By Golbon Moltaji
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s reaction to a protest on Oct. 25 would seem to contradict remarks he made in July about unions as essential “in the fight for fair wages.” A couple of dozen young workers at the Canadian Labour Congress youth conference in Ottawa hoped that by physically turning their backs to Trudeau, they would draw some attention to the root causes of their apathy; the ongoing issues of unemployment, and unresponsive governments that run on unfulfilled promises of “economic prosperity”. In turn, they illuminated the contrary messages that the Liberal government continues to send both by rhetoric and by gesture.
Instead of prompting a positive response from the Prime Minister, Trudeau actually turned against them and their choice of action.
“It’s a little bit frustrating,” he said aloud, “…for me to come in, sit down, look forward to hearing from you, talking with you, and seeing a room full of people who are standing in a way that shows they’re not listening… and I think it reflects poorly on everyone who does want to listen and engage.”
There is always a certain amount of credit awarded to the highest levels of authority given that they just might be able to make good on the promises that awarded them that power, and it is easy to predict how Trudeau’s maneuver may come to define the relationship between state and union.
Interestingly, Global News’ chief political correspondent Tom Clark defended Trudeau’s handling of the situation, claiming that Stephen Harper would not have even attended such an event or Jean Chrétien would have had a much more physical reaction to such confrontation!
However, this distracts us from the real issue here, namely that Trudeau was elected on the good faith that he is the person that this country needs during this period of reconciliation, climate crisis and economic uncertainty.
However, on Oct. 25, the Prime Minister demonstrated a debilitated approach to United Steel Workers’ symbolic demonstration. A simple review of Trudeau’s reaction to the protesters reveals that he not only appeared defensive towards what is being perceived as his failure to fulfill promises to these workers, he is guilty of exactly the same things that these disappointed young workers were accused of: showing no signs of listening to, sympathy for or identification with the opposite party.
Even when one of the members of the union raised a question about the Phoenix pay system, Trudeau responded in a generic administrative tone and a set of jargon, and never really explained “when the pay was going to come in.”
This, reflected pretty well on another point from the same individual who accused the Liberals of sticking with the conservative mandate; this government assumes that workers have nothing but weak ties to administrative infrastructure, and that administration can simply extend its idleness through some invisible set of activities over uncertain timelines. The point is that indirect answers only work to further alienate individuals who are striving to address their demands in the most human way.
If the Prime Minister cannot peacefully accept that he has been remiss in fulfilling the very promises that earned him his seat, and in fact questions and berates a collective action taken by these workers, how hopeful can we be for the Liberals to prioritize youth and worker’s demands? How likely is it that their inability to rewrite the discourse between state and union is just another sign that Trudeau’s other golden age promises might just be too ambitious for Liberals to achieve?
This article was first published in the Leveller Vol. 9, No. 3
