Political leaders, like the products we purchase at supermarkets, all come with a ‘Best By’ date. Those who are sagacious enough to leave before that date tend to time their departure to coincide with the very height of their popularity, cognizant that contemporary opinion (and perhaps even the judgment of posterity) will likely view them with affection, goodwill and positivity. In this group are a select few like Nelson Mandela who only served one five-year term as president of South Africa. Conversely there are those whose date never seem to expire, like Franklin Roosevelt, whom Americans seemed ready keep in almost perpetual power by voting him in again and again. Then there are those who, while term-limited, whose poll ratings were good enough that they could have conceivably been re-elected. American presidents Reagan, Clinton (who actually held the highest approval percentage of any post-World War Two chief executive even after the Lewinsky affair) and Obama.
The great bulk of politicians though, tend to fall into a less agreeable categories: those who followed in the footsteps of larger-than-life leaders and came to grief due to public weariness with a particular brand or were unable to establish themselves in the collective consciousness fast enough to win voter trust. Witness Martin after Chretien, Campbell following Mulroney, May, Johnson, Truss an Sunak after Cameron, Brown from Blair.
Then there those who hung onto their positions for too long, and like withered vegetables on the ‘Must Sell’ counters long after the glory days had faded: Macron, Thatcher, Churchill, Biden, both Bushes, even Angela Merkel.
Into this last somewhat ignominious category falls Justin Trudeau. He swept into parliament at the helm of a surprise majority, vaulting his once-moribund Liberal party from third place in the polls to first in a single try, winning a huge parliamentary majority, promising change, hope and “sunny ways” as he charmed Canadians and much of the world with a brand that sought to embrace feminism, welcome refugees and reset Canada’s relationship with Indigenous peoples.
At the height of his popularity surfing the wave of a second “Trudeaumania,” media requests for the young leader poured in from around the world, Canadians appeared to embrace his habit of snapping spontaneous selfies with supporters and revel in his global star power, highlighted during the 2016 G7 summit in Japan, where he was nicknamed “ikemen shusho”, or hunky PM, by local media and swooning fans who lined up for a glimpse of him.
How things have changed.
Almost a decade later, however, his political career has come to a grinding halt, with the 53-year-old on Monday, January 6th, announcing his decision to step down both as Liberal leader and Prime Minister following a party convention to choose his successor. He also made the decisions to request a prorogation of parliament, buying his ailing Liberal party precious few months to avoid disaster when an election is called.
In the end, Trudeau’s boyish Disney-prince charisma was not enough to reassure Canadians facing substantial increases in housing prices, skyrocketing grocery inflation and the prospect of huge 25% tariffs imposed by the country’s main trading partner, the US in the person of Donald Trump 2.0.
The decision capped off nothing less than a stunning, Icarus-like years-long turn of fortune for Trudeau, a former high school teacher and the eldest son of Pierre Elliott Trudeau, arguably one of Canada’s best-known and most accomplished prime ministers.
For months he had shrugged off calls to resign, insisting he would stay on even as a rising tide of his own party members urged him to go following Chrystia Freeland, his longtime compatriot in the political trenches, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister unleashed a tsunami of criticism as she announced her own resignation.
In his wake, Trudeau leaves a weakened Liberal party, with scant chances of success in the federal election originally expected by October but which is very likely to come sooner post March 24th. Jagmeet Singh, the leader of the New Democratic party (NDP), recently vowed to present a parliamentary motion to topple Trudeau’s government. In fact, Singh may have to get in line for two other opposition parties – the Conservatives and the Bloc Quebecois – have all vowed to do the same thing, constituting an unrecoverable trifecta of opposition parties which would drown the Liberal minority government.
The Liberals’ political fortunes have been in freefall for some time now, suffering the loss of key political strongholds in recent byelections and the abdication of prominent cabinet ministers who through self-selection have elected not to run again in the looming next election. Small wonder, given that a recent poll placed the governing party at a dismal 16% support, its worst pre-election standing in more than a century.
Trudeau’s dramatic reshaping of the Liberal party into a political entity tightly arrayed around its leader – and one with no obvious heir apparent – offers a glimpse into the challenge prospective candidates face in vying for the top job and the damage the prime minister has done in delaying that process through his obstinacy. When he took over the party in 2013, they had a mere 34 seats and through relentless branding efforts he and his team built the party up in his own image with the effect that now it’s not clear what would be left of the Liberal party and the Liberal brand without him.
It is natural, even instinctive for all politicians seek out allies for advice and support, but Trudeau’s decision to surround himself with close friends within his inner circle was unusual and probably played a role in convincing him he could contest the next election effectively even when public opinion suggested otherwise. In fact, so close is his circle that a number of ministers were at his wedding party and the current finance minister (Dominic LeBlanc) is his former babysitter.
But such a tight inner circle runs the risk – especially over time – of creating a hermetically sealed environment which can shield the person at its center from bad news, even feedback (however negative) that might be contrary to their world view. To some extent this would explain how a leader seemingly attuned to the mood of the country found himself embroiled in series of personal scandals, including a family trip to the Aga Khan’s private island, and skipping the country’s first National Day of Truth and Reconciliation for a surfing vacation. Three damning images of the Canadian prime minister in blackface and revelations that members of his family were paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by a charity to which his government recently awarded a substantial contract also eroded his carefully crafted public image.
Trudeau’s apparent inability to understand public outrage in each case offers an explanation for his protracted refusal to step down and his seeming blindness to growing dissatisfaction within his party and the broader public.
This is not to say that Trudeau’s time in power has been an outright unmitigated disaster. He leaves behind a mixed legacy; one dotted with progressive wins but which also fell short of the ambitious promises that fueled his rise to power. As prime minister, he oversaw landmark reforms such as the legalization of marijuana and programmes aimed at bolstering childcare access and affordability. The challenge lies in that many of his larger promises – especially around climate change, Indigenous reconciliation, and electoral reform – have been less successful.
His tenure, however, had managed to transform Canada in some ways, as his “sunny ways” and focus on inclusivity trickled down into government policy. Trudeau tilted Canada towards greater progressiveness in terms of gender equality, immigration, and social rights. His reassertion of Canada’s liberal identity was often played against Trump 1.0’s isolationist tendencies, thrusting Canada into the limelight when, for example, Trudeau headed to an airport to personally welcome Syrian refugees after Trump had signed off on his so-called Muslim ban.
The result – reinforced through stances such as his gender-balanced cabinet, the emphasis on LGBTQ+ rights, and his determination to take in 25,000 Syrian refugees – had helped to position Canada as more inclusive and globally minded.
But 2025 is not 2015 and by now Trudeau has run out of road. What was once seen as fresh appeal has become stale. And he has contributed to the dysfunctional air round Parliament Hill by selecting what could arguably the worst time to try and hand over the crown.
The political drama has dominated headlines across Canada and beyond, offered a sobering glimpse of a governing party in disarray as Canadians brace themselves for Donald Trump’s return to power. Last month the US president-elect announced plans to slap a 25% tariff on all products coming into the United States from Canada, sending the Canadian dollar tumbling as analysts warned that exports to the US had climbed to about 77% of the country’s total exports. It would, for certain, plunge the country into an instant recession.
The fast-approaching possibility of an economic crisis comes as affordability already ranks among the top concerns of many across Canada. While most Canadians agreed with the direction the Trudeau-led government had taken when it came to issues such as equality and diversity, many felt that he had failed to deliver when it came to economic issues, and the Liberals were easily made to appear flatfooted.
Compounding this perfect storm is the dichotomy produced when Trudeau asked Governor-General Mary Simon to prorogue (suspend) parliament until March 24th so as to allow the Liberals enough time to select a new leader and prime minister. Given that the opposition is likely to gang up and topple the government as soon as parliament resumes sitting whoever wins the leadership could technically (owing to the Liberal party’s constitution on elections) be in power for less than a month before they are turfed out. So, Trudeau remains in power when Trump becomes president (likely resulting in a continuing barrage of “Canada is the 51st state insults”), parliament cannot pass any bills as it’s not in session and the country will be plunged into an election: four months of uncertainty and instability at a volatile time.
This is not to suggest that the opposition is in reality any more popular. Conservative party leader Pierre Poilievre, likely the winner oft the next election and therefore become prime minister, is a polarizing figure in his own right. In fact, of late it seems as if we are in a world where most of the leaders are polarizing (as are the alternatives), but people are in a mood to take it out on someone. And, for the moment, in Canada they are looking at the guy on top. because of their worries about paying for groceries, paying for housing and wondering about what’s happening on climate change etc. etc.
In the final analysis, Justin Trudeau will leave behind a decidedly mixed legacy; one dotted with progressive wins but which also fell short of the ambitious promises and outsized expectations that fueled his rise to power. Unlike his father, who presided over equally tumultuous times, it will be harder to gauge the effects of his time in office. At the very least, as he leaves the stage, we are left to wonder about this mercurial, contradictory man and his ruefully unfulfilled potential.
Comments