The Academy Awards are over but it would appear there are still plenty of acting awards left to be won. Here are some thoughts on a few nominations and awards.
Nominees for best performance in role of a leader addressing a scandal:
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau for "I did not direct the attorney general."
Andrew Scheer for his hypocritical incredulity over "alleged direct involvement in a sustained effort to influence SNC-Lavalin's criminal prosecution."
Jody Wilson-Raybould for "I will not be commenting."
And the winner is... Trudeau.
He has allowed a minor scandal to flare up into a newsworthy event. Somehow he and his office have managed to mishandle the whole situation from day one.
Did he talk to the then minister of justice about the SNC-Lavalin case? Quite likely. Indeed, he is on record as saying he told Wilson-Raybould the decision was hers and hers alone to make.
Is this out-of-the-ordinary behaviour on the part of the prime minister? Probably not. There are 9,000 jobs within the company which are at stake, many in Quebec. The impact of a guilty verdict would see the company banned from government contracts for 10 years. As they are already banned internationally by the World Bank, shutting the company out of the Canadian market would likely lead to its complete collapse.
Going into an election year, the government or the Prime Minister's Office likely believed the failure of SNC-Lavalin would hurt their chances in Quebec. Further, it could be used as politic fodder indicating everything is not rosy in the Canadian economy.
After all, SNC-Lavalin is a major player.
Given the context, it makes sense the powers-that-be felt some form of intervention was probably a good idea and the prime minister or someone in his office felt a conversation with the minister was appropriate. Not really that unusual. I am not saying this is the way things should be - just this is the way things are.
The whole scenario gets complicated with the removal of Wilson-Raybould from her position as the minister of justice. Her response to the perceived demotion was terse and perfunctory. It left open the possibility there was more than meets the eye with the reorganization.
Over the past couple of weeks, we have heard more and more about the case. It would appear some form of pressure was applied.
However, it is not the application of pressure which has turned this into a scandal but rather the mishandling of the issue from day one.
With a more open response, it likely would have blown over.
The prime minister should have learned the lesson most politicians need to know - if you are digging yourself into a hole, throw away the shovel.
Instead, this scandal will likely play out over and over during the seven-month run-up to the next federal election. It might even impact the outcome of the vote.
In the meantime, the nominees for best performance in a supporting role during a scandal:
Wilson-Raybould for "I will not be commenting."
Gerald Butts for "I categorically deny the accusation that I or anyone else in (the Prime Minister's) office pressured Wilson-Raybould."
Conservative MP Michelle Rempel for tweeting "It's now officially PMO said he (can't talk). Lots to dig up and unpack. Meanwhile, Canada needs a pipeline, is in the middle of major foreign policy issues, etc. What a disaster."
Although it is a close thing, the winner is... Butts.
He resigned his position as principal secretary in the Prime Minister's Office over the whole affair. A longtime friend and advisor to the prime minister, he was also a key advisor in developing the Liberal 2015 election strategy. Along with chief of staff Katie Telford, he was considered to be Trudeau's top advisor.
Given his position, his resignation is perplexing. Even more so because of the way Butts defended his decision: "Any accusation that I or the staff put pressure on the attorney general is simply not true. Canadians are rightly proud of their public institutions. They should be, because they work. But the fact is that this accusation exists. It cannot and should not take one moment away from the vital work the prime minister and his office is doing for all Canadians. My reputation is my responsibility and that is for me to defend. It is in the best interests of the office and its important work for me to step away."
Translation: I have done nothing wrong but I am falling on my sword anyway.
Which raises all sorts of questions about why he would choose to resign and why at this moment? If the work is vital wouldn't his absence cause problems?
There is a lot at stake here and the performances are likely to continue for some time.
