Winnipeg Free Press

Winnipeg Free Press (Newspaper) - January 17, 2025, Winnipeg, Manitoba THINK TANK COMMENT EDITOR: RUSSELL WANGERSKY 204-697-7269 ● RUSSELL.WANGERSKY@WINNIPEGFREEPRESS.COM A7 FRIDAY JANUARY 17, 2025 Ideas, Issues, Insights Is Pierre Poilievre Canada’s Donald Trump? No. T HE election of an unpredictable, autocratic, conservative Donald Trump threatening to annex Canada is alarming to most Can- adians. The question for Canadians is what would hap- pen under a Conservative Pierre Poilievre admin- istration that might mimic the policies unfolding south of the border. Poilievre’s pre-election campaign has a Trump- like conspiratorial tone courting the anti-vaccine, climate-change-denial, anti-trans crowds and for good measure, anti-rich/elites. For proof of his sincerity, Poilievre tells us nei- ther he nor any of his staff will be attending the Davos annual meetings of the World Economic Forum, an organization funded by its 1,000-mem- ber multinational corporations. Like-minded politicians are invited to the annual meeting. Poilievre’s former boss — former prime minister Stephen Harper — has been a guest and speaker at the conference, preaching to the converted promoting conservative economics policy. The question remains how Poilievre will differ- entiate himself from the attendees other than as an anti-elitist election ploy. Once in office, the evidence suggests a Poil- ievre government could turn out to be cultur- ally rather benign and economically radically neoliberal, much like post-1980, pre-Trump U.S. Republican presidents. Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush used racism to court the so-called white working class while acting as pitchmen for the corporate rich who prospered with tax cuts, deregulation, free trade and anti-union labour market policies with the resulting remarkable increase in U.S. inequality. Tariffs, along with rounding up and exporting immigrants, is bad for business and would likely not be on Poilievre’s agenda. Like Reagan and Bush, Poilievre is using the culture war to attract popular support for a party whose prime interest is to defend wealth inequality, in this case in the form of a petrostate. He and his wife Ana identify as “pro-choice.” While he visits Christian funda- mentalist churches, he also shows up at mosques. He is just a conventional Canadian conservative who will introduce tax cuts for the rich, cuts to social spending, deregulation and free trade. Poilievre voted against environmental protec- tion 400 times and identifies efforts to regulate the environmental as “government controlling our lives” and an assault on “our freedom and prosperity.” The one thing his government will do is support the building of pipelines in Canada: “south, north, east, and west.” While he claims to be representing the interests of the “working class” against “elites” like “pol- iticians and bankers,” according to PressProg- ress, Poilievre — when serving as Harper’s jobs minister — pushed hard for U.S.-style anti-union “right to work” laws. Unions increase wages for themselves and others and defend the Canadian welfare system. His trade policy is free market, putting Canadian workers in competition with low-wage workers in developing countries. It is clear that he will end the Liberal/NDP tentative plan for a single-payer system for phar- maceuticals, complaining that it is inferior to the private plan that Canadians cherish. The fact is that all the sectors in the Canadian health-care system under the single payer system have been remarkably more effective at cost controls and equitable access than those still dominated by the for-profit private sector. Katrina Miller, the executive director of Ca- nadians for Tax Fairness, identifies Poilievre’s anti-tax agenda as rooted in a fundamentally false narrative. He claims government collects too many taxes, spend the money poorly and we get inflation. The truth is taxes for middle to low-income Canadi- ans are about the same rate as it was in Harper’s time. Poilievre wants to eliminate the carbon tax because of the burden it has on working families. The problem with this argument is that 80 per cent of Canadian families will get back more in rebates than they pay. Gas taxes are used to fund public infrastructure. The payroll taxes he wants to cut pay for the services that working families and seniors depend on for their quality of life. He will not follow through on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s plan to increase capital gains taxes. This kind of tax has served to enrich the top one per cent of Canadians without evidence of contributions to investment or growth. The Finan- cial Post headline from March 13, 2013 reads ‘Not much bang for the buck’: Harper’s $60-B corporate tax cuts under fire. According to the parliamenta- ry budget office, the top one per cent of Canadian households hold a quarter of all the wealth, while the bottom 40 per cent hold about one per cent. Instead of antidemocratic chaos, Canadian insti- tutions under Poilievre would be redirected away from social democracy and a government that takes responsibility for citizens economic welfare and environmental health and towards one that leaves them to their fate in the marketplace, resulting in inequality and a decline in their life chances. Like his predecessor Harper, he’s not an anti-establishment figure but one happy to serve its upper class. And like Harper, he would likely keep the socially conservative issues that might offend too many Canadians off the agenda in order to serve mammon. Robert Chernomas is a professor of economics at the University of Manitoba whose forthcoming book is Why America Didn’t Become Great Again. In search of thoughtful political leadership A FEW weeks ago, I had the privilege of attending the Aspen Ministerial Forum, an annual gather- ing of former foreign ministers held this year in Lugano, Switzerland, as an observer. To call it an awe-inspiring experience is no exaggeration — and yet, the awe I felt wasn’t driv- en by any grand revelations or groundbreaking ideas. Instead, it came from witnessing something we’ve been globally deprived of for years: the dignity of thoughtful political leadership. Each day of the forum, former foreign min- isters from diverse nations and opposing view- points convened around a rectangular table. Here, they debated complex global issues without — imagine this — resorting to name-calling, inflam- matory rhetoric, and hateful or racist remarks. The discussions ranged from the new realities of foreign policy after the American election to new propositions to strengthen democratic resilience through public education and the arts. The most profoundly moving moment, however, was to observe a former Israeli foreign minis- ter and a representative from the Palestinian Authority engage in serious debate on the Middle East conflict. Their disagreements were sharp, but the tone remained respectful and rational. It was a rare reminder of what political discourse is intended to be, substantive and civil. As I observed these exchanges, I couldn’t help but wish more Canadians could see that such constructive dialogue is still possible. Back home, as I read the news, our potentially future prime minister, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre ignored the “Team Canada” stance called for by all other parties, even continuing to perpetuate some of incoming U.S. president Donald Trump’s claims after he began threatening Canadian sov- ereignty with his online posts about us becoming the 51st state. This is the same would-be leader who continues to deny the existential threat of climate change, who engages in infantile name-calling remi- niscent of his idol to the south, refuses to read classified material so he can intentionally speak from an uninformed position in order to inflame the public, and has even pledged to be the first prime minister to use the notwithstanding clause to curtail the legal rights of Canadians protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. In contrast, the Aspen forum was a reminder of what leadership could and should be: a place where politicians prioritize facts, work together despite differences and address pressing issues with respect and decorum. Of course, disagree- ments are inevitable — that’s the nature of governance. But what we’re seeing today, both in Canada and globally, is the rise of populism and authoritarianism. Autocrats and their followers are not driven by facts or the public good. Their goals are self-serv- ing, and they manipulate anger and emotions to obtain and maintain power. Meanwhile, many vot- ers have grown so disillusioned and exhausted by the political landscape that they’ve simply tuned out. Those who remain engaged often follow their party with blind loyalty, forgetting it’s perfectly acceptable and democratic to sincerely consider all the political platforms every election cycle in order to cast a fully informed vote for the party that best represents their values. This static electorate isn’t rooted in malice or ignorance. It’s the result of a populace worn down by economic inequality, where the rich perpetu- ally become richer with lopsided tax breaks and deregulation while the rest of us struggle daily. In this enfeebled political climate, politicians often appear indifferent, failing to speak honestly or act decisively and altruistically to improve society. Moreover, you can see the effects in our body language. Where once Canadians could hold our head high with strong social policy and global leadership, we now have a prime minister who had to wait for every card to fall away from the house before leaving power, and what seems to be his inevita- ble successor, basking in self-adoration and pre- mature celebration with no clear policy stances on anything other than follow the southern leader. The result? Our once humble yet strong popula- tion has become disgruntled, bitter, and misan- thropic to foreigners just like the politicians who lead us. For these reasons, and many others, I would strongly encourage the Aspen Ministerial Forum to consider making some of its discussions public. Host them in universities or other bastions of free thought and democracy, where they can inspire current and future leaders. This is a group of experienced politicians who care about the issues, who answer questions directly, and who remind us of a time when facts, empathy, human rights, and respect were central to political discourse. In the face of the dark days ahead, Canada must reclaim its role as a diplomatic leader. Our strength has always been rooted in soft power, characterized by respect, decency, and an unwav- ering commitment to human rights. We need that Canada again. The world needs that Canada again. Stephen Axworthy has been a municipal councillor for six years and is an active social studies teacher who works in rural Manitoba. The truth about Russia’s ‘vintage tonnage’ THE name is brilliant: “vintage tonnage.” It evokes 17th-century pirate vessels flying the skull-and-crossbones, 18th-centu- ry ships-of-the-line bristling with cannons, or even 19th-century clipper ships in full sail bringing tea to England and America. The images are always romantic and often beautiful. Whereas the reality is just hundreds of giant old rust-buckets. The “vintage tonnage” is the “shadow fleet” of second-hand oil tankers that were spared from the ship-breaking yards in 2022 because Russia lost its export market in Europe when it invaded Ukraine. There were plenty of potential customers for cut-price Russian oil in India and China, but no pipelines to get it there. It had to go by sea. Unfortunately for Moscow, the U.S. sanc- tions meant that shipping companies that traded internationally and paid insurance on their cargoes were unwilling to risk action by the U.S. Treasury and refused to carry the Russian oil. However, the Russians need- ed tankers and they were willing to pay well over the odds. There was already a smallish shadow fleet of antiquated tankers carrying embar- goed oil from Venezuela and Iran, but the sanctions on Russian oil exports expanded that fleet at least fourfold. Anybody with a tanker that could still float, however decrep- it and unsafe, could make a pile of money by putting it at Moscow’s disposal. You’ll have to reflag it with some country that doesn’t care much about its reputation: current favourites are Gabon, the Cook Islands and Laos (which doesn’t even have a coastline). Hire a crew from various low- wage countries, and don’t waste money on maintenance or insurance. And after a few years you’ll have made your pile. Scrap your ships or sell them on to some other chancer, and you’re home and dry. You probably should not visit the United States, because the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control has a long memory — but maybe all will be forgiven once Don- ald Trump is in the White House again. Is Trump really going to maintain the U.S. sanctions on Russian oil sales when he admires dictators like Russia’s Vladimir Pu- tin? Isn’t Trump the man who said he could settle the war between Russia and Ukraine in one day? Doesn’t that imply he’s just going to force the Ukrainians to accept Russia’s peace terms? Who knows? It’s a fair bet that Trump himself doesn’t know what he will do. And some of what the Biden administration has been doing in its final week goes well beyond just sowing poi- son pills to limit the future damage Trump will do. At the last possible minute, true to form, the outgoing administration has finally done what it should have done a couple of years ago. It extended sanctions to the biggest Russian oil and gas companies, Gazprom Neft and Surgutneftegas, as well as 183 more named vessels that carry oil as part of Russia’s so-called shadow fleet of tankers. At least 65 of them immediately dropped anchor, no longer able to deliver their oil to customers (including China) that are unwilling to breach the sanctions against specific named ships. Many more will doubt- less follow once they have reached a safe anchorage. It will have a large and imme- diate effect on Russia’s cash flow, which is already under serious strain. This is giving Trump considerable extra leverage against Russia if he wants to use it. Why would he throw it away by immediately ending the sanctions and putting the Russian economy on the road to recovery? Trump’s vice-president (still Vance, not Musk) may say he “doesn’t really care what happens to Ukraine one way or the other,” but the man himself hates looking like a “loser” above all else. Even if the Russians have something on him — remember that two-hour one-on-one meeting with Putin in 2018 with only transla- tors present, from which Trump emerged looking like a whipped dog — Trump needs an imposed settlement on Ukraine not to look like an unconditional surrender. Whatever happens with Trump, Putin and Ukraine won’t happen overnight. It probably won’t be pretty, but there will almost cer- tainly be real negotiations about the terms before any ceasefire. (An actual peace deal seems out of the question.) Trump will need leverage, and the Biden administration is actually giving him some. Gwynne Dyer’s new book is Intervention Earth: Life-Saving Ideas from the World’s Climate Engineers. NATHAN DENETTE / THE CANADIAN PRESS FILES Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s pre-election campaign has a Trump-like conspiratorial tone, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’ll govern the same way as Trump. ROBERT CHERNOMAS GWYNNE DYER STEPHEN AXWORTHY ;