Matt Gurney: A perfect kind of crisis for our particular prime minister
Matt Gurney: A perfect kind of crisis for our particular prime minister
The Liberals will have to decide which of their grand plans will have now have to be put off — probably indefinitely.
By: Matt Gurney
The war in Ukraine is, obviously, a Ukrainian story first and foremost. But the scale of the war's global impact is undeniably massive (see my recent column on how it blew up a generation of German public policy in a week). Here in Canada, it's having one interesting impact — it's a shot in the arm for Prime Minister Trudeau. The PM's approval ratings were in a freefall after the trucker convoy in Ottawa and border blockades in other regions, when, according to John Wright and his team at Maru Public Opinion, the PM's leadership approval numbers epically tanked. Forty eight per cent of Canadians said he wasn't up to the job, 53 per cent said he looked weak, and a pathetic 29 per cent agreed that Trudeau had "acted like a prime minister should." Ouch.
But one war and a bunch of allied solidarity later, Trudeau's numbers are looking much more robust. Wright's polling the very next week found two-thirds of Canadians approved of the PM's performance on the Ukraine file, 58 per cent thought he was doing a good job, and 53 per cent said he was the assertive leader Canada needed right now.
Some of this can be explained pretty simply. The prime minister is not the first leader to enjoy a bounce from an international crisis after a run of bad luck on the domestic front. Maybe it’s as simple as that. Or hey, maybe it’s the fact that the prime minister has actually performed perfectly admirably during the crisis in Ukraine. He hasn’t done anything exceptional, but he has ticked all the right boxes for a suitably and appropriately concerned allied leader. He said the right things, he’s gone to visit the troops in the Baltics, Canada has moved in lockstep with allies on all political and economic measures. I’m not exactly his biggest fan, but there’s nothing that I’ve seen of late from Trudeau, on this file, that I’ve disliked — except his continued foot dragging on our own defensive needs. Maybe that'll come in the weeks ahead.
So yeah, there’s no reason to overthink this and reach for a deeper analysis. But where is the fun in that? So let’s totally overthink this: maybe we’ve witnessed two near-simultaneous crises that allow us to see, in rapid succession, Justin Trudeau at his best and at his worst.
Let’s start with the worst. The prime minister was savaged in the polls during the convoy protest, and that is fair and right. He looked helpless and befuddled throughout. His invocation of the Emergencies Act is still somewhat baffling. Even those of us with an open mind to its possible necessity are still wondering why it was needed, and what it accomplished. But more to the point, there’s a degree of political symbolism at play here, and optics matter in politics: Trudeau looked bad during the convoy protest. Don’t think this is some unfair ganging up on the prime minister, I am already on record lambasting both the Ottawa municipal government and Premier Doug Ford, where most of the jurisdictional authority for this crisis actually lay. Ottawa City Hall and Ford beclowned themselves, too.
But Ottawa is the national capital. It has symbolic value that is closely tied in with the prime minister: he was missing in action throughout. His approval rating on that score was low for a damn good reason. In a genuine crisis in his literal front yard, where he had some control — not total, but some — the PM was found wanting, and that was plain to see. The moment required leadership. He was MIA for weeks.
Now compare that to his handling of Ukraine, which the Canadian public — and even me! — find totally fine so far. Well, of course we do.
This is easy for Trudeau, as it would be for any leader from any party. With all respect to the suffering people of Ukraine, it's not hard for a Canadian PM to say the right things at the right moment. Nothing much has been asked of us beyond enduring higher gas prices, and we were going to get those no matter what side of history we chose to be on. Beyond sending money and weapons, which we are doing, what else could any Canadian prime minister do but show up, look very serious at press conferences, and talk about solidarity and unity and democracy?
If that sounds cynical, well, it is, at least a little bit. But it's also a sincere question. We don't have the economic or military power to go save Ukraine by ourselves. We'll no doubt end up resettling some Ukrainian refugees — perhaps many of them, and that's fantastic. Throw open the doors, as we did for tens of thousands of Syrians. For now, though, by visiting the troops and looking stern behind a lectern, Trudeau is doing about all that's left for him to do on the foreign front.
This will change in coming weeks. Sooner or later, the war in Ukraine is a crisis that will call for material progress on several files, including defence, agriculture, infrastructure, and energy policies. Praise for Trudeau’s performances above notwithstanding, when it comes to actual, measurable action, this is the kind of crisis Trudeau is least well suited for. Rapidly re-arming the military? Real danger of war-time leadership against an advanced power? A possible pivot toward significantly increased energy exports? Justin Trudeau?! Love or hate the guy, you have to admit that if you were asked to imagine a crisis that is particularly off-brand for him, you couldn’t do much better than “Russia invades Europe, which starts begging for more oil and gas imports.”
Maybe this explains the delay in any major new policy proposals: the Liberals are back at the drawing board, trying to figure out which of their grand ambitions is about to be put on the back burner, probably indefinitely. But for now, Trudeau can only do the part of the job he’s always liked best. He was always better at the showy announcement than the delivery, even for the stuff they actually want to do. The performative parts of the job are the ones he clearly enjoys and has some talent for — and that’s a genuine compliment. He’s good at this part of politics. The follow through is where he’s typically stumbled, which might explain why he’s lost voters each time he’s stood for election to prime minister (yes, yes, civics pedants, I know).
But for now, this is the perfect kind of crisis for this particular prime minister. There isn’t much we can do beyond what modest things we’re already doing. The entirety of the rest is just showing up to be seen doing and saying the right things at the right places with the right people. This must be such a relief for the PM, especially after such a horrible February. Finally, he’s getting a chance to really shine.
The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Follow us on Twitter @the_lineca. Fight with us on Facebook. Pitch us something: lineeditor@protonmail.com
Responding correctly to Ukraine in no way changes the vast collection of poor choices he's made from SNC, to National Indigenous People's Day, or his complete and total failure to address Ottawa's occupation. For me, there's no shine here. For the sake of his party, he needs to go.
Mr. Trudeau could have committed to increasing Canada's defense spending, the way Germany just did. But no, he will give no targets against which he could be held accountable.
Meanwhile, we have some 500 troops in Latvia and will increase that by 120. In case of real need, we could, perhaps, increase that by 3,500, but I suspect that would stretch our armed forces. By the way, out armed forces number some 65,000. What are the others doing?
When the truckers came to Ottawa, Mr. Trudeau and many of his Liberal MPs went into hiding, quite literally, because, you know, there might have been some "hard men" in the convoy. Contrast with the conduct of Mr. Zelenskyy and countless other Ukrainian leaders.