The 2011 federal election seemed to have fundamentally changed Canadian politics. And maybe it did. Just not quite in the way it was imagined.
In theory, that vote heralded the arrival of a new political era. The Liberal Party’s day was done — the broadly centrist institution that dominated Canadian politics in the 20th century was no longer fit for purpose. Canada would finally become more like its sister democracies, with a clear contest between a distinct party of the political right and a distinct party of the left. The future seemed to belong to the Conservatives and the NDP.
Then things changed again, as they are wont to do. Foremost among those unforeseen developments was Justin Trudeau’s election as Liberal leader, which happened 10 years ago this week.
In the short term, Trudeau’s mere presence breathed a bit of new life into the lungs of a prostrate party. In time, it also gave the party a new sense of direction. If the worst thing that could be said about the Liberal Party was that it represented the “mushy middle,” the best thing that could be said about Trudeau’s early leadership is that he made the party less mushy.
He announced that he would support the legalization of marijuana. He declared that his party would take a strict pro-choice position in favour of abortion rights. He unceremoniously ejected Liberal senators from the party’s parliamentary caucus. And then he laid out a party platform that did not include a commitment to balancing the federal budget.
Each of these moves — like Trudeau’s own decision to seek the party leadership — was met with some level of consternation and skepticism. But four years after the party was given up for dead, the Liberals won 184 seats and Trudeau became prime minister.
What has taken shape since then is the most active and activist generation of Liberals to hold power since Lester B. Pearson’s government in the 1960s.
Justin Trudeau arrives on stage in Montreal on Oct. 20, 2015, after the Liberals won the general election. (Nicholas Kamm/AFP/Getty Images)
In 2011, when Michael Ignatieff was leading the Liberals, the party platform outlined $8.2 billion in new investments spread over two years. In 2015, Trudeau’s platform covered $149.8 billion over four years. The words “racism,” “gender” and “reconciliation” don’t appear at all in the 2011 platform. Those words appeared 28, 46 and 19 times in the Liberal party’s 2021 platform.
Some of those changes in language and emphasis might simply reflect the changing times (“reconciliation” had not really entered the popular lexicon when the Liberal platform was written in 2011). But they also reflect a leader and a party that have tried enthusiastically to speak to emerging demands and issues.
On his 10th anniversary as leader, Trudeau’s government may be closer to the end of its time in office than the beginning. Much of the shine has come off the famous son of Pierre Trudeau. But the Liberals remain competitive in public opinion polling and comfortably ahead of the NDP.
Did the prophecies come true?
One way to read the events of the past 10 years is to conclude that the post-2011 theories of realignment turned out to be broadly correct — that the party system did polarize, with the Liberals shifting to become the dominant party of the left.
There may be something to that, at least in the short term. But it’s also possible to overstate how much the Liberals have moved leftward. The Liberals remain far less inclined than New Democrats to talk about class or heap scorn upon the rich and powerful.
Despite major new social investments, the Liberals still seem reluctant to create new federally run programs. Dental care is only happening because the NDP demanded it, while Liberal interest in pharmacare has waned.
Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, left, and NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh prepare for the start of the federal election English-language leaders’ debate in Gatineau, Que., on Sept. 9, 2021. (Justin Tang/The Canadian Press)
Even when you consider trends in federal spending, the Liberals’ leftward lurch seems more like a nudge. As a share of GDP, federal program spending in 2023-24 is projected to be merely on par with what it was in the late 1980s, when Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservative government was in office.
In electoral terms, it’s also possible to conclude that Trudeau’s election victories have merely dressed up what is actually a long-term decline in the Liberal Party’s standing.
The ceiling on Liberal support does seem to have been dropping gradually since Mackenzie King’s Liberals received 51.3 per cent of the vote in 1940. Louis St. Laurent topped out at 49.2 per cent, Pierre Trudeau at 45.4 per cent, Jean Chrétien at 41.2 per cent. While Trudeau won a majority in 2015, the Liberals could only draw 39.5 per cent of the vote.
If the ceiling falls any further, it will be hard for a future Liberal leader to stand up.
But the same is broadly true of the Conservative Party — a party that has its own existential challenges. John Diefenbaker’s Progressive Conservatives won 53.6 per cent of the vote in 1958 and Mulroney got 50 per cent in 1984. Stephen Harper’s Conservatives couldn’t get more than 39.6 per cent.
In a system that includes both a durable NDP and a resilient Bloc Québécois (and a Green Party of some sort), it might simply be very difficult for any party to routinely capture much more than 40 per cent of the vote.
So the Liberals probably won’t be able to dominate this century like they did the last one (from 1896 to 2006, the Liberals governed for 80 years). When they do govern, they might have to work more often with other parties (as they are now).
Not mushy enough?
Ten years after Trudeau became the 13th leader of the Liberal Party of Canada, there is a new complaint — that the party is now not mushy enough.
Political polarization is worth worrying about. Taken to extremes, it can breed the sort of tribalism that makes a democracy difficult to manage. And it’s very possible that the next Liberal leader will decide that Trudeau took the party too far to the left. Economic or political circumstances might require the Liberal Party to shift — just as it has in the past.
It’s also possible that the political centre isn’t, or wasn’t, quite where it was thought to be. And while some pundits might prefer moderation, other Canadians might fairly want progress to happen faster than a more centrist approach would allow.
Any Liberal who aspires to win elections might also note that while the Liberal vote has eroded, the combined Liberal-NDP vote has consistently hovered around 50 per cent for the last 40 years — peaking at 59.2 per cent in 2015 and only once dropping below 46 per cent (in 2008). And on an issue as central as climate change, Conservative voters are much less enthusiastic about government action.
But the ultimate lesson of the 2011 election and the last 10 years is that the future is very hard to predict — and that political success depends on both a little bit of luck and an ability to adapt.
Quebec legislature member Youri Chassin has announced he’s leaving the Coalition Avenir Québec government to sit as an Independent.
He announced the decision shortly after writing an open letter criticizing Premier François Legault’s government for abandoning its principles of smaller government.
In the letter published in Le Journal de Montréal and Le Journal de Québec, Chassin accused the party of falling back on what he called the old formula of throwing money at problems instead of looking to do things differently.
Chassin says public services are more fragile than ever, despite rising spending that pushed the province to a record $11-billion deficit projected in the last budget.
He is the second CAQ member to leave the party in a little more than one week, after economy and energy minister Pierre Fitzgibbon announced Sept. 4 he would leave because he lost motivation to do his job.
Chassin says he has no intention of joining another party and will instead sit as an Independent until the end of his term.
He has represented the Saint-Jérôme riding since the CAQ rose to power in 2018, but has not served in cabinet.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 12, 2024.
MONTREAL – NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says he will not be taking advice from Pierre Poilievre after the Conservative leader challenged him to bring down government.
“I say directly to Pierre Poilievre: I’m not going to listen to you,” said Singh on Wednesday, accusing Poilievre of wanting to take away dental-care coverage from Canadians, among other things.
“I’m not going to listen to your advice. You want to destroy people’s lives, I want to build up a brighter future.”
Earlier in the day, Poilievre challenged Singh to commit to voting non-confidence in the government, saying his party will force a vote in the House of Commons “at the earliest possibly opportunity.”
“I’m asking Jagmeet Singh and the NDP to commit unequivocally before Monday’s byelections: will they vote non-confidence to bring down the costly coalition and trigger a carbon tax election, or will Jagmeet Singh sell out Canadians again?” Poilievre said.
“It’s put up or shut up time for the NDP.”
While Singh rejected the idea he would ever listen to Poilievre, he did not say how the NDP would vote on a non-confidence motion.
“I’ve said on any vote, we’re going to look at the vote and we’ll make our decision. I’m not going to say our decision ahead of time,” he said.
Singh’s top adviser said on Tuesday the NDP leader is not particularly eager to trigger an election, even as the Conservatives challenge him to do just that.
Anne McGrath, Singh’s principal secretary, says there will be more volatility in Parliament and the odds of an early election have risen.
“I don’t think he is anxious to launch one, or chomping at the bit to have one, but it can happen,” she said in an interview.
New Democrat MPs are in a second day of meetings in Montreal as they nail down a plan for how to navigate the minority Parliament this fall.
The caucus retreat comes one week after Singh announced the party has left the supply-and-confidence agreement with the governing Liberals.
It’s also taking place in the very city where New Democrats are hoping to pick up a seat on Monday, when voters go to the polls in Montreal’s LaSalle—Émard—Verdun. A second byelection is being held that day in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood—Transcona, where the NDP is hoping to hold onto a seat the Conservatives are also vying for.
While New Democrats are seeking to distance themselves from the Liberals, they don’t appear ready to trigger a general election.
Singh signalled on Tuesday that he will have more to say Wednesday about the party’s strategy for the upcoming sitting.
He is hoping to convince Canadians that his party can defeat the federal Conservatives, who have been riding high in the polls over the last year.
Singh has attacked Poilievre as someone who would bring back Harper-style cuts to programs that Canadians rely on, including the national dental-care program that was part of the supply-and-confidence agreement.
The Canadian Press has asked Poilievre’s office whether the Conservative leader intends to keep the program in place, if he forms government after the next election.
With the return of Parliament just days away, the NDP is also keeping in mind how other parties will look to capitalize on the new makeup of the House of Commons.
The Bloc Québécois has already indicated that it’s written up a list of demands for the Liberals in exchange for support on votes.
The next federal election must take place by October 2025 at the latest.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
Montreal Mayor Valérie Plante is defending her decision to turn off comments on her social media accounts — with an announcement on social media.
She posted screenshots to X this morning of vulgar names she’s been called on the platform, and says comments on her posts for months have been dominated by insults, to the point that she decided to block them.
Montreal’s Opposition leader and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association have criticized Plante for limiting freedom of expression by restricting comments on her X and Instagram accounts.
They say elected officials who use social media should be willing to hear from constituents on those platforms.
However, Plante says some people may believe there is a fundamental right to call someone offensive names and to normalize violence online, but she disagrees.
Her statement on X is closed to comments.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 11, 2024.
