Written by MetaCanada correspondent LicencetoShill

Justin Trudeau has campaigned on a renewal of “evidence-based decision making” and promised an end to Harper’s so-called “anti-science” approach. But Trudeau has never actually explained what this phrase means or how he would apply it to his policies. Much like his “from the heart out” economic plan, this promise is clear as mud and while it seems straightforward, actions speak louder than words.

“Evidence-based decision making” simply means that Trudeau has already made his decision, but needs to desperately find the evidence to support it even when the facts do not.

Justin Trudeau campaigned on “Evidence-based” decision making, but that doesn’t actually mean what you would think it does.

We’ve seen this already on the missing and murdered Aboriginal women file. Trudeau’s Minister of Aboriginal Affairs has already come to a conclusion that colonialism and racism are to blame for the missing and murdered women, and even went so far as to say an aboriginal women is less likely to be murdered by a spouse or intimate partner than the women in the general population. That’s just plain false. While it’s true that out of the murdered aboriginal women proportionately less are killed by their spouses than the general Canadian population, since aboriginal women are murdered at disproportionately higher rate it means they are actually 4 times more likely to be murdered by a spouse or intimate lover.

Despite any results from the $40 Million inquiry being wasted on someone who doesn’t understand simple math, a decision has apparently already been reached by Minister Carolyn Bennett. All she needs now is to spend a large amount of resources to find the evidence she wants. $40 Million may not be enough to overturn the clear facts and figures the RCMP already released but Trudeau will inevitably just raise the budget until he gets the evidence they want.

Now let’s look at the Syrian refugee crisis. Evidence came out from the Paris shootings that ISIS members are using the waves of refugees to sneak into Europe to cause serious, deadly damage. Every country in the Western world considered this event and made changes to ensure the safety of their citizens. However Trudeau’s decision (25,000 refugees by the end of 2015) was already made. So since this evidence goes against his plan, it was discarded, and the Trudeau government then spends a bunch of taxpayer money to convince the public to ignore it.

How does Trudeau plan on getting all this “evidence” he needs to make these decisions? By making the long form census mandatory again, of course. It makes perfect sense, considering how he’s blindly going ahead with all of his election promises, even when an Angus Reid poll clearly shows Canadians are against it, all without the benefit of these completed results. In a year or two (when it can finally provide some information) this census will either tell him what he wants to hear or he’ll ignore it to find a different source of evidence. In all cases the decision is already made, the evidence just needs to be found.

When justifying his decisions it doesn’t even seem like the value of the evidence even matters, just that it exists. To “justify” having forced gender parity in cabinet he doesn’t show any facts or figures, or even the resumes of the people he appointed. No, apparently just stating the year was enough evidence for Mr. Trudeau. It is 2015, Trudeau even has a calendar to prove it. Nobody can argue that it isn’t so maybe when he gets rid of mandatory minimums for child sexual offenders he’ll just have to say it’s Tuesday.

If that is the gold standard for “evidence based decision-making” we’re in for a long four years