Roundup: A singular call for a leadership review

Posted on by

As the Liberals’ caucus retreat got underway in Ottawa (immediately after the Cabinet retreat), things got off to another rocky start as Liberal backbencher Ken McDonald told Radio-Canada that he thinks there should be a leadership review in the party ahead of the next election, and lo, the media leapt all over that story, and the rest of caucus spent the day insisting that no, they’re happy with Trudeau (though one anonymous Liberal praised McDonald’s bravery in bringing this up). The problem with this proposal? The party’s constitution has no mechanism for this.

The new constitution, which was adopted after the Liberals formed government, only has one avenue for a leadership review, which is that one is to be held if they lose an election. And fair enough—that’s really the only time they could hold one, because it essentially means running an entire leadership contest but with only the leader canvassing sign-ups and votes (because they no longer have paid memberships), and his or her opponents trying to organise a no vote. There is no way a sitting prime minister has the time or capacity to do this while running the country, and it’s one more reason why the way we run leadership contests is made to obscure accountability. It also guarantees that bellyachers like McDonald can’t get their wish because frankly there is no capacity for this to happen while they are governing.

This all points to reasons why we need get back to the system of caucus appointing and disposing of leaders. It restores accountability because the leaders are once again afraid of their own members, and must be more responsive to their concerns rather than doing things like threatening to withhold the signature from their nomination papers if they don’t toe the line. It also precludes these mini-leadership contests as a “leadership review” (where past examples such as Jeremy Corbyn and Greg Selinger were not great examples of the membership being able to get rid of problematic leaders). It would make for one quick vote and being able to put the matter to bed rather than this interminable grousing that we’re seeing now, and an immediate replacement of a leader rather than a months-long leadership race that includes egomaniacs who have never won a seat, let alone have any idea how politics works. But people who don’t know how the system works insists that this is somehow “anti-democratic” (which is bullshit), and so this bastardised status quo continues to make our system worse.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukraine shot down 11 out of 14 Russian drones targeting the southern part of the country in the early hours of Thursday morning. A Russian military plane crashed, and they claimed it contained 65 prisoners of war headed for a swap and that Ukrainian forces downed the plane, but couldn’t produce proof; Ukraine didn’t confirm or deny this, but made it clear that if Russia was transporting POWs this way without notice it was unacceptable.

Good reads:

  • Patty Hajdu met with First Nations leaders around providing assistance for mental health crises, but the province of Ontario skipped the meeting claiming scheduling.
  • RCMP costs for protecting MPs has reached an all-time high as they face an increased volume of threats, particularly post-occupation.
  • The foreign interference public inquiry has asked for documents related to concerns about interference coming from India in the last two federal elections.
  • Ukraine’s first lady considers the Hunka matter behind them, despite the fact that it was used for Russian propaganda.
  • Conservatives are calling on the government to reinstate visa requirements for Mexican travellers to Canada to deter asylum claims.
  • Jagmeet Singh insists that his party can gain seats in Alberta by highlighting their differences from the two main parties, and is targeting Randy Boissonnault’s seat.
  • Singh is also trying to push the government to do more for affordable housing, claiming that the free market never helped with affordability. (Seriously?)
  • First Nations chiefs in Ontario are asking for a one year moratorium on mining claims, because they are being staked faster than they can respond to them.
  • Jason Markusoff recounts what Danielle Smith and Tucker Carlson talked about at his big event in Calgary.
  • Kevin Carmichael ponders Middle Class™ anxiety and how that can lead to bad policy, particularly when the data doesn’t match the mood.
  • Carmichael also parses the Bank of Canada’s latest messaging around rates.
  • Matt Gurney worries that there is now too much uncertainty on the use of the Emergencies Act going forward, which is bad in an emergency situation.
  • Susan Delacourt argues that the Federal Court and the public inquiry rulings are not actually that far apart, but that won’t stop people weaponising the former.

Odds and Ends:

For National Magazine, my write-up of the Federal Court decision on the Emergencies Act invocation and some analysis from scholars.

https://youtu.be/Pl7-p-pKkEQ 

Want more Routine Proceedings? Become a patron and get exclusive new content.