Sounds like typical bullshit Faux News spin.
Yeah, that’s a pretty poor question. I’d likely answer it “no”, because I’d largely already decided to vote for him for other reasons, long before this crap started.
In fact, reading that, I’d interpret as “Trudeau has gained 16% more support due to his handling of this crisis”, but even that seems like a bad take, the question is so badly worded.
It’s a ridiculous question to ask at this time, since we only had an election six months ago. It might make sense to ask it if we had an election coming up, but we don’t. No matter how much I might want to vote for his party (remember, the only people who can actually vote for Trudeau are the voters in his riding), I cannot until the next election.
The question and responses also say nothing at all about support for the “Medom” circus. Many of the respondents likely thought Trudeau should have come down harder, sooner (like we’ve seen in this very thread).
But is seems like some mathematically challenged folks in the media are trying to pretend this is some measure of support for the criminal blockaders.
The term “mathematically challenged” makes it seem like they are confused and doing it by accident. They are not.
Yeah, it’s better to say that the media are trying to pretend this is a measure of support for the criminal blockaders for the benefit of the mathematically challenged.
So Canadians thought it needed to be dealt with immediately.
Combine that with the polling that expressed how they felt about how Trudeau dealt with it.
17% thought he looked strong in acting to stop the ongoing truckers’ protests.
17% thought he used every opportunity to calm things down and find a solution,
29% thought he acted like a prime minister should in the face of the protest.
that’s a pretty good argument to suggest the public thinks, in this instance, he was a slow to react.
The point of the Emergency Act is to act in a timely manner in an emergency. Taking over bridges and city streets certainly qualifies as an emergency.
Clearly the local agencies failed in this respect and people naturally looked to higher levels of leadership to step in.
IMO Trudeau was late in his response and the polls reflect that.
That poll was conducted February 11 to 13.
The Emergency Act was announced February 14.
Is that soon enough for you?
And please remember - he’s in a minority government situation, and needs the support of at least one other party. And many in the CPC are champing at the bit to get a vote of no confidence to bring down the government. The PM is not a dictator.
I think the effect of the protest has been to make Trudeau look weak, and make some federal Conservative leaders look out of touch. Ford handled it slightly better. This is just how I see it; without commenting on timing or what should have been done. I do not know. Almost three weeks already?
But what was done was using the Emergencies Act. This is for “a public order emergency” that comprises “threats to the security of Canada” which are “so serious as to be a national emergency”, which is defined as an “urgent and critical situation” that “seriously endangers” the “lives, health or safety of Canadians” to an extent that exceeds “the capacity or authority of the provinces” or “seriously threatens” the “sovereignty, security and territorial integrity” of Canada, and which “cannot be effectively dealt with under any other law of Canada”.
This is a high bar to clear. You can make the case there is a danger to public safety and that Ontario had evidence for a lack of provincial capacity. Most Canadians probably feel clearing away the big trucks and opening borders is worth it due to the damage to many businesses, to Canada’s reputation and the likelihood of similar tactics being used again. But the legal debate did not really take place, to my knowledge, yesterday or today in the House.
Some claim the police already had all the powers and laws required. Others that the powers granted are disproportionate, despite a limited time frame and pending further mandatory legislative review.
It is also unclear what will happen now companies with the capacity to tow continue to say they cannot be compelled to do so as private companies. The military is also reluctant to get involved with this, stating their available vehicles are far away. Accepting US help would be politically difficult. It is unclear to me if passing the Emergencies Act changes this in practice. I suppose we will see over the next 48 hours. Clearly many hope the protestors will just go away, a reality which will be more difficult if 20-25 cm of snow is falling on Ottawa over the next few days as predicted. A hot mess.
Public protest is an important and ancient right. Having the protestors on foot would be a good start - vehicles were blocked from getting to Queens Park, but not Ottawa. Making war memorials, borders and airports places where protest is not permitted may make some degree of sense if these tactics may be repeated by any future group with any grievance. I am less convinced of the merits of forbidding protests at parliaments, but perhaps only on foot. I do not know about legislating time limits for protests (Is it possible? Is it wise?) and the problems with towing big trucks will clearly require a better solution.
No, and clearly the polls reflect that he was slow to react since it started on January 29.
I’m truly stumped by what you’re trying to say. Are you trying to say he makes quick decisions based on polls?
No but he is the leader and is expected to lead in times of crisis. The polls reflect that.
I’m fully confident he will cure cancer during his time in office and will go on to create a line of carbon neutral hair care products for use in space. But in this instance he was slow to respond.
No, I’m saying the situation was political and complex, and a PM cannot make decisions by simply doing what is popular at the time. Have you even been reading what I’ve been writing?
I’d also point out that even if Trudeau should have made decisions based what the polls said, it would have been pretty hard for him to make a decision on Jan 29 based on a poll taken Feb 11 - 13.
Sure, he should have, could have done thus and so, two weeks ago, says the armchair quarterback who does not have a firm grasp on the political realities of a minority government in a parliamentary democracy.
In many places, neither the government nor the police would have shown much restraint. Showing restraint is a good quality. But, as per my post above, this has cost Ottawa almost $15m and businesses much, much more. Trudeau will be perceived as “should have done more or sooner” despite the complexities and realities. It is surprising the police and authorities do not seemingly have hundreds of contingency plans for the many possible crises possible in a capital city. It is too soon to judge the efficacy of things.
One other point, which I don’t think has been raised, is that Trudeau cannot unilaterally invoke the Emergencies Act. It’s a cabinet decision.
The PM is the strongest figure in Cabinet, but the PM also needs cabinet support. We don’t know where the other cabinet ministers have been on this issue up until the time it was brought into force.
If there was a strong minority in Cabinet opposed or uncertain, that would be a factor for the PM to take into consideration
True. I am not suggesting any other current politician would have done better than Trudeau. I did not hear better ideas discussed publicly (and why would I?). But I think it was perhaps a small political error not to be more visible. Talking to the protestors was probably a worse idea. I am not sure any Canadian politician comes out of this particularly well. I would still vote for Trudeau were an election held tomorrow.
The banking restrictions are hard to interpret. In practice I think it means more and much quicker regulation of alternative currencies. I think Fintrac rules might need tightening anyway, including more professions. However, this is far from the little expertise I have. It is easy to judge politicians and the police from an armchair. It is not a trivial situation.
Completely agree.
the better idea has already been posted. It was to do exactly what Trudeau did. Only sooner. Which is what the public expected.
It’s not realistic to say it was this mystically difficult problem to work out. It had public support and it didn’t involve anything controversial. Serve the truckers notice they they’re breaking the law and tow them if they refuse to move It’s the same thing any person would have been subjected to if they blocked traffic.
Why is it a factor? Your premise is one of leadership by opinion.
Because our system of government is one of collective executive. There is no doubt that the PM is the dominant person in Cabinet, but it is the Cabinet as a whole which makes the decision. The PM does not have the statutory authority to invoke the Emergencies Act all by himself. It has to be the recommendation of Cabient as a whole.
A determined PM can go against the wishes of the consensus of Cabinet - but if the PM makes a habit of going against the consensus, there can be Cabinet defections. Unlike in the US system, each Cabinet minister has political authority independent of the PM, since they’ve been elected to the Commons, so even if they leave Cabinet, they still ahve a vote in the Commons.
Suppose a third of the Cabinet was saying that they didn’t think it was time to use the Emergenices Act, and the PM decided to go ahead anyway. If some of those Cabinet ministers felt strongly enough on the issue, they might quit Cabinet and sit on the backbenches, ready to vote against the proposal to use the Emergencies Act. And since the government is a minority government, the PM can’t afford to have members of his own party voting against the use of the Emergencies Act.
That’s all just a hypothetical discussion, to illustrate how the Cabinet works in our system. But it’s not entirely hypothetical - two of the LIberal MPs have publicly come out against the current Covid measures. How many more might there be, lurking in the government caucus? That’s the sort of thing that keeps a government whip lying awake at night, counting MPs instead of sheep.
You make it sound like a Simpsons episode.
They were elected to lead.
.
By the time they voted down the Emergencies Act the roads would have been cleared and they’d look like idiots.
Yes, they were elected to lead. But if a significant minority in Cabinet interprets their leadership goal as not invoking the Emergencies Act, and relying on the normal law enforcement process, that too can be seen as leadership.
Some of the party leaders who voted for the invocation of the War Measures Act, like Stanfield, in later days said they regretted their vote and respected the leaders of the NDP who voted against it.