? And should this be considered how you change things or, you know, kind of the naive way to change things? Jen?

I don't think that there's a right answer to that question in all circumstances. I think that Jodi Wilson-Eirbold and Jane Philpott should be greatly honored for the fact that they have pursued public service. It's called public service for a reason. It's because, you know, to go into politics is to give up an element of your privacy and even your earning potential in order to serve the greater good for the creation of better policy for all Canadians. And, you know, as much as we like to crap on politicians, we have to honour them for that choice. I've heard women criticise them for this. You know, if you wanted to move the needle, then why did you pick up your ball and walk away? And I've also seen criticisms of them in a parallel drawn to if you were working in any organisation and you stepped out

and you publicly criticised your boss and you recorded a conversation you publicly criticized your boss and you recorded a conversation that you had on the job and you leaked that publicly that you would not expect to keep your job. So it's unreasonable that these women would come out and do that and still keep their jobs. What I would say to that, though, is that to think of the Canadian government as an everyday workplace, like a pizza parlor at the corner of your street is a bit disingenuous. My boss can't affect the criminal code. My boss can't change laws.

My boss doesn't decide whether people are kept in solitary confinement or not. So I think the standards need to shift a little bit. The prime minister has extraordinary power. And I think we want watchdogs both outside of the government and inside of the government. But this is something that we have struggled with, with various governments dating back decades even. We saw it under Stephen Harper. Brent Rathgeber spoke out against the government and he was outside of the caucus. Sure enough, even, you know, we saw it under Andrew Scheer, just in terms of the opposition,

Maxime Bernier called out his own party for its role in the supply management system in Canada. And the fact that Andrew Scheer has said that he is going to keep that going, and he soon found that there wasn't really a place for him within that caucus. My party stands on several issues that have convinced me that, under the current leadership, it has all but abandoned its core conservative principles. So it's something that we haven't quite figured out how we are going to deal with it. The only issue is, of course, if you look at somewhere like the UK, for example, when there is so much diversity. So this is what I was just going to say. I mean, it's a full train wreck there right now, right?

Like they can't get anything done. And Justin Trudeau mentioned this yesterday, a party that's at civil wars can't function. Exactly. Well, he specifically said a party that's at civil wars are more likely to lose, which is slightly different. Civil wars within parties are incredibly damaging because they signal to Canadians that we care more about ourselves than we do about them. Following specifically to what Robin said about the system. I mean, under the traditional Westminster parliamentary system, MPs are beholden to their constituents

and leaders are beholden to their caucuses. And in Canada, we have created over the last hundred years, this weird hybrid monster in which now MPs are beholden to their parties and caucuses are beholden to their leaders. We are creating and cementing a bizarre Tamm the fact that we have morphed into this new style system. And I think that there are going to be really weird repercussions for that in the long run. Last question for the day. What if I am a young person, like the young women who were in Parliament on Wednesday,

brought there as part of this initiative to help encourage more women to be part of politics? And I look at this situation and I look at the frustration on all sides. What am I supposed to make of this? What message am I supposed to take away from it? What message am I supposed to take away from it? I think it's hard not to look at what's going on and be awfully cynical about what you're seeing, partially because this government came in and said that it would do things differently, especially in terms of recruiting a diverse slate of candidates from all across Canada. And it means not simply women and men who look different,

but women and men who came from different parts of Canada, who perhaps never stepped foot in any political circles before. People who brought their own lived experiences to the House of Commons. So if you are someone perhaps weighing the possibility of getting involved with politics now, and you see that as the repercussion of bringing those alternative sensibilities to the House of Commons, to the way you participate in the political system, I think it might encourage a lot of people to look the other way and just say, this is not for me. It might encourage a lot of people to look the other way and just say, this is not for me.

Jen, I would just say what it tells me is that if you want to partake in power of this country, you had better learn how to sit down, shut up and be a team player. Because that's the system we have now. Okay, so on that note, thank you both so much for being here today. It really is such a pleasure to talk to you. Thanks, Jamie. Thanks. So I imagine listening to that conversation, you probably had a lot of opinions too, and we would love to hear them. You can tweet us at FrontBurnerCBC. It feels like everybody has an opinion on this scandal,

including Edward Snowden. Edward Snowden, the guy that exposed a mass global surveillance program. Here he is talking to my colleague, Adrian Arsenault. You know, I actually think it's a little bit surprising that members of government would consider their phone calls to be private. Without taking a position on right or wrong here,

because I simply don't know the details of it, I would simply say there's a kind of irony about the government being scandalized, that their communications are being read when all of ours are being read as a matter of course. You can catch that full interview on The National. That's it for today. Thanks for listening to FrontBurner. It's 2011 and the Arab Spring is raging. A lesbian activist in Syria starts a blog.

She names it Gay Girl in Damascus. Am I crazy? Maybe. As her profile grows, so does the danger. The object of the email was, please read this while sitting down. It's like a genie came out of the bottle and you can't put it back. Gay Girl Gone. Available now.