Article content continued

For all the brouhaha about women, from a cultural perspective, the cabinet is surprisingly not very diverse

For the most part, this reorganization is a good thing. But do taxpayers need to fund a stand-alone ministry for the status of women? No. Some may argue we don’t need this ministry at all. But separating it out allowed Trudeau to add another woman to the list. (It might have been more counter-culture if Trudeau had appointed a man to the role, but never mind.)

And for all the brouhaha about women, from a cultural perspective, the cabinet is surprisingly not very diverse. While two aboriginal-Canadians and four Indo-Canadians were appointed, there is no one of Asia nor black descent. Everyone else looked kind of, er, pale.

But this isn’t how one should take the measure of a cabinet. Yes, it should have diversity, not for diversity’s sake, but because as any business knows, a range of perspectives makes for better decision-making. Merit should count first and foremost, even if, as we know, it is sometimes not the main criterion. One of the most important criteria in this cabinet — and any cabinet, for that matter — is actually loyalty, which crosses gender, cultural and geographic lines.

This whole conversation is unfortunate, because it obscures the real story of today. What I wanted to write was this: Trudeau’s picks were all competent and qualified. Many bring compelling personal stories and experiences to the table. The ceremony struck the right balance of pomp, circumstance, homage and levity. It represents a promising start for his government and I wish him well because he has a daunting task ahead of him.

But that got drowned out in a sea of tweets and TV commentary about how fabulously female this cabinet is. Which is what the Liberals probably wanted, because it is a feel-good story and a vote-getter, too.

Still, one wishes the feminists could stop crowing and see past the politics. Or maybe, like in the Clinton era, sadly, they just don’t care.

National Post