Trudeau and Liberals Secure Shallow Victory in Snap Elections
The Prime Minister had hoped to secure a mandate for the Liberal Party and a clear legislative majority to move forward with COVID-19 recovery plans, but he will now face leading yet another minority government.
Two Elections in Two Years
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau held onto power after Monday’s federal parliamentary election, but he will still lead a minority government now that his Liberal Party has again failed to secure a majority of seats.
The results mirror those of the country’s last election in 2019, and in the lead-up to Monday’s vote, many Canadians questioned why another parliamentary election was occurring so soon when the next scheduled elections would happen in another two years. The most basic answer is that Trudeau called for a snap election in August. However, reports on his reasoning vary.
Trudeau himself said he wanted a clear mandate from voters so he could move forward with efforts to lead Canada out of the pandemic and focus on recovery plans. Yet, for Conservatives and Canada’s smaller parties, this election was viewed as a blatant power-play by Trudeau to get more seats just two years after his Liberal party lost its majority.
Whatever the reason actually was, the snap-election was a gamble that doesn’t seem to have paid off. While some mail-in votes are still being counted, over 98% of the results are already in and they’ve proven to be a return to the status quo. The Liberals are gaining just one seat and the Conservatives are only losing two, while the minor parties in Canada are exchanging a few seats.
Possible Political Blunder
It’s likely that the call for a snap election was a miscalculation by Trudeau, who received high praise in polls when asked about his response to the COVID-19 pandemic; however, in polls that looked at his overall popularity, most voters said they have a dimmer view of Trudeau.
According to the Angus Reid Institute, a non-profit pollster out of British Columbia, Trudeau struggled to have a majority of voters approve of his tenure. In August, just after he called for snap election, his popularity plummeted further, with a majority of voters overtly disapproving of the Prime Minister.
As of election day, that number continued to rise.
Additionally, Trudeau’s calls for what many viewed as an unnecessary election in order to get a mandate on how to move forward against COVID-19 came off as tone-deaf since Canada is in the middle of dealing with rising Delta cases. This is an argument that the Conservatives picked up on, including leader Erin O’Toole, who called it “un-Canadian.”
There is also criticism over how Trudeau conducted his campaign. The Justin Trudeau of 2021 isn’t the same man who first gained power in 2015. Back then, Trudeau was somewhat of a Barak Obama-esque figure. He was a political underdog who ran on a platform of hopeful optimism over what could be achieved in Canada.
Fast forward to 2021, and Trudeau was less concerned about presenting his party’s hopes for the future and more concerned about sparking fears over what a Conservative government would do. His biggest fears seemed to have been the undoing of years of legislative and executive actions, including the reversal of a firearms ban.
In one rally earlier this month, Trudeau warned supporters that, “Mr. O’Toole won’t make sure the traveler sitting beside you and your kids on a train or a plane is vaccinated.”
“This is the moment for real leadership. Mr. O’Toole doesn’t lead — he misleads.”
But many of the things Trudeau attacked O’Toole and the Conservatives for are possibly no longer positions they hold. O’Toole recently took on the leadership of the Conservatives last year, and before the election, he published a 160-page document that sought to clarify his party’s positions and broaden their appeal.
One major reversal was support for a carbon tax, a traditionally Liberal Party platform. However, that manifesto seemingly wasn’t enough, as O’Toole later had to reverse course on a promise in the manifesto and clarify that the Conservatives wouldn’t actually overturn Trudeau’s ban on 1,500 sporting rifles, leading to some confusion among voters over his actual stance.
That being said, some of the major criticisms of O’Toole levied by Trudeau still stood up to scrutiny, such as his opposition to vaccine mandates or vaccine passports.
The Popular Vote Doesn’t Win Elections, Even in Canada
Another miscalculation that lead to the call for a snap election may have been a misread on how popular the Conservatives are. In 2019, the party won the popular vote, and Monday’s election seems to be another repeat. The Conservatives won just over 34% of the popular vote but only secured 35.8% of the seats in parliament. The Liberals received under 32% of the popular vote, but around 46% of parliament’s states. The disparity in the popular vote and how many seats a party actually receives has led to claims that the system is flawed and as unrepresentative as the United States’ Electoral College allegedly is.
Regardless of the representation disparity in Canada, many felt this snap election meant that Trudeau didn’t get the mandate he sought. Even so, Trudeau gave what he called a “victory speech” in Montreal, saying, “You are sending us back to work with a clear mandate to get Canada through this pandemic.”
Trudeau will likely need to rely on the left-leaning New Democratic Party to secure enough seats to form a majority government, although there are concerns that such a government could fall, as minority governments are notoriously fragile.
Such a situation would mean that this snap election may prove to be a political pitfall for Trudeau.
See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Guardian) (CNN)
95-Year-Old Woman Dies After Police Tases Her in Nursing Home
The officer involved was suspended with pay and charged with assault.
A 95-year-old Australian woman whom police tasered in a nursing home last week has reportedly died from her injuries.
Clare Nowland, who had dementia and required a walking frame to stand up and move, was living at the Yallambee Lodge in Cooma in southeastern Australia.
At about 4:15 a.m. on May 17, police and paramedics responded to a report of a woman standing outside her room with a steak knife.
They encountered Nowland, then reportedly tried to negotiate with her for several minutes, but she didn’t drop the knife.
The five-foot-two, 95-pound woman walked toward the two officers “at a slow pace,” police said at a news conference, so one of them tasered her.
She fell to the floor and reportedly suffered a fractured skull and a severe brain bleed, causing her to be hospitalized in critical condition.
Nowland passed away in a hospital surrounded by her family, the New South Wales police confirmed in a statement today.
After a week-long investigation, the police force also said that the senior constable involved would appear in court next week to face charges of recklessly causing grievous bodily harm, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, and common assault.
NSW police procedure states that tasers should not be used against elderly or disabled people absent exceptional circumstances.
Following the incident, community members, activists, and disability rights advocates expressed bewilderment and anger at what they called an unnecessary use of force, and some are now questioning why law enforcement took so long to prosecute the officer involved.
See what others are saying: (Reuters) (The New York Times) (CNN)
U.K. Police Face Backlash After Arresting Anti-Monarchy Protesters
London Mayor Sadiq Khan said that some of the arrests “raise questions” and “investigations are ongoing.”
The Public Order Act
A controversial protest crackdown law in the U.K. is facing criticism after dozens of anti-monarchy protesters were arrested during the coronation ceremony in London over the weekend.
The law, dubbed the “Public Order Act” was passed roughly a week ahead of the coronation for King Charles III. It gives police more power to restrict protesters and limits the tactics protesters can use in public spaces. It was condemned by human rights groups upon its passing, and is facing a new round of heat after 52 people were arrested over coronation protests on Saturday.
In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said protesters were arrested for public order offenses, breach of the peace and conspiracy to cause a public nuisance. The group said it gave advance warning that its “tolerance for any disruption, whether through protest or otherwise, will be low and that we would deal robustly with anyone intent on undermining the celebration.”
It is currently unclear how many of those arrested were detained specifically for violating the Public Order Act, however, some of those arrested believe the new law was used against them.
“Make no mistake. There is no longer a right to peaceful protest in the UK,” Graham Smith, the CEO of anti-monarchy group Republic tweeted after getting arrested. “I have been told many times the monarch is there to defend our freedoms. Now our freedoms are under attack in his name.”
An Attempt to “Diminish” Protests
During a BBC Radio interview, Smith also said he believes the dozens of arrests were premeditated.
“There was nothing that we did do that could possibly justify even being detained and arrested and held,” Smith claimed.
“The whole thing was a deliberate attempt to disrupt and diminish our protest.”
Yasmine Ahmed, the U.K. Director of Human Rights Watch, also tweeted that the arrests were “disgraceful.”
“These are scenes you’d expect to see in Russia not the UK,” she wrote.
When asked about the controversy, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak told reporters officers should do “what they think is best” in an apparent show of support for the Metropolitan Police.
For his part, London Mayor Sadiq Khan said he is looking into the matter.
“Some of the arrests made by police as part of the Coronation event raise questions and whilst investigations are ongoing, I’ve sought urgent clarity from Met leaders on the action taken,” Khan tweeted.
See what others are saying: (The Guardian) (CNN) (The Washington Post)
Foreign Nationals Make Mad Dash out of Sudan as Conflict Rages
The conflict’s death toll has surpassed 420, with nearly 4,000 people wounded.
As the 10-day-long power struggle between rival generals tore Sudan apart, foreign governments with citizens in the country scrambled to evacuate them over the weekend.
On Sunday, U.S. special forces landed in the capital Khartoum and carried out nearly 100 American diplomats along with their families and some foreign nationals on helicopters.
An estimated 16,000 Americans, however, remain in the country and U.S. officials said in a statement that a broader evacuation mission would be too dangerous.
Christopher Maier, the assistant secretary of defense for special operations and low-intensity warfare, said in a statement that the Pentagon may assist U.S. citizens find safe routes out of Sudan.
“[The Defense Department] is at present considering actions that may include use of intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance capabilities to be able to observe routes and detect threats,” he said.
Germany and France also reportedly pulled around 700 people out of the country.
More countries followed with similar efforts, including the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, Canada, China, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon, and Indonesia.
Yesterday, a convoy carrying some 700 United Nations, NGO, and embassy staff drove to Port Sudan, a popular extraction point now that the airport in Khartoum has closed due to fighting.
Reports of gunmen prowling the capital streets and robbing people trying to escape, as well as looters breaking into abandoned homes and shops, have persuaded most residents to stay indoors.
Heavy gunfire, airstrikes, and artillery shelling have terrorized the city despite several proposed ceasefires.
Over the weekend, the reported death toll topped 420, with nearly 4,000 people injured, though both numbers are likely to be undercounted.