Grounded -The PM’s plane is transformed into a metaphor

PAUL WELLS

Posted with permission from Paul Wells Substack

I stopped by the Conservative Convention on Thursday night, just briefly. The mood (which I ascertained by asking several Conservative acquaintances “What’s the mood?”) was cautiously optimistic. The Conservatives I met — a random sample, skewed older because I haven’t met a new generation of Conservative activists — sounded pleased with Pierre Poilievre’s summer. But they also figure they’re getting a second look because voters have given the Liberals a hundred looks and they always see the same thing.

Later, word came from India that Justin Trudeau’s airplane had malfunctioned, stranding him, one hopes only briefly. It’s always a drag when a politician’s vehicle turns into a metaphor so obvious it begs to go right into the headline. As for the cause of the breakdown, I’m no mechanic, but I’m gonna bet $20 on “The gods decided to smite Trudeau for hubris.” Here’s what the PM tweeted or xeeted before things started falling off his ride home:

One can imagine the other world leaders’ glee whenever this guy shows up. “Oh, it’s Justin Trudeau, here to push for greater ambition!” Shall we peer into their briefing binders? Let’s look at Canada’s performance on every single issue Trudeau mentions, in order.

Paul Wells is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

Click here for Paul Wells substack

On climate change, Canada ranks 58th of 63 jurisdictions in the global Climate Change Performance Index. The country page for Canada uses the words “very low” three times in the first two sentences.

On gender equality, the World Economic Forum (!) ranks Canada 30th behind a bunch of other G-20 members.

On global health, this article in Britain’s BMJ journal calls Canada “a high income country that frames itself as a global health leader yet became one of the most prominent hoarders of the limited global covid-19 vaccine supply.”

On inclusive growth, the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development has a composite indicator called the Inclusive Growth Index. Canada’s value is 64.1, just behind the United States (!) and Australia, further behind most of Europe, stomped by Norway at 76.9%.

On support for Ukraine, the German Kiel Institute think tank ranks Canadafifth in the world, and third as a share of GDP, for financial support; and 8th in the world, or 21st as a share of GDP, for military support.

Almost all of these results are easy enough to understand. A small number are quite honourable. But none reads to me as any kind of license to wander around, administering lessons to other countries. I just finished reading John Williams’ luminous 1965 novel about university life, Stoner. A minor character in the book mocks the lectures and his fellow students, and eventually stands unmasked as a poser who hasn’t done even the basic reading in his discipline. I found the character strangely familiar. You’d think that after nearly a decade in power, after the fiascos of the UN Security Council bid, the first India trip, the collegiate attempt to impress a schoolgirl with fake trees, the prime minister would have figured out that fewer and fewer people, at home or abroad, are persuaded by his talk.

But this is part of the Liberals’ problem, isn’t it. They still think their moves work. They keep announcing stuff — Digital adoption program! Growth fund! Investment tax credits! Indo-Pacific strategy! Special rapporteur! — and telling themselves Canadians would miss this stuff if it went away. Whereas it’s closer to the truth to say we can’t miss it because its effect was imperceptible when it showed up.

In a moment I’ve mentioned before because it fascinates me, the Liberals called their play a year ago, as soon as they knew they’d be facing Pierre Poilievre. “We are going to see two competing visions,” Randy Boissonault said in reply to Poilievre’s first Question Period question as the Conservative leader. The events of the parliamentary year would spontaneously construct a massive contrast ad. It was the oldest play in the book, first articulated by Pierre Trudeau’s staff 50 years ago: Don’t compare me to the almighty, compare me to the alternative. It doesn’t work as well if people decide they prefer the alternative. It really doesn’t work if the team running the play think it means, “We’re the almighty.”

There may yet be years — two, anyway — before we get to vote in a general election. Obviously much can change. I’ve made it clear, just about every time I’ve written about specific Poilievre policies, that I’ve seen no reason to be optimistic that a change of government would guarantee any improvement in public administration. But what we’ve seen elsewhere — most spectacularly in provincial elections in Quebec and Ontario in 2018 — is that sometimes voters stop caring about that question. They have a simpler question: After a decade in power, does the government in place even notice large, obvious things?

I see the Liberal caucus will be in London, ON this week. Here’s a chance for them to practice noticing large, obvious things. MPs would do well to walk around the city’s downtown core after dark, east of Richmond St., between Dundas and York. If they travel in small groups they’ll probably be safe.

While they witness what a Canadian city looks like in 2023, they might remind themselves that their unofficial 2015 election slogan was “Better Is Always Possible.” And ask themselves how much trouble they’ll be in if voters still believe it.

Lately when I write about the Liberals I upset my Liberal subscribers and when I write about Conservatives I upset my Conservative subscribers. I know it can feel like shtick, but it reflects my conviction that the partisan joust, and the genuine feelings that underpin it, are easier to address than the wicked problems of a chaotic time. And therefore way too tempting to an entire generation of political leadership.

For the Liberals, the challenge has been obvious since 2019: Does Justin Trudeau learn? In 2015 he ran as a disruptor, a guy who had noticed large, obvious things — interest rates were low! Small deficits were more manageable than they had been in years ! — and was willing to be cheeky in ignoring the other parties’ orthodoxies. Stephen Harper and Tom Mulcair were reduced to sputtering outrage that the new kid was making so many cheeky promises on fighter procurement (whoops), electoral reform (never mind), admitting Syrian refugees, legalizing cannabis, and more.

Since about 2017, inevitably, the Trudeau government has undergone a transition that’s common when disruptors become incumbents. He is increasingly forced to defend the state of things, rather than announcing he’s come to change it. He’s changed positions from forward to goal. All his opponents need to do is notice the big, obvious things he seems unable to see. The biggest: It’s become punishingly difficult for too many Canadians to put a roof over their head.

The old Trudeau would have done big, surprising things to show he could see such a thing. The Trudeau who ejected every senator from the Liberal caucus and broke a decade’s taboo against deficit spending would shut down the failed Canada Infrastructure Bank this week and put the savings into a national crisis housing fund. Or, I don’t know, some damned thing.

But of course, the surprising Trudeau of 2015 hadn’t been prime minister yet, had he? This hints at a question a few Liberals are starting to ask themselves. Does he have any juice left in him for more than pieties? He might still have some fight in him, but does he still have the job in him?

He’s already been in the job for longer than Pearson and Diefenbaker were. His indispensable right hand has been chief of staff longer than anyone who ever held the job. They have, for years, already been noticeably eager to administer lessons to others. Would they view a Liberal election defeat as their failure — or ours?

Would a prime minister who views a G-20 summit as a learning opportunity for every country except Canada view an election defeat as anything but further proof that Canada never really deserved him anyway?

This article is from Paul Wells substack.

For the full experience, click to subscribe to Paul Wells.

Click here to support the work of Paul Wells by subscribing to substack

Related Topics:#Grounded #JustinTrudeau #PaulWells feature

Up Next

From mass graves to mass hysteria

Don't Miss

Climate Fears and Political Smoke Screens

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Or $50 Oil — Trump Can’t Have Both

2025 Federal Election / 13 hours ago

Inside the Convoy Verdict with Trish Wood

Carbon Tax / 14 hours ago

The book the carbon taxers don’t want you to read

Daily Caller

‘Drill, Baby, Drill’ Or $50 Oil — Trump Can’t Have Both

Published on April 5, 2025

Todayville

From the Daily Caller News Foundation

By David Blackmon

President Donald Trump has often made clear his goal of cutting prices for energy as part of his overall agenda to break the back of chronic inflation left behind by the Biden presidency. When talking about this goal, the president has placed special emphasis on lowering the price of crude oil, given its integral relationship to gas prices at the pump and transportation-related costs which go into the price of food, clothing and other consumer goods.

“A very big thing that I’m very happy with is oil is down,” Trump said in remarks in the Oval Office on Wednesday. “We’re getting that down. When energy comes down, prices are going to be coming down with it. So, in a very short period of time, we’ve done a very good job.”

White House advisor Peter Navarro has been quoted by The New York Times and other media outlets as saying that an average oil price of $50 per barrel would help tame inflation and set the stage for a return to a healthier economy. If that is indeed the goal, this week’s confluence of events, featuring a bigger-than-expected increase in oil production quotas from the OPEC+ oil cartel preceded less than 24 hours earlier by the president’s announced reciprocal tariffs on a wide array of countries went a long way to doing the trick.

Just prior to Trump’s tariff announcement Wednesday afternoon, the price for West Texas Intermediate crude stood at $70/bbl. Less than 48 hours later, the price had fallen below $61, a drop of about 15%. It was the largest 2-day decline in crude prices since 2021. How much of the price decrease is due to the tariffs as opposed to the OPEC+ agreement to pour another 137,000 barrels per day onto the international market is hard to know, but there is no doubt both actions had an impact.

As I’ve noted previously, this action to force lower prices for oil and natural gas lies directly at odds with the concurrent Trump “drill, baby, drill” objective which he sees as a key part of his American Energy Dominance agenda. The White House gave a nod to the oil refining segment in the Wednesday tariff announcement by exempting energy imports, another action at least in part aimed at lowering prices for gasoline and diesel fuel.

But that nod to the downstream segment does little for upstream companies who have seen supply chain muck-ups and Biden-era inflation raise break-even prices above Friday’s levels. The Q1 2025 Energy Survey Report published March 26 by the Dallas Federal Reserve estimates that drillers in the Permian Basin require a $61 oil price just to break even on drilling new shale wells. The needed breakeven price rises higher in other, less prolific basins. CNN quoted independent oil analyst Andy Lipow as saying that many upstream companies require prices closer to Monday’s $71/bbl level for new shale wells. It almost goes without saying that operators will have little incentive to “drill, baby, drill” if they stand to lose money doing it.

In an interview with Fox Business host Stu Varney on Tuesday, Energy Secretary Chris Wright, himself a former oil industry executive, said, “If your state has expensive energy, it’s because of choices made by politicians in those states to virtue signal somehow they’re on some global mission. They’re going to solve climate change by making your utility bills more expensive and your businesses want to relocate out of the states. That’s just nonsense.” He added that Trump was pursuing energy policies based on common sense, saying, “common sense will deliver more investment in our country and lower energy prices.”

No doubt, few executives in the industry would agree that a pursuit of $50 oil prices has anything to do with common sense for their companies. If prices should drop that far and linger there for any length of time, layoffs and idled drilling rigs will become the prevailing topic of the day in oil and gas.

So, while the White House might continue touting its “drill, baby, drill” slogan for the time being, we won’t hear it echoing through the barbecue and Tex-Mex joints in Midland, Texas, for the time being.

David Blackmon is an energy writer and consultant based in Texas. He spent 40 years in the oil and gas business, where he specialized in public policy and communications.

2025 Federal Election

Inside the Convoy Verdict with Trish Wood

Published on April 5, 2025

Todayville

From Trish Wood is Critical

Peaceful convoy — violent voters. They convicted the wrong people.

TAMARA LICH, CHRIS BARBER AND THE OTHER TRUCKERS INSPIRED THIS: POLICE AND PROTESTORS HUGGING AND SINGING OH CANADA. THE TRUDEAU GOVERNMENT WAS ALREADY SMEARING THEM AS DANGEROUS.

In April of 2025, one day after the conviction of Lich and Barber for leading a protest with no violence, our politicians and media finally got what they wanted — division, and citizens absolutely hating each other. Watch these videos if you can, over and over again until it sinks in. View the one above and then the one below and decide who is harming the country.

Two middle-aged women had an “elbows up” fisticuffs yesterday near the waiting-to see-Mark-Carney line before an event. As you might figure, I was not surprised and knew violence was coming — not from a terror group and not from truckers. They pit us against each other with the full collaboration of paid-for media. We are broken, brainwashed and angry. We do not understand why our friends, neighbours and family vehemently support ideas that we know will harm the country.

They think we are monsters. And so it goes. Watch and compare to the scene above. And think about who was convicted this week.

Click image to see video

Our ideas can’t be discussed civilly and we must remain in our silos so as not to pose a threat to the elites — the way the Freedom Convoy did. This was Tamara and Chris’ mistake. They brought people together.

Liberals, and I would hazard all contemporary pols are not working to actually make our lives better. They seem to have their own agenda — even Trump whom I had some hope for.

Our lives get worse. They enrich themselves spending money overseas for wars we the people don’t want. And it seems they all walk away from “public service” with mucho brass in pocket.

The video of the fighting women shows the bread and circuses is now us. This ancient Roman idiom is defined as:

Bread and circuses” refers to pacifying people with food and entertainment to prevent them from taking action on civic duties.

During COVID-19, until January of 2022, they thought they had this modus operandi all locked-down. Canadians were compliant and some were even enjoying their marathons of garbage Netflix shows and soggy Door Dash deliveries. We were staying home, staying safe, getting fat and dependant on the government. Except the men and women who worked hard to keep the country running — like truckers. And those of us with a fully operative bullshit detector — you know, actual journalists.

There were many suicides, overdoses and other tragedies. Some of us allowed a sick parent to die alone. Our spiritual health declined and we closed off the part of our brain that safeguards our need for fellowship.

And then the Convoy happened and pulled back the curtain to reveal The Great and Mighty Oz manipulating the whole damn thing.

Yes, the Convoy’s presence in Ottawa was dangerous to the elites but not for the reasons they say. Of course it was disruptive for the citizens. Isn’t that what protests are supposed to be? But many forget that they were indirectly saving lives. I know it because people have told me.

The reason the Convoy had to be dramatically taken down and then punished for three years is because they reminded us – that we could push back and we were not alone. But when tyranny comes, united opposition must be crushed.

In the courtroom on Thursday, Justice Perkins-McVey went out of her way to speak highly of Tamara’s non-stop admonitions to the convoy that they stay peaceful, cooperate with police and put love at the top of their agenda. It was in almost every communication Tamara made to a big, burly group of mostly men who listened and then, even during the police violence were nearly Gandhi-like in their resistance. You can see it in the videos.

John Lennon would have been proud and in fact Imagine was played for the protestors who at one point sang along. But according to Judge Perkins-McVey, Lich’s commitment to keeping the peace will work only as mitigation during sentencing in a couple of weeks. She was found guilty of mischief in a definition so broad it includes everyone no matter what they actually did. I still can’t believe it.

The other revelation, I’m being sarcastic here, is that Chris Barber swears when he is talking to other truckers. I was uneasy that Perkins-McVey read out word-for-word an expletive-filled rant by an exhausted and frustrated Barber in which she herself repeated his words in the courtroom, F-bomb for F-bomb, making him sound like a crude, aggressive person. Which he is not. I could see he was embarrassed as his words were never meant for consumption in a setting like that.

It wasn’t necessary and to me, it felt like a swerve to appease the Crown. I have never heard Chris speak that way in front of civilians, even myself and I have been known to F-bomb in front of him on occasion – a kind of tacit permission that he has never accepted. In the heart of Ottawa, a city beset by gentility, it became clear in Courtroom Five that the subtext might be interpreted as — the crudeness of these working class protestors was an assault on the city’s good name and manners.

For all they did in Ottawa and for the country, Barber was reduced in that courtroom to an angry man who couldn’t control his potty-mouth. Talk about prejudicial. Maybe she was giving the defence a gift for the appeal. I hated it on a visceral level. This was not the kindly, thoughtful judge I had been observing through the course of the trial. How could she not know the affect she was having? Perhaps she did.

Ready for more?