Jagmeet Singh, you need an issue voters can rally behind and I have just the thing
By ripping up his support agreement, Singh solved his communications problem. But he still needs a clarion call if voters are going to take notice.
Don’t get excited about two Toronto Star columns in the same week; it’s just that NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh’s decision to “tear up” his Confidence and Supply Agreement with the Liberal government was worthy of note, and — as every former Parliament Hill staffer knows — political advice can get stale fast. Holding the balance of power didn’t produce meaningful electoral gains for the NDP in either 1974 nor 1980, but Singh can be forgiven for hoping that his own version of Layton’s famous 2011 “Orange Wave” is just around the corner.
If you’re looking for some real analysis, one of the better pieces was by Matt Gurney of The Line:
And though it may sound snarky, I mean it with total sincerity. I am so, so happy for Jagmeet Singh. Since the deal was announced, he’s had to keep Trudeau in office while also acting like he was as disgusted with the PM as the typical Canadian voter seems to be. It was, truly, cringe-inducing, a real-life manifestation of the first half of the Hot Dog Car sketch (the back half gets weird).
I wasn’t kidding when I said it was painful to watch. And it wasn’t just me who noticed — a few podcasts ago, Jen and I had a laugh at Singh getting hit by Twitter’s Community Notes fact-checking service. After one of his regular tweets attacking Trudeau, a note was added to it, reminding readers that Singh was officially, as per a signed agreement, responsible for keeping Trudeau in power. It was laugh out loud funny, and, alas for the NDP leader, we were very much laughing at him, not with him.
That’s finished now. His nightmare is over. He can stop looking so goddamn ridiculous every day now. The deal is dead.
In her own post, Jen Gerson hit the nail on the head when she observed that: “I'm starting to consider the possibility that Jagmeet Singh is bad at politics.” That Mr. Singh would succumb so quickly to Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s not-so-gentle teasing might be a sign that Mr. Singh’s not completely tone deaf, no one seems to be trying to help the poor guy break-out of his political doldrums.
This falls to me, apparently.
If you were watching Amber Kanwar and I on BNN Bloomberg last Thursday, this idea won’t be new to you. Apologies. I’m a free market guy, and I don’t want you to confuse advice that might be useful to the NDP as being equally good for Canada’s economy.
As Matthew Slaughter, the Dean of the Tuck School of Business, told CNBC viewers last week, in relation to Nippon Steel’s bid for U.S. Steel, the globalization forces that lead to the consolidation of steel operations can be a good thing: foreign acquirors can often bring new technology, management expertise, fresh capital and additional customers.
The proposed Cleveland-Cliffs acquisition of Stelco does beg the question: what’s in Canada’s best interest? Should we care who owns these particular plants?
U.S. President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have both vowed to block the U.S. Steel takeover based on “national security” grounds. Does Canada not also have national interests (beyond free healthcare, dentalcare and $10/day day care)? Why do we protect banks and TelCos but not mining companies or steel firms (except when China is involved)? Questions for every Canadian politician and voter to consider.
As for Mr. Singh, I cannot fathom why he’s not made more of a meal out of the issue over the past two months. Lucky for him, there’s still time! Hopefully, one of my Toronto Star Ottawa Bureau colleagues will ask him the question during his next media scrum.
As this Star column is off-cycle, I’m posting the entire piece. If you want to see the rest of my collection, you can subscribe to the Star online via my special discount code: www.thestar.com/informed.
One has to give full marks to NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh for recognizing that Einstein was right when he defined “insanity” as “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.”
Having clawed his way up a few percentage points from the high teens his party polled in the 2021 election, Singh is clearly annoyed at his inability to breakout of the 20 per cent support range, as per the latest Nanos poll.
Of the three mainstream party leaders, Singh came out as the only clear winner of the 2021 election campaign. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was denied his majority, and former Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole saw both his election lead slip away as well as his chance to eventually lead his party to the ultimate victory.
The resulting minority Parliament set the table for the NDP-Liberal “confidence and supply agreement.” Deftly wielding his hold on the balance of power, Singh got Trudeau to deliver some version of a national dental care program in 2023. That was a tangible improvement over former NDP Leader Jack Layton’s track record, where his best muscle flex was to ensure that Stephen Harper’s minority government didn’t put any stimulus funding into Billy Bishop Toronto City Airport when the Conservatives were looking for “shovel-ready infrastructure projects” in the wake of the 2008-09 global financial crisis.
As his MPs faced the prospect of returning to the House of Commons later this month, Singh must have dreaded having to explain to the Parliamentary Press Gallery why he was continuing to support Trudeau despite vowing to dissolve Parliament if the Liberals sent railway employees back to work late last month.
By ripping up his support agreement, Singh solved his communications problem. But he still needs a clarion call if voters are going to take notice.
What about the pending $3.8-billion acquisition of Hamilton-based Stelco by American-listed Cleveland-Cliffs? With a local history that dates back to the 1800s, I’m surprised that Singh hasn’t made more of a meal out of this high-profile takeover.
As reported in The Star at the time of the deal’s announcement, the local United Steelworkers union president is understandably worried about job losses, and dubious about “promises we have heard before.” Despite corporate assurances when U.S. Steel acquired Stelco in 2007, hundreds of workers were laid off, production was cut, and the new owners shut down Stelco’s last blast furnace.
Those economizing moves didn’t prevent Stelco from seeking creditor protection in 2016, just the same. A private equity firm bought the operation, turned it profitable, and took it public on the Toronto Stock Exchange in 2017. Shares went on to double in value over the next few years, demonstrating Stelco’s ability to survive as an independent corporate entity.
Although the Cleveland-Cliffs’ takeover requires federal approval, market watchers don’t seem concerned about Trudeau standing in the way. I don’t blame them, either. Canadian voters have been pretty passive when it comes to most foreign takeovers.
Alcan, Falconbridge, Inco, Noranda, Seagram’s and Tim Hortons, were all once proud Canadian companies. As the world globalized, all ended up in foreign hands.
South of the border, U.S. President Joe Biden is about to announce his opposition to the $14 billion (U.S.) takeover of U.S. Steel by Japan’s Nippon Steel on “national security” grounds. Nippon Steel has promised to protect U.S. jobs and invest more than $3 billion in U.S.-based plants if the deal proceeds, but politics usually prevails. With an election less than two months away, the Democrats need to win steel-producing states such as Pennsylvania if they hope to retain The White House.
In his breakup video, Singh claimed “the Liberals are too weak, too selfish and too beholden to corporate interests to stop the Conservatives. But the NDP can. Big corporations and CEOs have had their governments. It’s the people’s time.”
As Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre chips away at the union vote, Singh’s best counter may be to try and force Trudeau to block the Stelco takeover and deliver a win for the “people” he claims to represent.
MRM
(this column is an Opinion Piece)