This past Saturday, thousands of Torontonians flocked to Trinity Bellwoods Park, a delightful, family-friendly space not too far from the lakeshore.

Photos taken that afternoon, showing over 10,000 Canadians virtually on top of one another, reflect a population seemingly oblivious to the pandemic surrounding them.

Toronto’s chief medical officer of health, Dr. Eileen de Villa, condemned the behaviour of the revellers as “selfish and dangerous.”

A city spokesperson promised that by-law officials would be out in full-force the following day. (They were.)

In the meantime, the number of COVID-19 cases in Ontario is spiking, with Toronto leading the way.

How could this happen?

I suspect that part of the problem was caused by a group of disgruntled, perhaps entitled, Torontonians using an example set for them by some of our political leaders as justification to overlook municipal and provincial rules around physical distancing.

In early April, we learned that PM Justin Trudeau had visited his family at the Prime Minister’s summer residence at Harrington Lake barely hours after he had called on the rest of us to stay home for the weekend.

We never received a convincing explanation as to why seemed to be one set of rules for most Canadians and another for the prime minister and his family.

That same weekend, after urging Ontarians not to visit their cottages, Premier Doug Ford drove up to his own summer residence to “check on the plumbing.”

Rather than apologizing, Ford attempted to rationalize his trip. He drove alone; he didn’t stop along the way; he didn’t visit anyone; and he was genuinely worried about a flood.

Why someone from the area could not have checked the cottage on his behalf was never made clear.

Strike three came on Mother’s Day.

While Ontario public health officials continued to order provincial residents to stay away from anyone who lived outside of their household, Ford invited his two daughters who do not live with him to visit the family home for some quality time.

The premier’s justification this time was that we should all use our own best judgment in interpreting the advice from Public Health.

When leaders in other countries have behaved similarly, some have been forced to resign.

In Canada, there were no consequences for Trudeau, nor have there been any for Ford, now a repeat offender.

This context does not excuse Torontonians’ shoddy behaviour at Trinity Bellwoods. They put the health of their fellow residents at increased risk and might well have extended the length of our lockdown.

It might, however, explain how such a situation could occur, and suggests that it could happen again.

Both the prime minister and the Ontario premier have managed elements of the Canadian response to COVID-19 admirably.

But when it comes to consistently matching their words with their actions, they have made significant mistakes.

It seems to me that, at least in Toronto, these errors have undermined the critical message that our public health officials have been sending.

If Trudeau and Ford want to restore Torontonians’ commitment to flattening the curve, they should start by following Toronto Mayor John Tory's lead, and offering all Canadians a sincere apology.

***

Like many Canadians, I have been impressed by the work of Dr. Bonnie Henry, British Columbia’s Provincial Health Officer, throughout the pandemic. Her calm, thoughtful presence has been reassuring. Dr. Deena Hinshaw’s work as the chief medical officer of health in Alberta has been equally inspiring.

To be notified of the next blog post, follow me on Twitter @achapnick. 

You can subscribe to my newsletter at https://buttondown.email/achapnick.

Last week, Rob Oliphant, parliamentary secretary to Canadian Foreign Minister Francois-Philippe Champagne, spoke to The Hill Times about the “massive and complicated repatriation effort,” undertaken by Global Affairs Canada (GAC) in response to the current pandemic.

Oliphant noted that the personal relationships that Minister Champagne had established with his ministerial counterpart and officials in Morocco during a visit in January was critical to GAC’s ability to help more than 1,000 Canadians stranded there get home.

According to Oliphant, his own and Prime Minister Trudeau’s personal visits to Ethiopia earlier this year were similarly critical to GAC’s successful efforts to arrange flights out of Johannesburg and Cape Town.

It's worth recalling that those visits to Africa were initially controversial. Critics suggested that the Trudeau government was engaged in a vanity project to secure a seat on the UN Security Council.

In this context, Oliphant’s revelations illustrate not just the importance of effective diplomacy, but also the challenge of making that importance clear to the Canadian public.

Particularly in times of crisis, international relations is all about personal relationships. Our diplomats use the capital they have accumulated through their relationship-building efforts to advance and defend the national interest.

Put another way, world leaders don’t have a lot of time for favours during a pandemic. If you need something from them, and they don’t already know you, it’s probably too late.

The problem when it comes to building public support for diplomacy is that best diplomatic practices are a lot like insurance: the costs (embassies, receptions, official visits) are clear immediately, but the benefits are only incurred later, and typically when the average Canadian is too preoccupied to appreciate the work that was necessary to produce them.

To make matters worse, contemporary populist movements have promoted a disdain for elites and their expertise. Many Canadians have been conditioned to question the purpose and value of our diplomats and their efforts.

Nonetheless, diplomacy has proven time and again that it can save lives.

When we face the financial reckoning that is sure to arise in Ottawa when this pandemic is finally over, let’s hope that the critical work of Global Affairs Canada in getting so many stranded Canadians home is not forgotten.

***

The most convincing essay I’ve read on the value of diplomacy was written by the novelist and humourist, Sondra Gotlieb, as a chapter in Diplomacy in the Digital Age, a quasi-academic collection dedicated to her now late husband Allan, one of Canada’s foremost 20th century diplomats.

If you do take a look at the book, be sure to also check out “Professionals and amateurs in the diplomacy of the age of information,” by one of our finest scholars, Denis Stairs.

And a shout-out to the University of Toronto’s Brendan Kelly. His book, The Good Fight: Marcel Cadieux and Canadian Diplomacy was just awarded the 2020 Dafoe Prize, recognizing “the best book on Canada, Canadians, and/or Canada’s place in the world.”

Cadieux was another one of Canada’s great diplomats. His own book, The Canadian Diplomat, is another tremendous resource.

If those books aren’t enough, you can find some of mine here, here, or here.
 
To be notified of the next blog post, follow me on Twitter @achapnick. 

You can subscribe to my newsletter at https://buttondown.email/achapnick.

A couple of weeks ago, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development released an extensive data set that tracks the contributions of member countries to official development assistance (ODA) in 2019.
 
Here is what the University of Ottawa’s Stephen Brown – one our leading experts on ODA – said about Canada’s numbers through a blog for the McLeod Group (later reproduced by the University of Ottawa’s Centre for International Policy Studies):
 
“Despite talking a good game when it comes to foreign aid … it is clear that Canada is refusing to contribute its fair share of development assistance.” 
 
Brown goes on to declare that “under the Trudeau government, Canada is less generous than under Harper.” Put another way, even though the Liberals have actually increased the international assistance budget since 2015, ODA as a percentage of gross national income has dropped from an average of 0.30% under the Conservatives to 0.27% in 2019.
 
I agree with this element of Brown’s analysis.
 
Canada has the capacity to contribute more to international assistance. Moreover, investing extensively in foreign aid is consistent with the national interest.
 
Canada is a trading nation. It is in our interest to increase the number of prospective consumers of Canadians goods and services around the world by helping struggling members of the international community pull themselves out of poverty.
 
Canada is also an aging nation, reliant on a steady stream of educated immigrants to maintain our economic prosperity. Supporting poverty alleviation around the world is a logical component of any proactive immigration strategy.

Later in the same blog, when Brown points out that “Norway and Ireland, Canada’s ‘rivals’ for a seat on the UN Security Council … are providing foreign aid equivalent to 1.02% and 0.31% of GNI, easily outshining Canada,” he appears to imply that Canada’s efforts to secure a seat on the UN Security Council this summer could be compromised by its lack of generosity relative to Norway and Ireland.

That contention, which has been made more explicitly by others, is less convincing.
 
Critics of Canadian ODA policy often fail to note that the same OECD data also show that, on a grant equivalent basis, Canada provided more aid than either of its Security Council competitors in 2019.
 
Some will respond that since the Canadian economy is much larger than Norway’s, and Ireland’s, the international community could punish Ottawa for being miserly.
 
But for the recipients of development assistance, it’s the total dollar amount that counts.
 
If I’m looking for seed money to start a new business, I’ll take $30,000 from a less generous Canada over $25,000 from a more generous Norway every time.
 
We therefore shouldn’t expect Canada’s disappointing record in international assistance to have any real effect on its campaign for a Security Council seat.
 
In fact, with more than four times Ireland’s development budget, Ottawa will be in a favourable position if the election comes down to using aid to sway a country’s vote.
 
***
 
If you’d like to read more about ODA, especially in Africa, take a look at the work of my fellow Trent alum, David Black. I also recommend anything that Shannon Kindornay has written. She is currently a senior analyst at the Canadian International Development Platform, a critical source for any student of Canadian foreign and public policy. 

If you need something longer to read while sheltering from the virus at home, you can find some my books here, here, or here.
 
To be notified of the next blog post, follow me on Twitter @achapnick. 

You can subscribe to my newsletter at https://buttondown.email/achapnick.