cabinet shuffle Archives - Loonie Politics

As the Cabinet retreat concludes in Halifax, the assembled journalists and pundits following the meeting are looking to see what kind of “reset” the prime minister is going to offer voters in order to rescue his abysmal polling numbers, whether that is the persistent rumours of a Cabinet shuffle, or the ultimate play of his realizing that he needs to step down for the good of the party, and getting a leadership contest underway. Of course, that’s not actually going to happen, but there are a whole lot of people in the media space who are looking for something like it to take place because they’ve spent their summer months hooked on American news, and are looking to replicate what they have seen in terms of the bounce the Democrats’ polls have undertaken since president Joe Biden made the decision to drop his quest for re-election and to step aside in favour of Kamala Harris. But Canada is not the United States, and Justin Trudeau is not Joe Biden.

This kind of political drama-envy is not new to Canadian politics, nor is the problem of Canadian political media trying to import American narratives because they think it will somehow help the audience relate more. Hell, for that matter, it’s also not new for political parties in this country to import American narratives wholesale and try to do things like simply dividing them by ten in order to Canadianize them, even though that’s not actually how this works (and I’m looking at you most especially, NDP). This particular situation with Trudeau’s poor polling numbers and what happened with the Democrats is catnip for this particular kind of political media in this country, and they cannot resist its lure, so the attempts to force Trudeau into this narrative box are coming on particularly strongly, and there’s little that anyone can do to stop it, unfortunately.

Cabinet shuffle speculation is a constant in Ottawa, but aside from Seamus O’Regan’s decision to step down and be replaced by Steve MacKinnon, it’s hard to see just what kind of reset will satisfy the media narrative, aside from a leadership race (which isn’t going to happen at this point in the game). I know that a number of backbenchers have been agitating and doing the Anonymous Liberal™ schtick over the summer, but there frankly isn’t a lot of untapped potential on said backbenches that would make a noticeable difference in Cabinet if they were swapped in—assuming that a manner could be found to do so that wouldn’t completely unbalance it in terms of geographic, gender, and cultural representation. The notion that Trudeau will recruit Mark Carney directly to Cabinet without having won a seat first is little more than a technicolour daydream, but nevertheless one that the political media have deluded themselves into believing for months now, for some reason.

So just what kind of change can the Liberals actually offer if this is what the voting public is craving, if you believe the polls? That’s become the million-dollar question. One of the things that has been creeping into the discourse is the notion of the “politics of joy” that the Kamala Harris/Tim Walz ticket has been employing, in contrast to the dourness of Trump’s declinist assertions, but once again, this is hard to try and make a direct import into Canada because Trudeau has tried to focus on the “sunny ways” shtick, to the point of toxic positivity at times (and certainly their happy-clappy pabulum talking points are meant to reinforce that toxic positivity), while Poilievre is the one asserting that Canada is “broken” and that only he can fix it. Even Poilievre’s attempts to present an “It’s morning in America” positive vision fell flat, and not only because of the ridiculously poor choice of foreign-sourced stock images that his social media geniuses edited together for a Twitter video that they were forced to delete, but because his entire slogan-filled message rings hollow.

Meanwhile, any minister that was asked about change or resets at the Cabinet retreat basically said the same thing—that they’ve heard the message loud and clear that Canadians are frustrated and angry, and they’re going to focus on “delivering results for Canadians.” And hey, re-focusing on “deliverology” like they did back when they took office in 2015 would be a welcome change, and it would be new and novel for them. This is a government that has opted not to focus on managerial competence since about mid-2018, but rather has devoted their energies to finding shiny new baubles that will try and recreate the energy and excitement of 2015 all over again, to ever-diminishing returns. If they want to really double-down on “delivering results for Canadians,” this could be one way to do it, and finding a level of change that would be unique to Canadian politics rather than just aping the American narratives and dividing by ten.

But let’s not kid ourselves—this is Trudeau we’re talking about and he will try to find some shiny new programme that he hopes will wow the socks off of everyone, that leaves the Conservatives and NDP unable to compete, but he also has to do it while being fiscally prudent, or to offset the costs in some way that may or may not include class warfare (which the Liberals seem to believe is working for them). We’ll have to see what it is, either when the final press conference of the retreat is held, or possibly in a surprise Speech from the Throne when Parliament returns (but that’s less of a sure bet because the NDP, whose support they rely upon, have come to distrust prorogations after Stephen Harper abused them), but you can count on something to be cooking from the Liberals that they hope will capture voters’ imaginations just enough to get them over their dislike of Trudeau and push the Liberals just far enough over the edge electorally to squeak out another win based on voter efficiency alone. Meanwhile, political media will continue to try and find an American narrative to import, and the Liberals will resist the notion that change is what people are looking for when the next election rolls around.

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.

Click here for more

This content is restricted to subscribers

Click here for more

With a major cabinet shuffle announced, pundits have had a field day analyzing the tea leaves of its significance.

Despite all the so-called analysis, there remained a limited insight about the road map to achieve the government’s intentions.

Were the appointments a sign of Trudeau’s legacy efforts to boost the fortunes of women as future potential Liberal leaders? Will carefully crafted and balanced Cabinet teams advance the goal posts on climate change, indigenous affairs and infrastructure? Will the creation of standalone ministries dealing with housing and mental health give those portfolios the attention they richly deserve?

Despite continuity in key economic roles, business and labour interest groups alike are seeking clarity to address skilled labour shortages, global supply chain challenges, employment insurance system failings and to deliver an equitable recovery for women in the workforce.

Beyond rehashing personal anecdotes and scoring political points, have the pundits really been concentrating on the right metrics to make a sound policy assessment of the government’s future direction?

The 2021 election campaign sorely lacked a serious public policy focus, flitting instead from one to another transactional promise: the competing Covid related leadership agendas drove most of the campaign debate and ‘horse-race’ coverage.

Within the next month, several crucial public policy documents will be released. Those analysts willing to hold their fire about future policy direction until then will have a veritable banquet of information to feast upon.

Throne Speeches are notorious for their vague language and lack of quantifiable outcomes. They do however send an important signal to the public service about the government’s priorities and where to marshal their resources.

But it will be a longer wait for budgets and economic statements including estimates to spell out in detail the likely availability of financial resources and allocations to specific project priorities.

Even before those documents are produced, there is a an important transitional process step that can provide clarity about the Liberal government’s intentions and priorities. In line with ongoing parliamentary practice, individual mandate letters will be sent by the Prime Minister to each of his ministers around the time of the Throne Speech.

While ministerial mandate letters have been a common practice in Canada and abroad for many years, their public release was accelerated by Ontario Premier Wynne’s publication of these letters in 2014 as part of her Open Government initiative.

“Ontarians want their government to work for them – and with them. Making the mandate letters public makes it easier for people to see what we are working on, and how we can work together to build better lives for everyone across Ontario.”

In 2015, Mr. Trudeau set an important federal precedent by publicly releasing the expectations he had for each Minister: “to outline responsibilities and considerations that I expect you to undertake on behalf of Canadians”. He has continued to issue such guidance following each Cabinet shuffle as well as the swearing -in of a new government.

Ministerial mandate letters follow a common format and serve as a roadmap to manage both public service and sectoral expectations.

After confirming and thanking the Minister for taking on their official duties, there is a short pro-forma summary of the challenges facing the country. A general restatement of the government’s priorities and the tone and style it wishes to follow in governing includes references to the communications themes that frame the government’s agenda.

The meat of the letters rests in the specifics related to each Ministers’s accountabilities. For example, after the start of the COVID -19 crisis, the Prime Minister spelt out additional accountabilities for Finance Minister Freeland in 2019.

“You will use whatever fiscal firepower is needed in the short term to support people and businesses during the pandemic, and will keep supporting the economy with emergency measures until the economy improves. Doing so, you will avoid creating new permanent spending.” (my bolding)

Trudeau’s letter also flags certain sectors for attention:

“Tailor support for those sectors hit hardest, such as travel and tourism, hospitality and cultural industries like the performing arts… consider options for further, targeted measures for personal support workers as they continue to provide essential services in our communities.”

It also gives clear direction about new revenue sources:

“Identify additional ways to tax extreme wealth inequality, including by finalizing amendments to the Income Tax Act to limit the stock option deduction for high-income individuals at large, established firms… Continue work with the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), with the support of the Minister of Canadian Heritage, to ensure that multinational technology giants pay appropriate corporate tax on the revenue that they generate within Canada. If no consensus can be reached among OECD members, you will ensure that a made-in-Canada approach is applied no later than 2022. You will also work to ensure that international digital corporations whose products are consumed in Canada collect and remit the same level of sales tax as Canadian digital corporations.”

The letter also reinforces existing government policy approaches: “… Continue putting a price on pollution while putting that money back in the pockets of Canadians. As part of Canada’s climate plan, move forward with tax policies that support clean energy transition, advancing policy work on border carbon adjustments and ensuring carbon pollution pricing rebate payments move from being distributed on an annual basis to a quarterly basis, starting as early as 2022. … As part of Canada’s climate plan and to create jobs and make Canada a world leader in clean technology, cut tax rates by 50 per cent for companies that develop and manufacture zero-emission technology including a listing of eligible sectors.”

For those wishing to understand and benchmark the government’s progress in meeting its accountabilities, the ministerial mandate letters remain an excellent place to start.

Click here for more

My read on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s new cabinet can best be summarized as half-and-half.

The first half of the equation – a sterling front bench of capable, qualified women, backed up by close confidantes and activists in key roles.

Chrystia Freeland at Finance remains Minister of Domestic and Fiscal.

Anita Anand and Melanie Joly land the biggest promotions, running Defence and Foreign Affairs.

Trudeau’s groomsman and get-the-job-done quiet performer Marc Miller at Crown-Indigenous Reconciliation makes sense; he’s calmly distinguished himself in that role’s sister portfolio.

The activist Stephen Guibeault at Environment and Climate Change signals Trudeau wants to, no ironic pun intended, step on the gas on that all-important file, with Guibeault backed up by Jonathan Wilkinson, sort of the pragmatist foil to the activist, at Natural Resources.

Through in the uber-competent Jean-Yves Duclos at Health and Dominic LeBlanc as guy in charge of getting the provinces and municipalities to build things – with Ahmad Hussein and Karina Gould taking housing and child care as back up – and that isn’t a bad front bench at all.

The other half, well, here things get a bit more curious with the junior ministers – some of whom were recently senior ministers, demoted almost out of the cabinet but not quite. One wonders why the PM chose to drop his astronaut foreign minister, but kept some others he was demoting to the margins of cabinet; why not a full cull if he was demoting them anyway?

Indeed, and at the risk of being indelicate, I had thought there might be a blatant eye towards succession planning. Team Trudeau has always favoured a sort of Gen X/elder Millennial vibe, so there are at least three survivors in this cabinet I expected might have been put out to pasture in favour of “fresh blood”, if for no other reason than to renew the cabinet with younger faces, an eye to the future of the party, and to keep the backbench happy. I suppose there was some of that; but the fact there was some of that makes it all the stranger when there wasn’t.

More broadly, the more junior ministers are curious. Many share their regional economic development office – not a bad idea per se, to make economic development more locally focused, but still a bit strange when the senior minister in the province might be the one inclined to make the big economic announcements in the first place – case most in point being having a Quebec lieutenant in charge of Heritage, but a Quebec minister responsible for economic development who’s main portfolio is Sport. Or a lonely Alberta minister tasked with economic development and specifically also for… tourism? The pattern breaks when Ontario gets a standalone economic development minister, and rural Canada gets a Minister for Rural Economic Development.

These aren’t criticisms so much as puzzling things out.

So, what does it all mean?

Some commentators have remarked that it shows Team Trudeau’s preference to dance with the ones that brung em; close friends and borderline clique.

I preferred Aaron Wherry’s notion that the cabinet is instead a team of teams: there’s the global affairs gang, the infrastructure crew, the climate change duo, the finance sisterhood, the health squad. It’s a cabinet of not only regional and gender balancing, but also of ministers teaming up to tackle intra-related aspects of cabinet. That is intriguing.

The next most intriguing thing? Figuring out who was left out of cabinet, and how they divvy up the remaining spoils in parliamentary secretary roles and caucus leadership – there’s still plenty of room at the almost-top, or perhaps, if you will, the middle class of government, and indeed there’s still plenty of MPs working hard to join it.