The unveiling of the renewed Cabinet this week gave us a few hints about how the way in which Justin Trudeau's government operates will likely change over the life of the current hung parliament, and most of those changes are not positive ones. When they formed government in 2015 under the motto of doing government differently, there were some tangible examples of how they were making a break from past practices that had led to problems with the way that government operates in this country things like the elimination of regional ministers, and some of the corruptible practices that were associated with them. But with the loss of their majority and an overblown sense of regional frustration and alienation dominating the headlines, the Liberals have started to backslide on some of these changes, to the detriment of the country.
When the Liberals formed government in 2015, they did so with big plans of transformation. A lot of it was invisible to most Canadians and the media because it involved changing the backroom processes in government, which started with a great deal of consultation before they could move to implementation. Part of the problem with this kind of transformational change is that it takes years more than can be accomplished in four-year election cycles (another reason why it wouldn't hurt to respect the fact that our constitution allows for five-year parliaments between elections) and it was hard to show results as a result. Some of the promise of "doing government differently" around things like being "open by default" with data and Access to Information reform was incremental and not fast or far enough for the media and other critics, which is fair enough. Some of it was about recognizing that certain problems needed different solutions than just throwing money at problems and building capacity was a big focus on certain files but again, this all takes time. And while some of this transformation that is underway will no doubt continue, I nevertheless worry a great deal that the need to show short-term results will blunt some of the longer-term transformation projects that are underway, because of political expediency.
Some of the Cabinet posts as a result of this inward, short-term focus have seen some splitting out of roles that do have the longer-term focus, such as Digital Government, or Workforce Development both files that require longer-term vision and some transformative change in their particular spheres. That they are no longer with the broader ambit of the ministries does make me wonder how to read the signals are they really empowering these changes by giving them separate ministers (and good ministers to go with them) or are they marginalizing these files by keeping them apart from the overall management of their departments, so that it creates internal hurdles toward implementing the changes that are necessary? Certainly the creation of the "Minister for Middle Classâ„¢ Prosperity®" as opposed to just leaving her as the Associate Minister of Finance was a branding exercise, more indicative of this government drinking its own bathwater than it was about transformational change.
And then there is the resurgence of regional portfolios, which is the biggest sign that moving away from some of the parochialism of Canadian governments is falling away. Cabinet has a regional dimension for the very reason that this is a federation and those voices need to be heard around the table. Creating special roles for the Quebec lieutenant and the Cabinet-adjacent special representative for the Prairies serves a kind of dual role with the current situation it's both performative in terms of showing Alberta and Saskatchewan that Trudeau is listening to their concerns, but he also needs to balance that with a Quebec lieutenant to show that you can't just put the focus on the west without also placating Quebec particularly now that the Bloc have made a resurgence (in part because of the bellicose rhetoric of certain Western premiers who keep insisting that they want to put a pipeline through Quebec in defiance of both the public mood or the lack of an actual economic rationale for one). While Trudeau said in 2015 that he didn't need a Quebec lieutenant because they had a Quebec general (meaning him), that apparently wasn't going to fly in the current political reality.
It's the Economic Development portfolio that I find the most concerning because it, along with the six planned Parliamentary Secretaries that will represent each regional development agency under the ministry, because it's going back to the problems with how these agencies used to operate. Many of them became the source of personal slush funds for their ministers, the source of patronage jobs for their friends, and some of the more problematic corporate welfare that governments keep insisting they will get tough on, before they realize the need the votes and political capital that it brings. While it's not fully bringing back the old system they haven't fully re-instituted regional ministers that would act as power brokers in their provinces but it's a step back to that reality rather than away from it.
Of course, not all of this government's transformational change has been for the better the Senate being a prime example, and the fact that the Leader of the Government in the Senate remains outside of Cabinet remains a problem for how they perceive Parliament should function not to mention that it would have been a way to get a regional voice from Alberta or Saskatchewan at the Cabinet table in a way that is consistent with how our system was designed to operate. That being said, all of these changes, including the resurrection of regional posts, may be all for show it's not like there has been a change in the way this PMO operates, and the same crew is largely still in charge, meaning that the Cabinet and its new composition may be more marketing exercise than substantive change. Nevertheless, the signals it sends are worrying, and deserve our continued scrutiny.
Photo Credit: CBC News
