LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Unless you work in the Ottawa Parliamentary Press Gallery, it's tough to get excited about governmental cabinet making, since it's basically just a bunch of patronage appointments with a theatrical flourish.

Yet, I must admit Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's recent cabinet announcement actually intrigued me since it included something of a surprise, i.e. he created a brand new post — Minister of Middle Class Prosperity.

Mind you, others were less intrigued with this new ministry; indeed its announcement was immediately met with both derision and contempt.

For instance, Aaron Wudrick, of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation, dealt out lots of derision on Twitter, wittily suggesting the Minister of Innovation should now be renamed "Minister of Innovative Euphemisms For Corporate Welfare" and that the Finance Minister, should be rebranded, "Minister of Infinite Deficits."

Meanwhile, right here on LooniePolitics, John Robson was more about contempt, as he bluntly called the post of Minister of Middle Class Prosperity, "nauseating."

And I certainly get where both Robson and Wudrick are coming from.

If nothing else, this cabinet post's euphemistic sounding name gives it an ironic kind of vibe, that's simultaneously funny and a little bit worrying.

In fact, it reminds of me George Orwell's novel 1984, which tells the story of a dystopian fascistic-style society, where, "The Ministry of Peace concerns itself with war, the Ministry of Truth with lies, the Ministry of Love with torture and the Ministry of Plenty with starvation".

Orwell called these contradictions "doublethink."

Now, I don't for minute believe the Liberal government has any plans to play such an Orwellian doublethink game, which is to say its Ministry of Middle Class Prosperity certainly won't concern itself with creating middle class poverty, since, for one thing, we already have a government department for that, it's called the Canada Revenue Agency.  (Ha, ha, to all the wonderful people who work at the CRA, that's just a harmless, friendly joke.  I love you guys!)

So what do I think the Ministry of Middle Class Prosperity is really all about?

Well, in my view, it's pretty simple; Prime Minister Trudeau has basically decided to give cabinet rank to a bumper sticker slogan.

In other words, from now on, the term "middle class prosperity" will be associated with Trudeau's cabinet.

That's it; that's the whole point of this new post, it's just a public relations gimmick.

As proof of this just consider how the Minister of Middle Class Prosperity, Mona Fortier, doesn't seem to have a clue as to what her job actually entails.

As matter of fact, during a recent media interview she described her mandate as "to work with my colleagues to make sure we have that lens enabling the fact that we want to put measures in to continue to grow our economy."

Huh?

Then when asked to define the middle class she declared, "I define the middle class where people feel they can afford their way of life, they have quality of life and they can send their kids to play hockey or even have different activities."

Yeah, I don't get it either.

But the point is, you and I don't have to get it, nor does Fortier have to get it nor for that matter does anybody else have to get it.

All that matters is during that interview, the words "Minister for Middle Class Prosperity" kept getting mentioned, meaning, despite her oddball answers, Fortier did the prime minister proud.

To be blunt, her job title is an advertisement for the Liberals, suggesting to voters that the government has some sort of plan to make the middle class more prosperous.

Hence, even though it's a dopey-sounding name, with Orwellian overtones, creating a ministry of Middle Class Prosperity makes perfect political sense.

In fact, solely in terms of persuasive political communications, it's actually kind of brilliant.

Photo Credit: National Post

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.