This Liberal government has botched the issue of Chinese interference in Canadian elections so badly that it’s hard to imagine how things could be any worse.
Beset on all sides by critics, David Johnston has resigned from his position as special rapporteur.
Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has scored a political victory by discrediting Mr. Johnston’s efforts, confirming that he is the fiercest pit bull in public life, and confirming as well that he is willing to distort the truth and smear the reputation of an honourable man for political gain.
Justin Trudeau used Mr. Johnston as a shield, to avoid having to call a public inquiry into election interference. Mr. Johnston’s resignation has left the Prime Minister exposed.
And the whole sordid affair has undermined public confidence in the integrity of the country’s electoral system.
What a mess.
Mr. Johnston erred in failing to recommend a public inquiry in his original report, released in May. But at least he was resolved to hold hearings and to make recommendations that could improve the security of elections and improve communications between the security services and government.
With his departure, those hearings are no more.
Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Dominic LeBlanc said on the weekend that the government remained open to a public inquiry. On Sunday, Mr. Poilievre told reporters that Mr. Trudeau “needs to call it right away. He needs to get someone who is job-ready, and we need to have terms of reference that have tight timelines.” Exactly right.
But would the Leader of the Official Opposition work constructively with the government and with other opposition leaders to establish those terms and find someone to lead the inquiry? We may be about to discover whether Mr. Poilievre can build, not just wreck.
NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh finds himself in an awkward spot. While repeatedly calling for a public inquiry into election interference, he has maintained his party’s supply and confidence agreement with the Liberals.
Now that Mr. Johnston has stepped down, how can Mr. Singh possibly prop up the government if the Prime Minister continues to delay?
But the greatest burden of responsibility clearly rests with Mr. Trudeau himself. He must confront the serial failures of his China policy, from his initial eagerness to court a trade deal to his reluctance to acknowledge China’s genocidal human-rights abuses, to his foot-dragging in banning Huawei from fifth-generation technology to his unwillingness to confront the issue of election interference.
In his efforts to deflect, delay and distract, the Prime Minister has undermined public confidence in our democracy and tarnished Mr. Johnston’s legacy. He should never have called upon the former governor-general, who was 81 and in retirement, to serve in the first place.
As former cabinet ministers Jody Wilson-Raybould, Jane Philpott and Bill Morneau can attest, Mr. Trudeau has a tendency to use and discard people.
With Mr. Johnston’s departure, the Prime Minister now has no choice but to convene a public inquiry and consult the opposition leaders on who should head it – if, that is, anyone qualified can be found willing to accept that now-poisoned chalice. Any further delay would warrant an immediate vote of non-confidence in his government.
With the House soon to break for its summer recess, Mr. Trudeau may be tempted to continue ragging the puck. That would confirm he would rather undermine public confidence in elections than confront the issue of Chinese interference. Nothing could be more politically damaging.
Some good may come out of all of this: a tougher, more realistic foreign policy toward China; new measures – preferably through an inquiry – to strengthen electoral integrity.
But the government’s handling of this issue will go down as one of its most discreditable legacies.
Finally, a personal acknowledgment: I called the appointment of Mr. Johnston in March an “inspired choice,” because I thought it would win bipartisan support. The very opposite turned out to be true. Strike one.
I hoped and expected Mr. Johnston would recommend a public inquiry. He didn’t. Strike two.
When it seemed clear a public inquiry was off the table, I hoped that some good would come out of the public hearings Mr. Johnston had promised. Instead, he resigned and a public inquiry is back on the table. Strike three.