THE sad thing about the David Emerson affair is that he probably was being a straight-shooting politician telling what he considers public policy truths rather than political party spins.
For his honesty, he has become a political football in an experience that likely confirms his intention to retire this year, a decision undoubtedly helped by the fact that the Liberal-turned-Conservative could not be reelected again in his Vancouver riding.
Trade minister Emerson, a conservative former British Columbia forestry executive, told The Western Producer that focusing the national trade negotiating stance on defending high protective tariffs for supply managed and other sensitive sectors short-changes export sectors and leaves Canada in a no-win defensive rather than offensive position at trade talks.
Read Also
Crop profitability looks grim in new outlook
With grain prices depressed, returns per acre are looking dismal on all the major crops with some significantly worse than others.
Politically, all hell broke loose.
Within hours, the prime minister’s office communications staff had sent e-mails to Conservative MPs.
“The Western Producer has published an article that inaccurately states that Canada is putting its supply management system on notice,” said the note to MPs. “Minister Emerson is the lead spokesperson on this issue. Please use following lines when bridging out of interviews or when speaking with local media.”
Then followed reminders that prime minister Stephen Harper had said in the 2005-06 election campaign that he would defend supply management’s three pillars (production controls, regulated pricing and import protection) and that on Nov. 22, 2005, Conservatives supported a Bloc Québecois motion in the House of Commons that over-quota tariffs must not be reduced.
Emerson and agriculture minister Chuck Strahl soon issued their joint statement insisting that supply management is not on the table at World Trade Organization talks.
All the time, opposition MPs and supply management defenders were doing damage to Conservative political prospects in Ontario, Quebec and Atlantic Canadian rural ridings where support from supply management will matter in a 2007 election.
The government damage control was instructive. It denied a story that had not been written.
In private messages to MPs it denied that Canada was putting supply management on notice. In its public message, the reference was to the government’s support for supply management.
The PMO did not try to humiliate the trade minister by forcing Emerson to retract his statement or to claim misquote.
Beyond a weak response from his office that while the quotes were accurate the story had been “torqued” and one farm leader reported that Emerson’s office said he had been taken out of context, there was no serious attempt to suggest Emerson had not spoken his mind.
So the message was that the trade minister was not speaking for government on one of the key politically charged trade issues in his portfolio.
If the rumoured early 2007 cabinet shuffle happens, Emerson may well be replaced since he almost certainly won’t run again.
The fact that in his heart, despite the government script, he really doesn’t believe the Conservative policy of no concessions on over-quota tariffs is proper or sustainable will be just one of the contributing factors.
