Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announces his resignation as leader of the Liberal Party outside Rideau Cottage in Ottawa on Jan. 6.Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press
“I will always be motivated by what is in the best interests of Canadians,” Justin Trudeau declared, in announcing his resignation. And yet the interests of Canadians seem to have finished well behind the interests of the Liberal Party in his decision.
At one point the Prime Minister mused “we are at a critical moment in the world.” He got that much right, not least where Canada is concerned. The country is under assault on several fronts: by China, by India, by Russia, but most of all, incredibly, by the United States, whose president-elect has, for no sensible reason, declared economic war on us.
And for the next several months, at least, we will just have to sit tight before anyone does anything about it – not because the Prime Minister is going, but because, as he also announced, he is staying, pending the election of a new leader.
Alone in his office – for his staff will be off filing job applications – the Prime Minister might speak, but will find no one is listening. He will pull on all the old familiar levers, and find they are not attached to anything.
There is nothing wrong in principle, of course, with a leader staying on until his successor is chosen. There is nothing wrong with proroguing Parliament, in principle. It is the time he proposes each should take, and the context, that is the issue.
The Prime Minister did not have to advise the Governor-General to prorogue Parliament until March 24 – nearly three months from now. He chose to. The pretext – that Parliament was “paralyzed” and in need of a “reset” – is bogus enough: the paralysis could have been resolved long ago had the government simply met its constitutional obligation to give the House the documents it demanded.
But even if a reset were in order, that could be effected in a day. That Parliament is to remain dark for all that time is for one reason only: to prevent the House from voting no confidence in the government, while the Liberals hold a leadership election.
Read the full transcript of Trudeau’s resignation speech
But that election could be carried out in a matter of days, two weeks at the most, in time to meet Parliament on the previously scheduled date, Jan. 27. Even that timetable looks complacent, given the imminent arrival of Donald Trump in the White House.
True, two weeks would not be time to hold a traditional, one-person, one-vote leadership race. But so what? Leadership races as membership drives are a terrible idea at the best of times, but if ever there were a time to let the caucus choose who should lead them, it is now.
Instead, we will have a trifecta of irresponsibility. Not only will the country be effectively leaderless for many weeks, and not only will Parliament be shuttered throughout, but the ruling party will spend the interval consumed with internecine slaughter, rather than the business of the country – like Hamlet’s family in the final act, oblivious to the approach of Fortintrump’s army.
On top of which, we have the possibility of the leadership vote, and the choice of our next prime minister, being hijacked by interference efforts, foreign or domestic. This has been an issue of increasing concern even before this, but in the party’s present chaotic state must be considered a five-alarm emergency.
Whatever this is, it is not putting the country’s interests first. Whether or not you feel Mr. Trudeau should have stepped down before this, having made the decision to go it is essential that he, and the party, should be as quick as possible about it. What the country needs now is not a leadership race but an election.
At the very least, the question of confidence must be resolved at the earliest possible opportunity. Again, for a government to attempt to carry on while the confidence of the House is in doubt is a bad idea at the best of times. In the present crisis, it is calamitous. Any government that has to hide from the House has no business governing.
Obviously the Liberals would prefer to have a new leader in place before then. But if the party truly has the best interests of Canadians at heart, it would arrange its leadership election around the timing of a confidence vote, not the other way around. Liberal constitutional rules have proven flexible in the past. They should be flexible enough to allow a caucus-based leadership race.
Perhaps, under a new leader, the government might be able to survive such a vote, notwithstanding the NDP leader’s latest utterances. Stranger things have happened. But if not, so be it. This is not a time for playing games. The country needs leadership, and leadership, in present circumstances, requires a fresh mandate. Not three months from now, or four, or five. Now.