Liberal roads pitch a tone-deaf vote-loser

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 20/02/2024 (588 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

When the obituary for the Trudeau government is finally written, the cause of its demise should include the tone-deaf comments made last week by federal environment minister Steven Guilbeault.

Nine days ago, Guilbeault announced that his government plans to stop investing in new road infrastructure. According to the Montreal Gazette, he said “There will be no more envelopes from the federal government to enlarge the road network,” and, “We can very well achieve our goals of economic, social and human development without more enlargement of the road network.”

He added that tax dollars currently being spent on roads could be “better invested into projects that will help fight climate change and adapt to its impacts.”

He also said his government is determined to get Canadians out of their vehicles and using public transit, walking and riding their bikes more.

Two days later, Guilbeault clarified his position, saying that “maybe I should have been more specific… we don’t have funds for large projects like the ‘troisieme lien’” (a proposed highway tunnel project between Quebec City and Levis).

Perhaps sensing the political danger created by Guilbeault’s remarks, a Trudeau government official announced that same day that the government has not changed its infrastructure funding policy. That clarification did not calm the situation, however.

The reaction to Guilbeault’s remarks by various provinces and local governments, who all rely upon federal funding for major road construction projects, has been intensely negative. Ontario Premier Doug Ford told the media that Guilbeault “doesn’t care that you’re stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic. I do. We’re building roads and highways, with or without a cent from the feds.”

Alberta Premier Danielle Smith said, via her X account, that “So now our environment minister wants to cut federal funding for roads… because we should all just walk more. Does this minister understand that most Canadians don’t live in downtown Montreal? Most of us can’t just head out the door in the snow and rain and just walk 10km to work each day. Can we return to the real world Minister @s_guilbeault?”

To date, much of the commentary regarding Guilbeault’s remarks has focused on the impact his new policy would have on infrastructure project funding. That’s a mistake, given that there is a near-zero chance of the new policy ever being implemented.

That’s because the Trudeau government is weeks or months away from a near-certain election defeat, at which point they will have no say over how major road projects will be paid for. Given that likelihood, Guilbeault’s comments are irrelevant because it is doubtful that he and his Liberal colleagues will be in power after the election.

Where the minister’s remarks are relevant, however, is in the context of how his plans are perceived by voters, and the impact that perception could have on the result of the upcoming election.

Guilbeault’s strategy is to use increased traffic congestion in order to force gridlocked Canadians out of the security and privacy of their cars, and onto crowded buses that may have other passengers who are a threat to their safety. If that sounds coercive, that’s because it is.

By making it harder to travel around a city, many voters could view Guilbeault’s plan as restricting their mobility in their own communities. That could impair their employment and education options, and even their access to health care, food and other critical services.

Indeed, has Guilbeault even thought about the impact that increasingly congested roads would have on emergency response times?

Viewed from those perspectives, many voters will likely regard Guilbeault’s plan — in particular, the part about achieving his government’s “goals of economic, social and human development” — as further evidence of heavy-handed social engineering by a government that too often portrays itself as smarter, more compassionate and generally better than ordinary Canadians.

None of that will win votes, but it will certainly lose them.

Guilbeault has given Pierre Poilievre and his Conservative Party another powerful argument to use against the Trudeau Liberals in the coming campaign. He has also accomplished something that many have thought was impossible: he has made Danielle Smith appear to be a voice of reason and common sense.

When pundits say that governments defeat themselves, this is an example of what they are talking about.

Deveryn Ross is a political commentator living in Brandon. deverynrossletters@gmail.com X: @deverynross