{"id":377114,"date":"2021-12-06T17:14:06","date_gmt":"2021-12-06T14:14:06","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/en.buradabiliyorum.com\/the-future-of-the-liberal-party-without-justin-trudeau\/"},"modified":"2021-12-06T17:14:06","modified_gmt":"2021-12-06T14:14:06","slug":"the-future-of-the-liberal-party-without-justin-trudeau","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/buradabiliyorum.com\/en\/the-future-of-the-liberal-party-without-justin-trudeau\/","title":{"rendered":"#The future of the Liberal Party\u2014without Justin Trudeau"},"content":{"rendered":"

“#The future of the Liberal Party\u2014without Justin Trudeau<\/strong>”<\/p>\n

\n
\"Trudeau<\/p>\n

Trudeau and the newly sworn in ministers in Ottawa on Oct. 26, 2021 (Courtesy of Alex T\u00e9treault\/PMO)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

On Sept. 20, voters returned a Parliament that will look a lot like the one Justin Trudeau was stuck with before he called the 2021 election. But one big thing did change. In conversation, senior Liberals were remarkably candid about discussing the last days of Justin Trudeau\u2019s government, and the prospect of a government led by somebody else.<\/p>\n

\u201cWell, the PM\u2019s going to need legacy projects,\u201d one cabinet minister said, when invited to chat about the government\u2019s priorities.<\/p>\n

Another member of Trudeau\u2019s inner circle was matter-of-fact in discussing the danger a leadership change would represent for the governing party. The Liberals had a decade of increasingly disapp<\/a>ointing electoral outcomes before Trudeau became the leader, this person said. It\u2019s an open question whether Trudeau\u2019s tenure marked the end of those trends, or merely an extended break before the party declines again.<\/p>\n

This sort of talk is new. In a party whose unity of purpose Trudeau did much to restore, it\u2019s long been considered poor form, or wasted energy, for Liberals to contemplate the prospect of life without the leader who brought them back from the brink of irrelevance. This fall, that taboo lifted. It\u2019s as though a screw that had secured some plate in the Liberals\u2019 psyche for nearly a decade had been loosened by one full counterclockwise turn. Suddenly Liberals are granting themselves licence to speculate. And so the biggest question in Canadian politics in 2022 is whether Justin Trudeau will still be Prime Minister when the year is done.<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Erin O\u2019Toole, unresponsive\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

For what it\u2019s worth, the man himself insists he\u2019s not leaving the top job anytime soon. At his first news<\/a> conference after the election, a reporter asked Trudeau whether he\u2019ll lead the party into the next election. He replied with an emphatic \u201cYes!\u201d<\/p>\n

That\u2019s pretty much the only way you can answer a question like that. The moment you acknowledge an intention to leave, you\u2019re basically inviting everyone to ignore everything you say. But it may also simply be true. Trudeau has been Prime Minister for only six years. Voluntary departure from the job\u2014because a PM is tired, or wants to arrange an orderly succession, or doesn\u2019t like their chances in the next election\u2014is relatively rare, and normally comes after more than six years. Jean Chr\u00e9tien gave up the job after a decade, under considerable pressure. Brian Mulroney hit the eject button after nearly nine years, dooming his successor Kim Campbell to a brutal electoral reckoning.<\/p>\n

Only one prime minister has ever retired voluntarily by the seven-year mark, which is the milestone Trudeau is scheduled to hit in 2022. Lester Pearson retired in 1968, after not quite five years. But Pearson was over 70. Walking away from the best job you\u2019ll ever have is a big decision, after all. And Trudeau, who has not yet made a decision about home renovations at 24 Sussex Drive, cannot be accused of being impetuous.<\/p>\n

RELATED:\u00a0There\u2019s no you in Team Trudeau<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

But already the question of Trudeau\u2019s future is becoming a feature of political conversation. A Maru Public Opinion poll days after the September election found that 55 per cent of respondents thought Trudeau should step down. A Nanos poll two weeks later found that 36 per cent shared that opinion. Obviously, most of the people who want to see any leader go voted for a different party. But in both polls, Trudeau was mentioned more than other major party leaders as the one who should leave. If nothing else, these results suggest the PM has a tenuous grasp on the hearts of the nation.<\/p>\n

Nowhere is it written that a political leader needs to be beloved. All they really need to do is win. In September Trudeau won his third consecutive election. Excellent work, but not all that rare. Seven of his predecessors also won three in a row, including Stephen Harper, Jean Chr\u00e9tien and Pierre Trudeau. What would be truly unusual would be racking up a fourth consecutive win. Only John A. Macdonald and Wilfrid Laurier have ever managed it. (Mackenzie King, whose first and last days as prime minister were separated by nearly 27 years, lost a couple of times amid all the victories, breaking what would otherwise have been longer streaks.)<\/p>\n

These considerations start to wear on a leader after a while. And on his team, which helps explain why the Trudeau inner circle has lately grown markedly more quitty. Catherine McKenna and Navdeep Bains once seemed to reside at the heart of Trudeauism. Bains played a key role at the summer retreat at Mont Tremblant in 2012 at which a small team of loyalists hatched and workshopped the Trudeau leadership project. Now both senior ministers have left. So have important political staffers whose lower public profile spared them from some of the indignities of elected office, people like Mike McNair, Elder Marques and Mathieu Bouchard.<\/p>\n

MORE:\u00a0All the good politicians are in\u00a0Montreal<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Every departed colleague stands as a reminder that there\u2019s life after politics, a life with more money and less public scrutiny. The temptation to chuck it and find a beach somewhere must always lurk in the background. Alain Jupp\u00e9, who served briefly as France\u2019s prime minister, gave this impulse a name with the title of his 1993 book, La Tentation de Venise<\/em>, the temptation to drop everything and head to Venice. For Trudeau, the poster child for that temptation might be Barack Obama, whose U.S. presidency was capped by a constitutional term limit at eight years but who now makes more money from a single speech than he used to in a year.<\/p>\n

Trudeau is likely to resist the siren song of a life away from politics for some time yet. But politics will change even before he leaves. Paul Martin\u2019s ambition was a central feature of Liberal Party life for every day that Jean Chr\u00e9tien was prime minister. Other party figures who thought they had the luxury of playing the waiting game<\/a> more coolly than Martin eventually woke up with his footprints on their backs.<\/p>\n

If you\u2019re Fran\u00e7ois-Philippe Champagne or M\u00e9lanie Joly or Mark Carney or Anita Anand\u2014names that often figure in speculation about Trudeau successors\u2014you have to ask yourself two questions, starting right now. First, are you going to be a candidate for leader? Second, is there a subtle way to stop Chrystia Freeland?<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0The new conductor of Montreal\u2019s orchestra \u2018looks like fun but sounds like business\u2019\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Surely I deserve some credit for getting this far in an election speculation essay without mentioning Freeland, the finance minister, deputy prime minister and stalwart Trudeau defender. She\u2019s not universally beloved among Liberals. She\u2019s aloof toward caucus colleagues, pays little attention to most briefings from officials, and her oratorical skills land somewhere this side of spellbinding. But so what? Right now her occasional detractors are far outnumbered by those who think she\u2019d represent a substantial improvement over Trudeau in intellectual capacity, worldliness and the possession of a closet blessedly empty of skeletons. Almost alone among reputed pretenders to the throne, she has a network within the government of loyal staffers who could form the basis for a solid campaign organization.<\/p>\n

Most importantly, her position as frontrunner is general<\/a>ly assumed. In the Liberal Party of Canada, such assumptions normally carry the weight of self-fulfilling prophecy. Liberals have been voting on their leaders since 1919. In all that time, with only a single exception, the winner has been the person who led on the first ballot. In fact, more often than not, there wasn\u2019t more than one ballot. The exception was St\u00e9phane Dion in 2006. He was in third place on the first ballot. His tenure as leader didn\u2019t go well. More than members of any other party, Liberals live to back winners. Offhand it\u2019s hard to imagine why else anyone would want to be a Liberal. So if your name isn\u2019t Chrystia Freeland and you want to lead this party, you need to do more than make your case. You need to make yourself inevitable. And you don\u2019t have a week to spare.<\/p>\n

\"Right<\/p>\n

Right now, Freeland\u2019s detractors are far outnumbered by those who think she\u2019d represent a substantial improvement over Trudeau (Courtesy of Adam Scotti\/Liberal Party of Canada)<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

But it\u2019s probably early to be measuring the prospects of individual candidates who haven\u2019t yet even identified themselves. Liberals face a bigger question: what kind of party do they want to be?<\/p>\n

Whatever happens next, Justin Trudeau will almost certainly be remembered as a significant Liberal leader, not only for the way he brought an end to a terrifying decade-long losing streak, but because he provided novel answers to the question of what the Liberal party is for. The change he has wrought was perhaps clearest this past Sept. 14 in Brampton, when Trudeau\u2019s nervous and embattled campaign enlisted the help of Jean Chr\u00e9tien to nail down voter support in the suburban ring around Toronto.<\/p>\n

Chr\u00e9tien peddled his trademark middle-of-the-road nostrums. \u201cIt\u2019s not the time to move to the far right or to the far left,\u201d he intoned. \u201cIt is the time to be in the middle.\u201d And the middle, he said, is where Canadians have always known they\u2019d find the Liberal Party of Canada. \u201cThe Liberal Party is the same party since 1867.\u201d<\/p>\n

READ:\u00a0Jason Kenney is sinking. How it all went wrong for him.\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Surely Trudeau had to bite his tongue nearly in half to resist the urge to rebut the old man. Nobody in Trudeau\u2019s party talks about the centre. When presented with evidence of its existence, say in the person of Chr\u00e9tien or John Manley or really anyone in a suit, Team Trudeau\u2019s normal instinct is to recoil. Trudeau\u2019s Liberal Party is a party of cultural combat, self-consciously designed first as a counterweight to Stephen Harper\u2019s Conservatism, then to Donald Trump\u2019s heady toxic stew, and now to anything that isn\u2019t Liberal. The location or even the existence of some purported \u201ccentre\u201d simply doesn\u2019t enter into it.<\/p>\n

If pressed to explain themselves, Trudeau Liberals would insist that, far from limiting its electoral fortunes, the contemporary party\u2019s wokeness has actually bolstered and ensured its electoral success. Trudeau didn\u2019t defeat any of three consecutive Conservative leaders thanks to his superior ability as an economic manager. He won as a superior reader of the cultural moment. He didn\u2019t win despite the bundle of diversity, reconciliation, feminism, climate activism and abortion rights that grates on earlier generations of Liberals like fingernails on a chalkboard. He won because of those stances, which put a solid floor under Liberal support and motivated a sufficient number of voters to believe they had something at stake in a Liberal victory.<\/p>\n

If enough candidates show up for a post-Trudeau leadership campaign to make things interesting, they will surely debate the merits of a move to the centre. If there are enough candidates to debate, at least one will say: \u201cSure, the six-year shopping spree started out fun and turned out to be crucial to getting through the COVID crisis. But now recess is over. It\u2019s time to rein in spending, attract foreign investors, grow the economy and do all the other responsible stuff a natural governing party used to worry about.\u201d<\/p>\n

One of the other candidates will serve up a rebuttal that may sound like this: \u201cThe centre only looks like the place where the votes are. Historically, the centre has often been where you find apathy and a demotivated electorate. That\u2019s what Joe Clark and Tom Mulcair and Michael Ignatieff found, in three separate parties. The middle of the road is where you go to get run over.\u201d<\/p>\n

RELATED:\u00a0The broken triumph of Justin Trudeau\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

It\u2019ll be a fascinating debate, one the Liberals have avoided in public for most of a decade. It will also mark a moment of maximum danger for the party, because leadership changes give voters an excuse to shop around for alternatives. The current Conservative and NDP leaders replaced predecessors who were thought to be electoral under-performers\u2014and managed to attract even less of the popular vote. So did every Liberal leader between Chr\u00e9tien and Trudeau. This, too, will wear on Trudeau\u2019s mind as he ponders his future: does he have the luxury of leaving a party that keeps winning elections under his leadership?<\/p>\n

Anyone purporting to know Trudeau\u2019s mind on these questions is guessing. He\u2019ll let us know. Either post-election will drift into pre-election and it will be clear that Justin Trudeau is bidding to enter a pantheon so far occupied only by Laurier and Macdonald; or on some random morning he\u2019ll invite Liberals to try their luck without him. All that\u2019s changed now is that the various considerations behind such a decision are now being discussed, just a little more openly, by the people who\u2019ll live with its consequences.<\/p>\n\n

This column appears in print in the January 2022 issue of<\/em> Maclean\u2019s magazine with the headline, \u201cThe life of the Party.\u201d Subscribe to the monthly print magazine here<\/a>.<\/em>
\n<\/span><\/p><\/div>\n