Canadians’ practice of democracy without polarizing into extremes is a wonderful strength, and somewhat rare these days. Within this tradition of balanced partisanship, a prime minister’s character is an important factor. Our present PM, as part of his brand, insisted he stood for “a different kind of politics.”
Justin Trudeau promised it and younger Canadians believed it. It seems that Jody Wilson-Raybould might have attempted an experiment in a new way of governing ethically, but she operated within an unchanged a partisan-parliamentary landscape.
Was she asking for an idealism no one can live up to within the given system? Did she fully grasp the ambiguity of “appropriate” conversation in the deferred prosecution agreement process (a very new and untried process in Canada)?
And, did she really expect Liberals would react any other way than expulsion, to her relentless exposure of their leader’s ineptitude in this tale of very bad communications?
Trudeau has looked incompetent and clumsy for sure, but Wilson-Raybould cannot be cast as an unsullied heroine.
Politics might be changed for the better, to make them more ethical, but Wilson-Raybould has not shown she has understood how to move that worthy objective forward.
She is, it must be emphasized, a neophyte in politics, promoted to a very high post with minimal experience. No one in this sad tale emerges as brilliantly effective at their job.
At the end of any evaluation of this long saga involving Trudeau and Wilson-Raybould, a Canadian will ask if the former ought to be turfed out. If one decides yes, he deserves to lose an election, one is accepting Andrew Scheer and his party as the viable alternative. Quelle horreur!
I cannot imagine preferring Conservatives to Liberals on most issues. I vote Green, but in circumstances where my vote might mean Scheer as PM, should I vote my conscience, I would vote Liberal.
Charles Jeanes
Nelson