Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will have to decide whether he can best salvage seats in the face of certain defeat or whether he can rise to the occasion one more time, the Star's editorial board writes.
Presents a point of view reflecting the company’s progressive values on an issue of public interest. Editorials are written by staff within the Star’s editorial board, which is independent of the newsroom.
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will have to decide whether he can best salvage seats in the face of certain defeat or whether he can rise to the occasion one more time, the Star's editorial board writes.
It was a session of carbon carveouts and bullying in the Senate and a session that put to lie the theory that foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East, doesn’t matter in Canadian politics. It was also the session in which Liberals and New Democrats demonstrated how a political calendar isn’t really a way of marking time if it can be tossed aside in order to maintain power and influence.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
It may also have been the session in which the Liberals under Justin Trudeau, after months of inexplicable hibernation as cost-of-living and housing woes mounted, finally emerged from their slumber. And it may also have been the session where Canadians saw the man who would be prime minister, Pierre Poilievre, in full flight and wondered whether he should be prime minister.
But we place conditions on these observations because it’s unclear if many of us were paying attention. Suggestions that Parliament has merely retreated deeper and deeper into the Ottawa bubble and become increasingly irrelevant to Canadians is hardly a new observation, but there can be no denying that the toxicity, faux outrage, partisan posturing and schoolyard sniping in the just-completed session has brought this cherished institution into further ill repute.
Some would be correct in calling it “the gong show session of Parliament,” NDP MP Charlie Angus agreed.
To be fair, some things got done. The government’s gun control legislation, which will formally freeze handgun sales, define assault weapons in the Criminal Code and provide harsher penalties for weapons smuggling, finally passed the Senate. The Liberals began to move on a number of fronts to deal with the housing crisis and, as part of the Liberal-NDP supply-and-confidence agreement, a national dental care plan has begun its rollout. Any movement on a national pharmacare plan, which the NDP had demanded of the Liberals by year end as part of their agreement, has been punted to March.
Some things didn’t change. There is no resolution to the Trudeau allegation that India was complicit in a murder in British Columbia. We are no closer to determining the depth of foreign interference in our political system. Speaker Greg Fergus appears to have hung on to his job. Conservatives will still be seeking those perfect social media hits (in English).
The coming year portends more of the same. There will be unrelenting speculation about Trudeau’s future. He – and Liberals – will have to decide whether he has become a drag on the party, whether he can best salvage seats in the face of certain defeat or whether he can rise to the occasion one more time. Most crucially, he and his inner circle must decide whether Canadians have simply tuned him out.
The Conservative leader’s biggest foe may come from within. His self-confidence and bravado regularly strays into arrogance. His non-stop attack mode is perfectly suited to an opposition leader and his braying anti-Trudeau acolytes on social media love it. But to convince Canadians he can be prime minister, he needs to tamp down the sky-is-falling hyperbole, look like someone who can represent this country internationally, and put some serious policy in the window in 2024.
ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW
Otherwise, he will get lost in the noise. Because, increasingly, that’s all Canadians are hearing from the capital. Is anybody really listening?
The Star’s Editorial Board is responsible for the editorial and op-ed pages, as well as content on the Opinion section of thestar.com. That includes editorials, letters to the editor, columns, opinion articles by guest commentators and multi-media features on thestar.com Opinion section.
The Star’s Editorial
Board is responsible for the editorial and op-ed pages, as well
as content on the Opinion section of thestar.com. That includes
editorials, letters to the editor, columns, opinion articles by
guest commentators and multi-media features on thestar.com Opinion
section.
