Trudeau says Wilson-Raybould, Philpott no longer Liberal caucus members
Read this article for free:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
To continue reading, please subscribe:
Monthly Digital Subscription
$19 $0 for the first 4 weeks*
- Enjoy unlimited reading on winnipegfreepress.com
- Read the E-Edition, our digital replica newspaper
- Access News Break, our award-winning app
- Play interactive puzzles
*No charge for four weeks then billed as $19 plus GST every four weeks. Offer only available to new and qualified returning subscribers. Cancel any time.
Read unlimited articles for free today:
or
Already have an account? Log in here »
Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 01/04/2019 (2096 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.
OTTAWA – Liberals are hoping to cauterize the SNC-Lavalin affair with the expulsions of Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott from the governing party’s fold.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced late Tuesday at a hastily called caucus meeting that he had informed the two former cabinet ministers he was kicking them out of the Liberal caucus and will not allow them to run as Liberal candidates in this fall’s election.
“The trust that previously existed between these two individuals and our team has been broken,” he told Liberal MPs.
“Whether it’s taping conversations without consent or repeatedly expressing a lack of confidence in our government and in me personally as leader, it’s become clear that Ms. Wilson-Raybould and Dr. Philpott can no longer remain part of our Liberal team.”
The SNC-Lavalin affair has engulfed the government for nearly two months and cost Trudeau his lead in public opinion polls; his most trusted adviser, Gerald Butts; and the country’s top public servant, Michael Wernick — in addition to the two former ministers who had symbolized his commitment to gender equality and reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples.
Liberals are now hoping the worst is over and they can finally move on to the agenda they hope will get them re-elected.
Trudeau said the Liberals won the 2015 election “because we stood together as a team,” whereas “the old Liberal party was notorious for infighting.”
“Civil wars within parties are incredibly damaging because they signal to Canadians that we care more about ourselves than about them. That’s why I made the difficult decision to remove Ms. Wilson-Raybould and Dr. Philpott from the Liberal caucus.”
Trudeau’s announcement followed a day of meetings with the chairs of the various Liberal regional caucuses and discussions with MPs. The party’s largest group, the Ontario caucus, met for 90 minutes earlier in the day to discuss the fates of the two former ministers.
Philpott, who represents a Toronto-area riding, showed up for that meeting but left after less than 10 minutes.
“I am angry, hurt, and frustrated because I feel and believe I was upholding the values that we all committed to. In giving the advice I did, and taking the steps I did, I was trying to help protect the prime minister and the government from a horrible mess.”–Jody Wilson-Raybould
Jody Wilson-Raybould’s letter to the Liberal caucus
OTTAWA – As federal Liberal MPs prepared to debate whether former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould and former health minister Jane Philpott should stay in their caucus, Wilson-Raybould wrote to them to explain her actions in the SNC-Lavalin affair and why she still wants to be a Liberal MP:
I am writing to all of you, members of the Liberal Caucus, to share some of my thoughts and observations about recent events and what they mean for us as a Party. I hope they are helpful to you…
OTTAWA – As federal Liberal MPs prepared to debate whether former attorney general Jody Wilson-Raybould and former health minister Jane Philpott should stay in their caucus, Wilson-Raybould wrote to them to explain her actions in the SNC-Lavalin affair and why she still wants to be a Liberal MP:
I am writing to all of you, members of the Liberal Caucus, to share some of my thoughts and observations about recent events and what they mean for us as a Party. I hope they are helpful to you.
There were many reasons I ran for the Liberal Party of Canada in 2015, including commitments on addressing climate change, the challenges of our criminal justice system, Indigenous reconciliation, and building an economy that supported all Canadians. For me, and I believe for our Party, all of these progressive policy commitments had underlying them a firm belief in the need for a transformation in our political culture, and the pursuit of a more responsive, representative, and less partisan approach to the governing of the country.
This commitment to a changed politics was not just about specific policies, such as proportional representation, but about every aspect of how we organize ourselves to govern, and the responsibilities that each of us carry. We committed to break old and cynical patterns of centralizing power in the hands of a few unelected staffers, the marginalization of hundreds of Members of Parliament with expertise and insights to offer, and the practice of governing in the shadows, out of sight of Canadians. I believed we were going to uphold the highest standards that support the public interest, and not simply make choices to create partisan advantage.
As part of committing to this transformative and progressive path, we were also committing to a government and caucus that represented all Canadians. Diverse and inclusive, our Caucus was to be a microcosm of Canada — not just geographically, but demographically. Indeed, I believe we understood that to build a stronger Canada, we needed to reflect that Canada. This includes the challenges, opportunities, tensions, and insights that arise when seeking to forge a common path and understanding in a context of real diversity and difference. This is a vision that reflects the future. Young people identify in dozens of different ways before they identify with a political party — and they privilege diversity of experience, background, and belief and upholding the experiences of all, over simply following the paths laid out with those who claim to hold power.
I still believe all of these things as I know all of you do, too. I believe it is what the country needs, and I believe our collective future well-being as a country demands action on such a vision. And indeed, one of the main reasons I had no hesitation to stand up for what I believed to be right and necessary for the country since September 2018 regarding SNC-Lavalin was because of my belief in that vision.
In 2015, I believed the Liberal Party held such a vision, and I still believe the Liberals can and must advance such a vision. I do believe fundamentally that the Prime Minister also still shares this vision.
Now I know many of you are angry, hurt, and frustrated. And frankly so am I, and I can only speak for myself. I am angry, hurt, and frustrated because I feel and believe I was upholding the values that we all committed to. In giving the advice I did, and taking the steps I did, I was trying to help protect the Prime Minister and the government from a horrible mess. I am not the one who tried to interfere in sensitive proceedings, I am not the one who made it public, and I am not the one who publicly denied what happened. But I am not going to go over all of the details here again. Enough has been said.
Growing up as an Indigenous person in this country I learned long ago the lesson that people believing what they wish about you does not, and cannot ever, make it the truth — rather than letting authority be the truth, let the truth be the authority. Indeed, if I had succumbed to interpreting the beliefs of others to be the truth, I never would have been able to push forward in the face of the racism and misogyny that far too many Indigenous women, and others, still experience every day.
Ultimately the choice that is before you is about what kind of party you want to be a part of, what values it will uphold, the vision that animates it, and indeed the type of people it will attract and make it up.
If indeed our caucus is to be a microcosm of the country it is about whether we are a caucus of inclusion or exclusion; of dialogue and searching for understanding or shutting out challenging views and perspectives; and ultimately of the old ways of doing business, or new ones that look to the future.
As I have stated recently to the constituents of Vancouver Granville, it has been my great privilege to serve as their Member of Parliament over the past three and a half years and to continue to have their confidence. With the support, guidance, and participation of Canadians our government has accomplished much — and, of course, there is important work yet to be done. My nomination has been confirmed and it is my intention to stand for re-election as the Liberal candidate for the 2019 federal election and to continue with this work.
Respectfully,
Hon. Jody Wilson-Raybould, P.C., Q.C., M.P.
Member of Parliament for Vancouver Granville
Wilson-Raybould, meanwhile, sent a letter to all Liberal MPs making an 11th-hour pitch for staying in caucus but making no apologies for going public with her contention that she was improperly pressured last fall to stop the criminal prosecution of Montreal engineering giant SNC-Lavalin.
The company faces criminal charges over allegedly corrupt dealings in Libya. Wilson-Raybould had the authority as attorney general to divert the proceedings with a remediation agreement, a sort of plea-bargain that could spare the company the worst consequences of a conviction; that authority is new in Canadian law, it has never been used, and Wilson-Raybould has said she saw no reason to overrule a decision by the director of public prosecutions against seeking such an agreement.
“There was a tone of the letter that had an exclusivity to it, that she had a monopoly on truth and that there was not a conversation to be had,” said Toronto MP Rob Oliphant. “It was a strong first-person letter and politics is not about first person … it’s about ‘we,’ not about ‘I.’ “
National caucus chair Francis Scarpaleggia, from Quebec, said there was “an overwhelming consensus” that the two had to go.
Not all Liberals were happy with the decision. Toronto MP Nathaniel Erskine-Smith and New Brunswick MP Wayne Long, who had hoped for a way to accommodate the former ministers, said they were disappointed but respected the consensus view of caucus and the prime minister’s decision.
In a Facebook post, Philpott said her decision to resign from cabinet in early March, citing a lack of confidence in the government’s handling of the SNC-Lavalin file, was not about “a lack of loyalty.” Rather, she insisted both she and Wilson-Raybould were attempting to “protect” Trudeau from the consequences of “attempts to interfere with prosecutorial independence.”
Philpott said she will continue to serve her constituents in Markham-Stouffville “for the remainder of this term” — which suggests she does not intend to run for re-election as an independent or candidate for another party.
Wilson-Raybould tweeted that she will take time to reflect on her next steps.
“What I can say is that I hold my head high & that I can look myself in the mirror knowing I did what I was required to do and what needed to be done based on principles & values that must always transcend party. I have no regrets. I spoke the truth as I will continue to do,” she said.
Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer wasted no time issuing what amounted to an invitation to the two former ministers and their supporters to join his party.
“If you believe that speaking truth to power should be rewarded, not punished, there is a place for you in the Conservative Party of Canada,” he said in a statement. “The message (the Liberals) have sent today is clear: If you tell the truth, there is no room for you in the Liberal Party of Canada.”
“Growing up as an Indigenous person in this country I learned long ago the lesson that people believing what they wish about you does not, and cannot ever, make it the truth — rather than letting authority be the truth, let the truth be the authority.”–Jody Wilson-Raybould
Trudeau said he’d tried to be patient and understanding but nothing would satisfy the two ex-ministers.
“We’ve taken every effort to address their concerns, and ultimately, if they can’t honestly say that they have confidence in this team … then they cannot be part of this team,” Trudeau said. “Our political opponents win when Liberals are divided. We can’t afford to make that mistake — Canadians are counting on us.”
He concluded his speech with a campaign-style recitation of his government’s accomplishments, including the assertion that: “We have always, always fought to create and protect jobs. We will never apologize for doing so.”
Trudeau and his staff have maintained throughout the SNC-Lavalin affair that they never improperly pressured Wilson-Raybould; they only wanted to ensure she had considered every lawful tool to avoid a criminal conviction that could cripple the company and potentially put thousands of employees out of work.
Wilson-Raybould maintains she was moved out of the justice portfolio in a mid-January cabinet shuffle as punishment for refusing to comply.
Last week, she released a surreptitiously recorded audio of a phone conversation with Privy Council clerk Wernick, the country’s top bureaucrat, as part of additional evidence to bolster her claim of improper pressure. But that too seemed to backfire, galvanizing Liberal MPs in the belief that she could no longer be trusted.
“If a politician secretly records a conversation with anyone, it’s wrong,” Trudeau said in explaining Wilson-Raybould’s expulsion. “When that politician is a cabinet minister secretly recording a public servant, it’s wrong. And when that cabinet minister is the attorney general of Canada, secretly recording the clerk of the Privy Council, it’s unconscionable.”
In the call, Wernick repeatedly asked Wilson-Raybould why she was not using all the tools at her disposal on the SNC-Lavalin case. She pushed back, saying she would not override the decision of the director of public prosecutions.
Wernick told her Trudeau was “quite determined” on the matter and would likely “find a way to get it done one way or another.”
NDP MP Jenny Kwan said Trudeau’s move Tuesday was an extension of that attitude — he’d decided he was going to get his way and threw two unco-operative women under the bus, she said.
In her appeal to her caucusmates, Wilson-Raybould did not mention the secret recording. She argued that she rejected the prime minister’s pressure on SNC-Lavalin because she was standing up for Liberal values.
“I know many of you are angry, hurt, and frustrated. And frankly so am I, and I can only speak for myself,” Wilson-Raybould wrote. “I am angry, hurt, and frustrated because I feel and believe I was upholding the values that we all committed to. In giving the advice I did, and taking the steps I did, I was trying to help protect the prime minister and the government from a horrible mess.
“I am not the one who tried to interfere in sensitive proceedings, I am not the one who made it public, and I am not the one who publicly denied what happened. But I am not going to go over all of the details here again. Enough has been said.”
Liberal MPs dismissed the letter as “too little, too late,” as Toronto MP Judy Sgro put it.
Oliphant acknowledged that ejecting two prominent former cabinet ministers — both women, one a prominent Indigenous leader before she ran for Parliament — will mean the party has to work on public perceptions of its commitments to equality and reconciliation.
Trudeau will have to begin that immediately. His schedule Wednesday includes a speech before Daughters of the Vote, which takes 338 young women to Ottawa to promote their involvement in politics. It’s followed by an appearance at a meeting of a committee of leaders working on Inuit-Crown relations.
Related Articles
Butts, JWR texts document escalating dispute Judge mulls whether SNC-Lavalin to face trial
