Over the weekend I was listening to an interview with Celina Caesar-Chevannes. Remember her? She’s the former Liberal MP for Whitby, Ontario who also served as a Parliamentary Secretary in the Trudeau Government. That is, until she made the conscious decision to not seek re-election in 2019. In a somewhat bespoke exit, she left the political stage..Now she’s back with a book, Can You Hear Me Now? to tell us all about her own experience as a woman trying to toe the party line. .You may also have forgotten that Caesar-Chevannes’ story followed on the heels of Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott’s decisions to leave the Liberal Caucus, and their positions in the cabinet. These were monumental moves that could have had serious consequences for these women. Sadly, their courage failed to move the needle for women in positions of leadership. .I always wondered why the public wasn’t more deeply concerned about this clear sign of toxicity on the Hill. Maybe it was because the SNC Lavalin scandal took up all the 280 allowable characters in a Tweet? But I was always struck why more of the of focus was never placed on what was an undeniable sign that Trudeau’s leadership was showing significant cracks. Especially in how he handled women in his Caucus and Cabinet. .It’s no wonder to me that toxicity on Parliament Hill continues with more poisonous headlines. From high on her perch falls the Governor General Julie Payette. Her secretary Assunta di Lorenzo tumbles, conveniently after. Now, Rideau Hall is slowly putting the pieces back together again. This will be difficult, as the wounds of toxicity almost always fester, run deep, and are far reaching. .Most fascinating is the carnage of women who have fallen on their swords, or unceremoniously exited the political arena. What does this say about the promising 50/50 male to female balance that the PM so proudly touted? Maybe it’s a sign that we aren’t ready to accept the consequences of female competence at the table. Or is there something these women lacked that caused their demise? Unable to handle the pressure? Lacking in skills?.In leadership theory, toxic workplaces are generally thought to be caused by a leader who is too controlling, critical, harsh and unapproachable. They also become toxic when a leader is too lax, cannot make difficult decisions, or handle tough conversations. In my experiences of being a leader, and being a follower, this has always been proved true. .The toxicity on the Hill stems from Trudeau himself who – not unlike many others – strayed from the core values that make up good leaders. That happens often enough, but it fascinates me that he never really seems to get the message, and neither does the collective electorate..I’m even more captivated by the history of these women being served up on a silver platter. Perhaps they were offerings, to distract us from what is really going on. Not to say that Julie Payette is a victim. She is not. She made some damaging mistakes. .But I do see very clearly the connection to women falling from high places, around a leader who does not seem to be able to provide an example of what good leadership looks like. Nor is he able to retain competent women around the cabinet table. .In this case, we might do well to evaluate the big picture and what it means. I’m talking about the Double Bind of Leadership. For women, this a tough thing. We’re expected to be competent to stand a chance at getting the position. On the other hand, if we are perceived as overly confident, or too competent, we are sometimes seen as unlikable. If we try to temper unlikability by being more feminine, we risk being perceived as too soft, and not competent. .It takes people – and especially men – to set the example of being truly cognizant of unconscious bias. This doesn’t occur just because we think it should. A woman’s voice and her ideas are often unheard in meetings and around the boardroom table. Women don’t need to think too hard to recall being spoken on top of, or mansplained to..And it’s not just up to men either. Women have to learn how to better foster alliances that will help magnify their voice, or else be shuffled towards that chopping block..Canada’s proudly feminist prime minister talks a good game about supporting women, but when the chips are down, they are the first ones to take the blame for his own mistakes..Christine Cusanelli is a columnist for the Western Standard
Over the weekend I was listening to an interview with Celina Caesar-Chevannes. Remember her? She’s the former Liberal MP for Whitby, Ontario who also served as a Parliamentary Secretary in the Trudeau Government. That is, until she made the conscious decision to not seek re-election in 2019. In a somewhat bespoke exit, she left the political stage..Now she’s back with a book, Can You Hear Me Now? to tell us all about her own experience as a woman trying to toe the party line. .You may also have forgotten that Caesar-Chevannes’ story followed on the heels of Jody Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott’s decisions to leave the Liberal Caucus, and their positions in the cabinet. These were monumental moves that could have had serious consequences for these women. Sadly, their courage failed to move the needle for women in positions of leadership. .I always wondered why the public wasn’t more deeply concerned about this clear sign of toxicity on the Hill. Maybe it was because the SNC Lavalin scandal took up all the 280 allowable characters in a Tweet? But I was always struck why more of the of focus was never placed on what was an undeniable sign that Trudeau’s leadership was showing significant cracks. Especially in how he handled women in his Caucus and Cabinet. .It’s no wonder to me that toxicity on Parliament Hill continues with more poisonous headlines. From high on her perch falls the Governor General Julie Payette. Her secretary Assunta di Lorenzo tumbles, conveniently after. Now, Rideau Hall is slowly putting the pieces back together again. This will be difficult, as the wounds of toxicity almost always fester, run deep, and are far reaching. .Most fascinating is the carnage of women who have fallen on their swords, or unceremoniously exited the political arena. What does this say about the promising 50/50 male to female balance that the PM so proudly touted? Maybe it’s a sign that we aren’t ready to accept the consequences of female competence at the table. Or is there something these women lacked that caused their demise? Unable to handle the pressure? Lacking in skills?.In leadership theory, toxic workplaces are generally thought to be caused by a leader who is too controlling, critical, harsh and unapproachable. They also become toxic when a leader is too lax, cannot make difficult decisions, or handle tough conversations. In my experiences of being a leader, and being a follower, this has always been proved true. .The toxicity on the Hill stems from Trudeau himself who – not unlike many others – strayed from the core values that make up good leaders. That happens often enough, but it fascinates me that he never really seems to get the message, and neither does the collective electorate..I’m even more captivated by the history of these women being served up on a silver platter. Perhaps they were offerings, to distract us from what is really going on. Not to say that Julie Payette is a victim. She is not. She made some damaging mistakes. .But I do see very clearly the connection to women falling from high places, around a leader who does not seem to be able to provide an example of what good leadership looks like. Nor is he able to retain competent women around the cabinet table. .In this case, we might do well to evaluate the big picture and what it means. I’m talking about the Double Bind of Leadership. For women, this a tough thing. We’re expected to be competent to stand a chance at getting the position. On the other hand, if we are perceived as overly confident, or too competent, we are sometimes seen as unlikable. If we try to temper unlikability by being more feminine, we risk being perceived as too soft, and not competent. .It takes people – and especially men – to set the example of being truly cognizant of unconscious bias. This doesn’t occur just because we think it should. A woman’s voice and her ideas are often unheard in meetings and around the boardroom table. Women don’t need to think too hard to recall being spoken on top of, or mansplained to..And it’s not just up to men either. Women have to learn how to better foster alliances that will help magnify their voice, or else be shuffled towards that chopping block..Canada’s proudly feminist prime minister talks a good game about supporting women, but when the chips are down, they are the first ones to take the blame for his own mistakes..Christine Cusanelli is a columnist for the Western Standard
