Front Burner - Why Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott are running for re-election as Independent MPs

Episode Date: May 28, 2019

Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott are advocating for a less partisan political system and will run as independent candidates in the next election. Co-host of CBC's The National, Rosemary Barton, explains why they're doing it and what challenges might be ahead for them.

In the Dragon's Den, a simple pitch can lead to a life-changing connection. Watch new episodes of Dragon's Den free on CBC Gem. Brought to you in part by National Angel Capital Organization, empowering Canada's entrepreneurs through angel investment and industry connections. This is a CBC Podcast. CPA 21, how do you read? I really want to know what happened. And it makes me extraordinarily angry that it's always been a big secret.

Uncover bomb on board. Investigating the biggest unsolved mass murder in Canada. CP Flight 21. Get the Uncover podcast for free on Apple Podcasts and Google Podcasts. Available now. Hello, I'm Jamie Poisson. For months now, lots of people have been wondering what Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott might do next.

The two women were star members of Justin Trudeau's cabinet before they resigned in relation to the SNC-Lavalin scandal and then were kicked out of the party. Well, on Monday we got an answer. I will be running as an independent candidate. As an independent candidate. Both former liberals were pretty clear that they want to change the status quo, away from big political parties in Canada, that this is their way of doing politics differently. I will not have to try and convince myself that just because the way it has always been done

means that it must continue to be done that way. There is no longer a political party telling me what to say. There's no longer a political staffer telling me how to vote. But can they even win seats without the backing of a political party? And if they do win, did they just trade power for independence? Today, my colleague Rosie Barton, who co-hosts The National, joins me to talk about all of this. This is FrontBurner. Hi, Rosie.

Hello. Thank you so much for joining us today. Of course, of course. Okay, so Jodi Wilson-Raybould, she resigned from the Liberal cabinet in February because of the SNC-Lavalin scandal. Jane Philpott resigned from the cabinet soon after that. Both women were then kicked out of the Liberal caucus at the beginning of April. The decisions that I have made, I have made on the basis of what I believe is best for Canadians to stand up for the truth and to stand up for the independence of the justice system. I am, to put it lightly,

disappointed. We have covered this a lot. Just a bit. Just a little bit. Since then, this has been anyone's call. And, you know, first question, are you surprised by their announcement today that they will both run as independents? I think a little bit surprised. I think it's fair to say that most of Ottawa might be a little bit surprised. There had been strong indications that they were being very heavily courted by the Green Party. So they're both women I admire enormously. And it's up to them. The one thing about the Greens that'll be different from any other party for any MP is that we do not have whipped votes. Decided not to go in that direction. The NDP had expressed interest. Clearly the Liberal Party wasn't going back to that well. Their ideas don't align with the Conservatives. So

I guess this made the most sense. It certainly made the most sense when we listened to them today talk about how they believe that things have turned hyper-partisan in Ottawa, that the system's dysfunctional, that MPs don't have enough power and can't represent their writings as well as they would have liked. Rising to these challenges requires Ottawa to operate more openly and transparently in the spirit of non-partisanship. People said, we are getting really tired of hyper-partisan politics. Can't we get beyond partisan politics? Okay, so I want to ask you in a minute about why they haven't gone to one of the other main political parties. But first, let's unpack that a little bit more,

what they did today, what they said today. So Jody Wilson-Raybould, she gets up at her press conference first. Good morning, Gayla Kusla, everyone. And what does she say that stood out to you particularly? Well, a couple of things. She said that she believes that partisanship is trumping principle. Incredibly, I have received over 15,000 emails, letters, cards. The overwhelming message I received was clear.

Clear how we need to do politics differently. Of course, she made a big deal when she left about her principles and how she wouldn't let them bend when it came to the SNC thing. She said that she believes in a strong team, but she doesn't believe that you need to have, I think the word she used was blood sport. Right. Politics isn't a blood sport. That's right, that it's a serious thing. Well, I do believe in the importance of a strong team, but I'm not sure that there has to be any blood involved.

And it is far too serious a business to call it a sport. Jane Philpott said that, you know, she didn't want to look at little girls and to have little girls say to her, well, when you stand up for yourself and what you believe in, that means that you have to leave politics. What lesson would it be for those young girls if I were to walk away? If I were to walk away with my tail between my legs and say, you guys are too strong for me. I'm afraid of you. What lesson would it be? I'm afraid of you. What lesson would it be?

It was largely the same theme from both of them, that they don't feel that partisan politics, a party, makes the most sense for either of them, which is curious for lots of reasons, because, of course, that's how they started in this business. But both of them seemed to realize that that just didn't suit who they were anymore. So, I mean, let's talk about why they didn't join the Greens, for example, which, you know, I think you could say isn't a traditional mainstream party anyways. And Elizabeth May courted them heavily. And she even said later today that she

offered, she put on the table that either of them could lead the Greens. I said to Jody in our first conversation, you know, are you interested in being leader of the Green Party? I think that'd be a great idea. She said, no, I think she's a very impressive and qualified person who's shown herself to have massive integrity in the face of inappropriate pressure. So why not go to a party like that? Yeah, I mean, that was a pretty stunning admission from Liz May. I think she was ready to stay with the Green Party for this election. And then after, if either of them have leadership ambitions, she was sort of willing to hand over the party. I think largely it came down to the idea that the two women both feel like being stuck within the confines of any party just won't work for them anymore. I'm not sure exactly where I

belong because I see good in all parties. I see many good things. So I see problems in all parties. It's interesting, though, that Jody Wilson-Raybould made it very clear that on an issue like climate change, to her, the Green Party is a natural ally. So it almost sounded like, I don't know that there's any kind of formal agreement between the two of them, but they would be quite willing to vote with the Green Party or support the Green Party's policies on certain issues. Climate change is the issue of our generation, and we need to move the conversation forward. I have to give a shout out to my amazing colleague, Elizabeth May. She needs to be listened to. That said, they also said that they found, Jane Philpott, for instance, cited the NDP's

Pharmacare platform playing as something that she found very attractive. So it's almost like they want to pull themselves right out of the box of being inside a party. You know, I just want to pick up on this idea. Jodi Wilson-Raybould mentioned it this morning. She talked about being free or, like, feeling free. As an independent, I will be truly free to take the guidance of the citizens of Vancouver-Granville and to represent you. You know, do you think that they're making valid points here,

that as independents they can just care about the issues that they want to care about. They can work with the parties that have the best policies on those issues. Yeah, I mean, of course, there's something to that. And I'm sure that that sounds attractive to lots of Canadians who don't find themselves to be, you know, card carrying members of any party. party. I think it is a little bit utopian, to be fair, because it's just not how the system works right now. You know, even our electoral system isn't set up to have a whole bunch of independents win. Our parliamentary system is based on parties. That's part of how it works.

The reason I think it works is that we do have an official opposition, a third party, a couple other little parties on the side that are able to push the government and hold them to account. And that's what their job is, so that the government can't just do whatever it wants and run roughshod over the entire country. And I think we see that. We see that that system works. It doesn't mean, however, that as an MP, you have no power. I mean, that's simply not true. You can certainly speak up and have your voice heard. But I think that we need to ensure that the voices of the elected representatives are the ones that are making the policies on behalf of their constituents,

policies on behalf of their constituents, not being dictated to or told what to do by non-elected individuals that happen to work in offices. There are different requirements for cabinet ministers because of cabinet solidarity and, you know, having the prime minister beside you. But as an MP, you do have certain rights in terms of voting on issues, expressing opinions, and being able to stand up for the things you believe in. I'm not sure that either Jane Philpott or Jody Wilson-Raybould maybe fully experienced that. Remember, they are new politicians, and both of them, instead of going from the very backbench, went to the very front one and became cabinet ministers right away. So they've sort of worked their career backwards. And I wonder if part of the problem with that is that they lost the experience of

what it's like to be an MP fighting for an issue in your riding, and how that is welcomed by the government, by cabinet, by the centre. Right, right. Because the idea being that they became cabinet members right away. And as a result, the cabinet is the party, is the iteration of the party. You cannot be in cabinet and not toe the line of the prime minister, essentially. Yeah. I mean, that's sort of the, you know, the front bench, if you will, for the team. And you are expected to maintain the positions that cabinet has taken to defend those policies and ideals and to have the prime minister's back and say that you have confidence in him. Obviously, that's something that came to a head for both of these both of these women. both of these women. I guess at some point, though, you have to weigh the risk for yourself and for your party, because that's also part of your job to represent that party.

Is there a recent example of an MP who has spoken out against their party successfully? Well, there's certainly MPs who have had to leave their party speaking out on issues that matter to them. One of the handful of people that has been re-elected as an independent would be Bill Casey. So Bill Casey was a conservative and under Stephen Harper, supported the conservative banner and was going to support a budget that the Harper government put forward until he realized or thought

that the budget somehow violated the Atlantic Accord. So he had to leave and he became an independent. He ran as an independent. Bill Casey, former conservative MP, says he has seen the light and it's red. I'm running for the nomination for the Liberal, to be the Liberal candidate in Cumberland-Colchester because the Liberals are really very much what the progressive Conservatives were. He has a complicated political history, but I think what's interesting about him and interesting about the handful of people that have succeeded as independents and what I think is different than what we're seeing from Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott is that generally those people are motivated by issues inside the community. You know, there's something that the riding is upset about.

It doesn't feel heard. It needs to have more weight. It needs a grand gesture in order to get the attention of the governing party. And that can mobilize people. That can certainly mobilize people in the riding to vote for you. What Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott seem to be suggesting is that they just want to do things differently. And the issues that they cited in their press conferences, issues like climate change and pharmacare and electoral reform, well, those are issues everyone's talking about. Those aren't issues that are proper to their ridings.

I think that these two newly independent MPs just feel like they can do politics in a different way. Everywhere environmental, economic and security challenges are deepening. Moving forward, we cannot afford to be complacent. We cannot use the same ideas and attitudes and practices that brought us to this point. And they are welcome to try. And if they can actually make it happen, great. I guess my skepticism is that the system in place right now won't allow them to get very far. And let's talk about that system, because you mentioned it before.

We don't have a system that necessarily encourages a lot of independence. And what is it about the system that makes it so? I mean, the first thing is the first-past-the-post system, right? I mean, that's the first change that is not going to happen because this government was going to do it and then reneged on that promise. I always felt that we could make a clear improvement to our political process by offering people to not ever have to vote strategically again, to give a preference on your ballot, to rank your ballot. A lot of people don't like it. A lot of people say it favours Liberals.

If we had some sort of list or preferential ballot you would probably see a wider variety of candidates and candidates getting elected. That's the first problem. If this was an issue that you really thought we had to tackle. And the second one is how would it work in a parliamentary system that has parties and needs parties in order to hold a government to account? I mean, that's why those parties function like that in those groups. So that would be the second problem. The independent MPs as well right now don't get anything So that would be the second problem. The independent

MPs as well right now don't get anything because of the way the system works, right? They don't get extra money for research. They don't get spots on committees. They don't get time in question period to ask questions. They are just there. And the only way they would get that is if someone from a traditional party were to say, we willing to give you x y and z and and i don't know that that will happen in this case but that's the only way that that these two would get advanced they have been very open to providing me and other independents the opportunity to speak in dialogue debates in the house of commons but i think their first biggest hurdle is going to be to get elected. I'm not even sure that that can happen.

Okay, and then now let's talk about how hard it might be for these two women to get elected in the first place. I understand there are just even a few logistical issues. For example, they can't give anybody tax credits for political donations until the writ drops. Am I right about that? Yeah, I mean, that's a huge, huge hurdle. They essentially have no money to run a campaign, no money to print off posters, to hire people to set up an office beyond what they would have in

a writing office. They've got nothing. So they're starting from zero. I'm going to be honest with you. There are a few things that are rigged a little bit against independent candidates. So I'm going to ask you to make a bit of a sacrifice in the next couple of months if you can. That seems to me pretty challenging. And they're asking people up until the writ drops, probably sometime in early September, if they're going to hand over cash, it's just a gift. They will get nothing back in return. So that's the first problem, because like it or not, elections are largely fought with money. The second problem is that they don't have the data.

They don't have voter lists. They don't have phone records. They don't know how households have voted in the past. This micro-targeting that the big parties do so well and have huge data centers on, they don't have access to any of that anymore either. So what do they have? They have volunteers, maybe a little bit of their own money or some money that the friends donate, and then the ability to go around and knock doors. You know, make the most beautiful lawn signs in the country

here in Markham Stobel because there are no rules. We are going to paint outside the party lines. The other thing that they have, and it's not to be dismissed, is name recognition. The reason that we know who these two women are, and that we're even talking about them right now, is because they were Justin Trudeau liberals. They were part of that cabinet. They were part of that first gender balance cabinet. And they were, you know, competent ministers in their own right. So they have that and they have the things that they've done mostly over the past few months.

Right. And a lot of people are very supportive of what they've done in the last few months. They see them as role models. I was consistently told by people young and old from all backgrounds that the events had inspired them, motivating them to get involved. Yeah, sure. Some people see them that way. And they are going to have to use that and the kind of messaging they use today about being a voice for the riding as a way to get elected.

But there are realities, too, to how they got elected. And if you go and look at how much they won by in the last election, I mean, Jane Philpott won by not even 4,000 votes. Right. The Conservatives are a very close second. That's right. This used to be Paul Calandra's writing. It's a Conservative writing. I would imagine that the only thing that's going to happen here is that Jane Philpott split some votes and the Conservatives, who already felt pretty comfortable that they were going to get that riding back, will be able to come up the middle somehow. Jody Wilson-Raybould won by a little bit more, closer to 9,000 votes the last time, perhaps

because she has become sort of a symbol of many, many different things. Her battle would be a little bit easier. But even there, Liberals say that they've got good people in mind for the Vancouver and the Lower Mainland. And if she comes up against a candidate and a big, big red machine trying to run her out of the business, I'm not sure how she fares either. I get all the logistical hurdles around them winning or potentially losing in the next election. But, you know, you did mention this name recognition. I'm wondering if you think they're also tapping into something else here, that there is all of this frustration globally right now with the status quo. And whether or not there's truth in all of this,

people are fed up with politics as usual. Just this week, we saw a pushback in the EU elections. We're seeing a move away from these traditional established parties towards smaller parties, both on the left and the right. And in Germany, the Greens were the radical alternative that really surged in popularity. France, we saw Le Pen's far-right party outstrip Macron's party by a little bit.

Like, is it possible that this also might be the time to run as an independent politician? This is the right moment in history for them to do something here. I don't think that there has been a moment that is more opportune to date. Again, I think that the way they left politics informs as much how they're going to move forward. So I think that they've sent a message from the beginning about what they were and were not willing to accept.

There are a record number of independent MPs inside the House of Commons right now, but that is not because there is a huge tsunami of independence. It's because the Bloc Québécois doesn't have official party status. It's because a number of MPs were tossed from their parties for all sorts of reasons. It's because you have Maxime Bernier, you know, with his own one-person party for now. So all those things mean that, sure, there are more independents, and there seems to be a willingness to at least pay attention to some of those people in a way

that there wasn't before. But I'm not sure that that is enough to galvanize support around these two women. And I would also suggest this. If you were trying to start a movement around independently minded MPs, what does the movement stand for? I think that's the question that they haven't answered yet. Because it can't just be climate change or electoral reform or whatever other issue they cited today. It has to be something bigger. And is the something bigger simply that the system doesn't work and we can find a way around it? Maybe. We need to move beyond what is traditionally thought of as the establishment to individual voices of members of Parliament.

There are countries in this world like the Republic of Ireland that has some 18 independent members. In Canada, we haven't had that tradition. But why not start it? It's a great idea. We're going to start it. We're going to show how it works. But that message is going to have to get a lot clearer and it's going to have to be a lot more exciting for people inside their writings and outside their writings in order to get people thinking differently about politics. So maybe what you're talking about is there. Maybe it's starting to spark up.

But I'm not convinced that we have heard enough yet to suggest that this is something bigger than just two people who felt like their careers in federal politics weren't over yet. Rosie, thank you so much. It's always such a pleasure to have these conversations with you. And for me, Jamie, thanks. So just to switch gears a bit, though, we are staying in Ottawa. Canada is hosting lawmakers from around the world to talk about data collection, privacy and democracy online this week. And on Monday, the Canadian Parliament's Privacy and Ethics Committee announced that it was considering whether two Facebook officials should be held in contempt. CEO Mark Zuckerberg and COO Sheryl Sandberg were subpoenaed and asked to testify in Ottawa this week. The problem for the committee is that they haven't yet responded. Committee members from three major parties say that Facebook is sending a bad message here.

What's unclear is what would actually happen to them if this committee decided to hold them in contempt. We're working on some episodes on this subject, so please stay tuned for that. I'm Jamie Poisson. Thanks for listening to FrontBurner. For more CBC Podcasts, go to cbc.ca slash podcasts. 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.