Columnists
Joining the parade
You have to be impressed by the commitment of the predominantly young people who organized and participated in the climate change marches held across the country last Friday. The Montreal march was the biggest, and featured Swedish teen climate star Greta Thunberg.
It also featured Justin Trudeau marching along with his family—and dodging eggs thrown in his direction for his trouble. Now it would take a hardened cynic, and I do not consider myself one, to say that Mr. Trudeau attended the rally to bask in the reflected glow of the marchers and their cause. If he hadn’t attended, he would no doubt have received criticism to the effect that he didn’t think the cause was important enough. His opponent, Andrew Scheer, took that risk and stayed away. Perhaps Mr. Trudeau attended knowing Mr. Scheer would not attend, and used his opportunity to create a ‘wedge’ issue to force voters to a choice between the two of them.
All the same, something seemed a little out of whack to see Mr. Trudeau marching in a parade, the principal focus of which was to try to persuade this government to do more. Wasn’t he the person to whom the parade was addressing itself? By joining the parade, wasn’t he essentially acting as the defendant showing up to support the plaintiff? He did admit that his government could do more and promised to do more; so maybe his attendance was a calculated risk that by joining in the march, he would earn forgiveness for his lack of accomplishment Maybe he intended to send a message that he was secretly on the protesters’ side, but was being held back by powerful forces within his own government. ( If so, it would be interesting to know just who those forces are, and why he hasn’t vanquished them already).
Maybe Mr, Trudeau could get away with it because the objective of the marchers has been for governments to “do more” and “listen to the science,” rather than demand that the government, say, not build the Trans Mountain pipeline, or leave Alberta oil in the ground. But if that general message is not followed with government action, the marchers will likely become more pointed in their demands and will be less inclined to cut Mr. Trudeau the slack of allowing him to participate. You didn’t see Mr. Trudeau participate in the “Oil Patch Caravan to Ottawa” last January, and I doubt very much the organizers would have let him do so, because he was the target of their wrath, And if the marchers don’t get more pointed in their demands, they run the risk that their cause will become a milquetoast affair (“Tackling climate change is important!”) endorsed by all and sundry because it doesn’t involve any hard choices.
I hope the marchers’ demands do become more pointed. The “Occupy” movement a few years ago fizzled because it lacked an overarching call for concrete action. In addition, monitoring a promise to achieve a certain output level over a period of many years is hard to police: it gives the politicians the wiggle room to say that while they may not be on a course to meet their target now, they have a plan in place to achieve and better it over the coming years.
Mr. Trudeau is lucky he was able to join the parade. He may not be so lucky the next time.
Mr. Trudeau can at least be thankful he isn’t Boris Johnson. After the House of Commons passed legislation requiring him to seek an extension of the Brexit withdrawal date if no deal was made—thereby depriving him of the ability to use Donald Trump’s ‘madman’ negotiating technique (“I am just reckless enough to hurt myself in the process of hurting you, unless you agree to my demands”)—the British Supreme Court ruled that his prorogation of Parliament for several weeks was void. He sits, unable to command a majority on any matter and with Parliament unwilling to let him call an election, a virtual prisoner in the office twisting slowly, slowly in the wind, strangling on his signature promise to achieve Brexit by October 31, even without a deal. He is also about to get in trouble with the Speaker for stating that he will not obey the legislation compelling him to seek that extension.
Just imagine where Canada might be today if the UK Supreme Court decision had been on record as a precedent before Michaëlle Jean made Steven Harper wait for his prorogation.
Comments (0)