"Taking advantage of others' generosity." I hadn't thought of putting it that way, but you are absolutely right. Not an attractive trait. Another thing: he is always the star in his own second-rate performances. And he only has a couple of scripts (empathy for the unfortunate, partisan boosterism, lamentations for historic wrongs) and they are getting tired. This may be true of all long-serving politicians, but Trudeau's lack of substance is increasingly apparent. Too familiar, perhaps; vaulting ambition with no discernible scaffolding. Years ago, when he was running for the leadership, I covered him at a small event at the Blacksheep Inn, in Wakefield, Que. He spoke about growing up in the area, about his love for the rivers and forests, about the urgent necessity of protecting the environment. He spoke without notes and with passionate urgency _ or a show of passionate urgency. He was captivating. Only when I looked at my notes later did I realize that he really hadn't said much worth reporting.( I think that is still true but I am open to reminders). He was good during the pandemic; he handled Trump with exemplary prudence the first time around. So there's that.
Did you really need 9 years to realize ``his lack of substance is increasingly apparent''. Some of us sussed this out when he was an MP in Papineau at the very beginning of his political career.
Put it another way, had his last name been Côté or Jones, he would still be teaching high school drama somewhere obscure.
Ah, the pandemic performance. When daily he walked down the Rideau cottage steps to give Canadians more grim news using his grim face. What a performer! He realized at that point that he had a captivated audience; could there be a better time to call an unnecessary election.
Im happy I wasnt the only one. From Day One I said exactly what you stated.
Not too long after taking office, is when the smugness, arrogance, and Narcissim became so apparent. Why people overlooked this fact, brushed it off, I will never know.
Like you, I too said, with tedious frequency, he’s an empty suit, no education to speak of, no public or military service, zero experience. If his vapid resume came across my desk, it would have been deep-sixed.
The collective media would not tolerate the anti-Trudeau blasphemy. They shaped & promoted the Trudeau Cult and quickly denigrated anyone who thought otherwise - it’s the Nazis, Far Right, those fascists!!
I’m smugly reveling in an inordinate degree of Schadenfreude as I watch the backpedaling & palpable fear I see in the pundits panicking about their careers as their Creature descends under the waves.
I would disagree that he was good during the pandemic.
- refused to quarantine travellers from Ground Zero of the pandemic. Called anyone who dared suggest this “racist”.
- gave away our PPE stockpiles to China when it was clear things were going to get bad here.
- entered into a bizarre vaccine partnership with China when our allies and partners were working with western pharmaceutical suppliers to develop the vaccines we have today. Then China freezes us out, making us beg and scrape to get in with the main vaccines our allies had been working on all along. It took Canada months longer to receive vaccines than our allies.
- he tried to end parliamentary oversight at the start of the pandemic.
Trudeau might not have been as bad as Trump (I will give him Operation Warp Speed, although he seems to have memory holed that), but his infatuation with China made him make some massive errors in managing the pandemic here.
I was drawn to “he is always the star in his own second-rate performances.”
At the risk of seeming to be argumentative, perhaps that’s why Trudeau is often lauded for his pandemic response. He basically had the whole communications apparatus at his disposal, with zero competition. If we would have had a normal, properly functioning Parliament and a media that had more insight than what was offered from the steps of Rideau Cottage would we still see Trudeau and his government in the same light?
Yes, I just made a comment regarding his Rideau Cottage steps performance. Those were crazy times, for sure. He had an entire nation doing his bidding. Oops, except the convoy participants and their supporters who lined up along the Canadian highways cheering them on. So, not all. Finally, thanks to Chrystia Freeland we all see the emperor has no clothes.
Eh, I don’t think he was good during the pandemic, at all. (And his Chinese friend screwed him over.) As for handling Trump, all I recall was Freeland’s shocked face when the USA announced, with her standing right there, that they were going ahead with Mexico and leaving Canada out of it. Canada capitulated, deal was done.
Good grief Paul! No wonder he doesn’t return your requests for interviews anymore. Calling out nepo-babies on their nepotism & privileged existence is just not…..cool (?). But I thoroughly enjoyed the read. Keep it up
Your comments on the Liberal Party are alarming. His best skill has been to ensured his complete control of the party, but he has failed to safeguard the party for the future.
Analogies to how he has run his government.
Thank you for highlighting Ms Freeland’s history and roll in his government. Too much revisionist history going on this week. She sat at the table loyally while Jane Philpott was given the boot. She showed her morals then, and through repeated loyalty to Trudeau throughout all the scandals. She deserves no applause for her roll in his government.
Thank you for calling out the Prime Minister's dreadful character (and the galling lack of courage on the part of Canadian comers who dilly dally about why they have decided to "move on").
I for one sincerely hope that the Liberals get absolutely pasted during the next election. If they get 35 seats it will be 33 too many.
AC, I enjoyed your comment but I respectfully challenge your mathematical model. I would argue that if they get 35 seats that would be 36 seats too many.
Now, you may ask about my mathematical abilities but I suggest that I feel that a) the Libs deserve NO seats; and b) they owe us something so, damnit, just give us a bonus seat back because these guys have always finagled and lied and we won't be able to recover all the money wasted/stolen/hidden/etc. so just give us a damned seat!
Is your preference an autocracy then? Or just a reboot of the historical opposition parties? Like the progressive Conservatives attempted 20 or so years ago?
In order for that scenario to play out, you need the BQ and Conservatives to sweep Quebec. PEI to give up on the Liberals, BC and Manitoba to Send Singh a Packin.
It’s amazing how the Conservatives have tied the pension can to Singh. The truth is his party is done. If you can’t raise enough money to fight an election despite the fact that your main opponent for that money is in absolute free fall, you are finished as any political force.
I believe that there is some kind of Khalistani connection to Singh's commitment to keeping Trudeau in power. I suspect that there is gang money involved.
Or I have gone over the edge in creating my own conspiracy theory.
The bare minimum MP pension isn't a lot per year. Yes, it's something, but we're talking beer money territory. It takes 19 years to qualify for the max. That's at least 4 but more like 5 or 6 terms, depending. Just FYI for all those freaking out over the Jagmeet.
Excellent point. I can’t say that paying for MP’s pensions is my biggest concern with these federal government goof balls.. What has always seemed disconnected is on one hand complaining about the NDP leaders expensive cars and jewelry and then saying his only reason to prop up Trudeau is wanting to qualify for pension.
...it's not the money we're freaking out about. It's the waiting.
We're freaking out because it is unseemly for a Party Leader to be making decisions of national consequence based mainly on his own financial interests.
Though, the real irony in your argument is that his support of the Liberals is not an actual prerequisite to qualify for his pension, nor is avoiding an election. He'd have to quit politics completely, or the NDP fires him as leader of the party after losing his seat...somehow.
I get it though; the comparison to near retirement blue collar workers that are stretching their lack of diligence to bare minimum tolerability until they hit their personal finance goals is a relatable story.
Bravo, Paul, for sharing what should be a tariff-free import from Britain into Canada - the ministerial resignation letter. Having studied in the UK at the time of Margaret Thatcher's defenestration - or should I say 'hand-bagged' by her Cabinet - i've had an appreciation for the finely-nuanced malice contained in resignation letters and speeches by former ministers. Sir Geoffrey Howe's masterful exposition of the follies of Thatcher's position on the ECU (hard or soft) remains the most biting of all. She resigned some 9 days later. It contained this searing passage:
"The conflict of loyalty, of loyalty to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—and, after all, in two decades together that instinct of loyalty is still very real—and of loyalty to what I perceive to be the true interests of the nation, has become all too great. I no longer believe it possible to resolve that conflict from within this Government. That is why I have resigned. In doing so, I have done what I believe to be right for my party and my country. The time has come for others to consider their own response to the tragic conflict of loyalties with which I have myself wrestled for perhaps too long."
Who would want to take over leadership of the party from Trudeau between now and the next election? They risk being n charge during a serious defeat, with what reward? The party could hold them responsible and dump them before another election. Maybe someone with the sort of dedication to party such as Ambrose had to the CPC over personal political ambition. Who would that be?
Whoever the new leader is won't lose because of themselves. They'll lose because of Trudeau. There's no reason to throw them out after that if they show potential. Pearson lost his first election the won two more. Harper lost his first election then won three after that. This one and done stuff doesnt have to be a hard rule.
Definitely does not & should not have to be, just seems to have been lately, like Harper is more the modern exception, and in his first election as leader the newly combined CPC gained seats and the LPC dropped out of majority. Its not so much the parties punishing leader for not wining as other potential leader or faction taking opportunity.
Not an NDP supporter but strategically it makes sense Mr Singh has more political leverage on policy now than he will with a Conservative majority. So makes sense to hold your nose and prop up the minority government if in his position. I don’t buy narrative that it’s all about a pension. He seems to genuinely be trying to push for policies he believes in.
Peter Julian has litterally said that the NDP will consider a confidence motion sometime after February. Why then? Why wait? It may have nothing to do with pensions, but their strategy is hardly doing anything to dispel the notion!
Is it not the case that the House is not going to sit until, and there will not be an Opposition Day or a money bill on which to vote, until late Feb or early March? You do realize they can’t just vote non-confidence in the comment section of Reddit? It’s Parliament, not Facebook.
The House returns on Jan 27th and opposition days have yet to be assigned. Perhaps you sould verify your information outside of Reddit and Facebook with a valid source instead of engaging in a tu quoque fallacy. Ourcommons.ca should function quite well for your purposes.
It is entirely possible I am mistaken in my interpretation of the situation and you are correct. As I don’t follow the NDP very closely the later is probable.
The reporter in the Singh scrum who asked why Jagmeet was leaving ON the table the possibility of supporting Trudeau in the future - who was he? That was a brilliant question, I'd like to read his work.
"Taking advantage of others' generosity." I hadn't thought of putting it that way, but you are absolutely right. Not an attractive trait. Another thing: he is always the star in his own second-rate performances. And he only has a couple of scripts (empathy for the unfortunate, partisan boosterism, lamentations for historic wrongs) and they are getting tired. This may be true of all long-serving politicians, but Trudeau's lack of substance is increasingly apparent. Too familiar, perhaps; vaulting ambition with no discernible scaffolding. Years ago, when he was running for the leadership, I covered him at a small event at the Blacksheep Inn, in Wakefield, Que. He spoke about growing up in the area, about his love for the rivers and forests, about the urgent necessity of protecting the environment. He spoke without notes and with passionate urgency _ or a show of passionate urgency. He was captivating. Only when I looked at my notes later did I realize that he really hadn't said much worth reporting.( I think that is still true but I am open to reminders). He was good during the pandemic; he handled Trump with exemplary prudence the first time around. So there's that.
Did you really need 9 years to realize ``his lack of substance is increasingly apparent''. Some of us sussed this out when he was an MP in Papineau at the very beginning of his political career.
Put it another way, had his last name been Côté or Jones, he would still be teaching high school drama somewhere obscure.
I don’t even think he was good during the pandemic. It was a ‘I am perfect’ every time.
What astonishes me is that his lack of substance has been there from the beginning….so I guess voters just wanted a pretty face.
"Lack of substance" sums it up!
Ah, the pandemic performance. When daily he walked down the Rideau cottage steps to give Canadians more grim news using his grim face. What a performer! He realized at that point that he had a captivated audience; could there be a better time to call an unnecessary election.
Agree, he is a good performer and thus probably was a very good high school drama teacher.
Did you notice how Melania and Ivanka were smitten? A pretty face will take you a long way. And that might be part of the reason Trump despises him
I agree, finally what was so obvious to some, has now become obvious to, I would like to say all, but alas, almost all.
Im happy I wasnt the only one. From Day One I said exactly what you stated.
Not too long after taking office, is when the smugness, arrogance, and Narcissim became so apparent. Why people overlooked this fact, brushed it off, I will never know.
Like you, I too said, with tedious frequency, he’s an empty suit, no education to speak of, no public or military service, zero experience. If his vapid resume came across my desk, it would have been deep-sixed.
The collective media would not tolerate the anti-Trudeau blasphemy. They shaped & promoted the Trudeau Cult and quickly denigrated anyone who thought otherwise - it’s the Nazis, Far Right, those fascists!!
I’m smugly reveling in an inordinate degree of Schadenfreude as I watch the backpedaling & palpable fear I see in the pundits panicking about their careers as their Creature descends under the waves.
I would disagree that he was good during the pandemic.
- refused to quarantine travellers from Ground Zero of the pandemic. Called anyone who dared suggest this “racist”.
- gave away our PPE stockpiles to China when it was clear things were going to get bad here.
- entered into a bizarre vaccine partnership with China when our allies and partners were working with western pharmaceutical suppliers to develop the vaccines we have today. Then China freezes us out, making us beg and scrape to get in with the main vaccines our allies had been working on all along. It took Canada months longer to receive vaccines than our allies.
- he tried to end parliamentary oversight at the start of the pandemic.
Trudeau might not have been as bad as Trump (I will give him Operation Warp Speed, although he seems to have memory holed that), but his infatuation with China made him make some massive errors in managing the pandemic here.
Allowing planes from China to land in Canada while we were on the precipice?
Great comments. Thanks.
I was drawn to “he is always the star in his own second-rate performances.”
At the risk of seeming to be argumentative, perhaps that’s why Trudeau is often lauded for his pandemic response. He basically had the whole communications apparatus at his disposal, with zero competition. If we would have had a normal, properly functioning Parliament and a media that had more insight than what was offered from the steps of Rideau Cottage would we still see Trudeau and his government in the same light?
Yes, I just made a comment regarding his Rideau Cottage steps performance. Those were crazy times, for sure. He had an entire nation doing his bidding. Oops, except the convoy participants and their supporters who lined up along the Canadian highways cheering them on. So, not all. Finally, thanks to Chrystia Freeland we all see the emperor has no clothes.
Eh, I don’t think he was good during the pandemic, at all. (And his Chinese friend screwed him over.) As for handling Trump, all I recall was Freeland’s shocked face when the USA announced, with her standing right there, that they were going ahead with Mexico and leaving Canada out of it. Canada capitulated, deal was done.
Good grief Paul! No wonder he doesn’t return your requests for interviews anymore. Calling out nepo-babies on their nepotism & privileged existence is just not…..cool (?). But I thoroughly enjoyed the read. Keep it up
Your comments on the Liberal Party are alarming. His best skill has been to ensured his complete control of the party, but he has failed to safeguard the party for the future.
Analogies to how he has run his government.
Thank you for highlighting Ms Freeland’s history and roll in his government. Too much revisionist history going on this week. She sat at the table loyally while Jane Philpott was given the boot. She showed her morals then, and through repeated loyalty to Trudeau throughout all the scandals. She deserves no applause for her roll in his government.
Thank you for calling out the Prime Minister's dreadful character (and the galling lack of courage on the part of Canadian comers who dilly dally about why they have decided to "move on").
I for one sincerely hope that the Liberals get absolutely pasted during the next election. If they get 35 seats it will be 33 too many.
AC, I enjoyed your comment but I respectfully challenge your mathematical model. I would argue that if they get 35 seats that would be 36 seats too many.
Now, you may ask about my mathematical abilities but I suggest that I feel that a) the Libs deserve NO seats; and b) they owe us something so, damnit, just give us a bonus seat back because these guys have always finagled and lied and we won't be able to recover all the money wasted/stolen/hidden/etc. so just give us a damned seat!
My hope is that both the NDP and the Liberals lose party status and no longer will my tax dollars go to supporting either party.
I don't know why my tax dollar is going to the Bloc, being that it really isn't a federal party.
So, I find your math logic more than acceptable.
Is your preference an autocracy then? Or just a reboot of the historical opposition parties? Like the progressive Conservatives attempted 20 or so years ago?
In order for that scenario to play out, you need the BQ and Conservatives to sweep Quebec. PEI to give up on the Liberals, BC and Manitoba to Send Singh a Packin.
Yes Carole we can DREAM! Fingers crossed.
Im hoping for a rout, something like what the conservatives endured thirty odd years ago.
It’s amazing how the Conservatives have tied the pension can to Singh. The truth is his party is done. If you can’t raise enough money to fight an election despite the fact that your main opponent for that money is in absolute free fall, you are finished as any political force.
The NDP base likely relates to the notion of putting in time until you qualify for the pension, and does not begrudge him for it.
They might not but I sure as hell do.
Its pathetic, but why would we think that our politicians are any better than politicians elsewhere?
I believe that there is some kind of Khalistani connection to Singh's commitment to keeping Trudeau in power. I suspect that there is gang money involved.
Or I have gone over the edge in creating my own conspiracy theory.
Yeah, I think you might have gone over the edge here :-)
His incompetence is sufficient. We needn’t hear any stupid, racist conspiracy theories.
Carole do you believe that the earth is flat?
Is it just me, or we haven’t heard a peep out of Mélanie Joly throughout this whole kerfuffle...?
I suspect that her handlers told her to not speak and let the rest of the party members implode.
Or no one told her what to say.
Probably told to keep quiet after that abysmal performance in Halifax a few weeks ago.
The bare minimum MP pension isn't a lot per year. Yes, it's something, but we're talking beer money territory. It takes 19 years to qualify for the max. That's at least 4 but more like 5 or 6 terms, depending. Just FYI for all those freaking out over the Jagmeet.
Excellent point. I can’t say that paying for MP’s pensions is my biggest concern with these federal government goof balls.. What has always seemed disconnected is on one hand complaining about the NDP leaders expensive cars and jewelry and then saying his only reason to prop up Trudeau is wanting to qualify for pension.
...it's not the money we're freaking out about. It's the waiting.
We're freaking out because it is unseemly for a Party Leader to be making decisions of national consequence based mainly on his own financial interests.
I for one don't mind the dental and drug plans...
Though, the real irony in your argument is that his support of the Liberals is not an actual prerequisite to qualify for his pension, nor is avoiding an election. He'd have to quit politics completely, or the NDP fires him as leader of the party after losing his seat...somehow.
I get it though; the comparison to near retirement blue collar workers that are stretching their lack of diligence to bare minimum tolerability until they hit their personal finance goals is a relatable story.
Whew! Great column. He does exude rich kid shallow behaviour. Shameful
Bravo, Paul, for sharing what should be a tariff-free import from Britain into Canada - the ministerial resignation letter. Having studied in the UK at the time of Margaret Thatcher's defenestration - or should I say 'hand-bagged' by her Cabinet - i've had an appreciation for the finely-nuanced malice contained in resignation letters and speeches by former ministers. Sir Geoffrey Howe's masterful exposition of the follies of Thatcher's position on the ECU (hard or soft) remains the most biting of all. She resigned some 9 days later. It contained this searing passage:
"The conflict of loyalty, of loyalty to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister—and, after all, in two decades together that instinct of loyalty is still very real—and of loyalty to what I perceive to be the true interests of the nation, has become all too great. I no longer believe it possible to resolve that conflict from within this Government. That is why I have resigned. In doing so, I have done what I believe to be right for my party and my country. The time has come for others to consider their own response to the tragic conflict of loyalties with which I have myself wrestled for perhaps too long."
Who would want to take over leadership of the party from Trudeau between now and the next election? They risk being n charge during a serious defeat, with what reward? The party could hold them responsible and dump them before another election. Maybe someone with the sort of dedication to party such as Ambrose had to the CPC over personal political ambition. Who would that be?
Her name was Chrystia Freeland.
Whoever the new leader is won't lose because of themselves. They'll lose because of Trudeau. There's no reason to throw them out after that if they show potential. Pearson lost his first election the won two more. Harper lost his first election then won three after that. This one and done stuff doesnt have to be a hard rule.
Definitely does not & should not have to be, just seems to have been lately, like Harper is more the modern exception, and in his first election as leader the newly combined CPC gained seats and the LPC dropped out of majority. Its not so much the parties punishing leader for not wining as other potential leader or faction taking opportunity.
Could the process as currently constituted block a write-in campaign for Doris Day?
Que sera sera…
The party that rejected the Reform Act and designed a murky leadership selection process deserves what it gets.
Problem is, we're the ones who are getting it.
Best summary I have read so far about this nonsense.
Thanks for this. Great perspective as usual.
Not an NDP supporter but strategically it makes sense Mr Singh has more political leverage on policy now than he will with a Conservative majority. So makes sense to hold your nose and prop up the minority government if in his position. I don’t buy narrative that it’s all about a pension. He seems to genuinely be trying to push for policies he believes in.
Peter Julian has litterally said that the NDP will consider a confidence motion sometime after February. Why then? Why wait? It may have nothing to do with pensions, but their strategy is hardly doing anything to dispel the notion!
Is it not the case that the House is not going to sit until, and there will not be an Opposition Day or a money bill on which to vote, until late Feb or early March? You do realize they can’t just vote non-confidence in the comment section of Reddit? It’s Parliament, not Facebook.
The House returns on Jan 27th and opposition days have yet to be assigned. Perhaps you sould verify your information outside of Reddit and Facebook with a valid source instead of engaging in a tu quoque fallacy. Ourcommons.ca should function quite well for your purposes.
It is entirely possible I am mistaken in my interpretation of the situation and you are correct. As I don’t follow the NDP very closely the later is probable.
Do you like voting in the dead of winter?
He can't leave. He has nowhere to go but the Trudeau Foundation.
And really, are not the foundations of the Foundation shaky as hell? After all, it seems that it depends on money from the Chinese government.
The reporter in the Singh scrum who asked why Jagmeet was leaving ON the table the possibility of supporting Trudeau in the future - who was he? That was a brilliant question, I'd like to read his work.