Navigator logo

Category: Chairman’s Desk

What the three federal parties must do next to succeed

Posted on by

“The past is a nice place to visit. You just wouldn’t want to live there.”

In the wake of a gruelling campaign, the problem is, too many political parties unpack their bags and take up residence.

My advice? Keep the trip as short as possible.

The real challenge for political parties isn’t figuring out what went right or wrong. That part’s easy. What’s hard is summoning the discipline to move on from the over-analysis, post-mortems, and endless internal score-settling.

Because if there is one thing that should be clear to all parties it’s that they are not going to find answers for the road ahead by staring in the rearview mirror.

With that in mind, let’s examine three federal parties: where they find themselves now, and what they must do next to succeed.

The NDP: Down, but not out

I don’t think there’s even room left on the bandwagon to be critical of their performance in this election. So, I won’t hop on. But I will say this: those who think a two-horse race between the Liberals and Conservatives will become a permanent fixture are dead wrong. Three essential points.

First, all it takes is one election to turn it around.

In 2015, Justin Trudeau took the federal Liberals from third place and just 36 seats to a commanding majority. Provincially, Bob Rae steered the Ontario NDP from the wilderness to a majority in 1990, and Rachel Notley took Alberta’s NDP from just four seats to a majority government, also in 2015.

Yes, rebuilding after defeat takes time. But it needn’t take a generation.

Second, Canadians are used to multi-party choice. The NDP brand has deep and durable roots. They’ve come back before. They can do it again.

Third, with a strong new leader, everything can change. After his national performance in response to the Trump tariff crisis, Manitoba NDP Premier Wab Kinew looks like the perfect fit for the federal leadership role. Charismatic. Pragmatic. Principled. He could be the all-star the party is waiting for.

The Conservatives: Where’s the ceiling?

My belief in a possible NDP resurgence perfectly defines the problem for the Conservative party.

While the media spotlight is fixated on Pierre Poilievre’s leadership, the real story, the Conservative’s path to victory, has gone overlooked.

To their credit, the Conservatives made impressive gains this cycle by pulling in working-class voters — many disaffected former NDP supporters. That’s a big win — and a sign of momentum.

But if the NDP rebounds — as history suggests they will — the path to a Conservative government narrows dramatically. It hurts the Liberals, yes. But it hurts the Conservatives too, because they don’t have the option of governing with the NDP in a coalition or confidence agreement.

In other words: the ceiling gets lower, fast.

So where do they go? They can’t pivot further right. There are simply no more votes there.

They can’t easily reclaim the centre either, as Carney has commandeered many of their policy positions on fiscal and energy matters.

While this is a dilemma with no perfect answer, the fact remains this new Liberal government is shaky. Its mandate is thin. Its challenges are massive. Translation: the Conservatives will have every opportunity to pounce on a government that has a short leash with Canadians. They need not redefine who they are but only add nuance to their policy pledges to allow more voters to see them as a viable option to govern in these challenging times.

The Liberals: Power on a tightrope

If you thought the Conservatives had a steep climb, look at the terrain ahead for Prime Minister Mark Carney. He’s inherited an enormous policy to-do list — without the majority to make it happen efficiently.

And while his focus must be on Trump, he can’t fully confront the American threat until he delivers at home. Only by advancing his domestic agenda — on trade, growth, and productivity — can Canada begin to rebalance the power dynamic with Washington.

Two of the biggest political mountains Carney must now scale: First, interprovincial trade. He’s promised to dismantle internal trade barriers by Canada Day.

There’s a reason no one has succeeded before. It will require national unity, real sacrifice, and backroom political skill. Provinces will need to compromise, and Carney will need to orchestrate it all flawlessly.

Second, Alberta separatism. It’s rearing its head again — at the worst possible time. Carney must move swiftly to address the legitimate grievances of Western Canadians. But he also needs to confront Premier Danielle Smith directly, and decisively.

Raised in Edmonton, Carney has the personal credibility to make that case. But he must do so with clarity, empathy, and unwavering resolve.

No party has emerged from this election with a clear and easy path forward. This country will need courage, focus, and creativity more than ever.

Let’s hope every party — whether in government or opposition — is ready to deliver.

What Mark Carney needs to do at home before facing Trump in Washington

Posted on by

It doesn’t matter your political persuasion. Tuesday morning, Canada did not get the headline it very much needed.

That headline would have trumpeted an expression of firm resolve and electoral clarity. It would have been supported by the usual language of triumph: “decisive victory,” “clear mandate,” “stable majority.”

Pick your phrase. But almost anything would have been better than what we got.

A country divided. A mandate diluted. A political leash far too short at a moment we need full stride.

Of course, the people have spoken and there’s no arguing with that. But now Prime Minister Mark Carney must make do with it — and transform it into something bolder and more workable than it appears.

Because what matters, first, is how that headline is interpreted by one man: Donald Trump.

At first glance, it might seem easy to overstate the importance of majority rule when facing the orange menace to the south.

Sure, it matters to Carney’s ability to govern and the stability of his rule.

But to Trump? A man who probably doesn’t know the difference between the House of Commons and House of Cards — is he really going to parse the nuances of a Westminster minority?

Of course not.

But here’s the difference he does understand: strength vs. weakness.

Trump not only knows something about that — that’s all he really cares about. And more importantly, he knows how to skilfully exploit weakness. And that means Carney must fight like hell to wash off its scent — and do it fast.

In an ideal world, before he sits across the table from Trump to negotiate on behalf of our sovereignty and prosperity, he needs to negotiate a deal here at home — to ensure he shows up with a united front and a functioning government.

Why? You don’t enter a heavyweight title match with your gloves half-laced.

Given the signals the two will meet as early as next week, there won’t be time for that, which only means that Carney will need every bit of his own negotiating skills to get what he needs from that meeting.

And, of course, it’s not just about foreign policy. Carney’s ambitious domestic agenda — on housing, energy, trade, productivity — depends on more than bold vision. It requires a functioning Parliament. Without one, the whole platform is just a pamphlet.

That’s why the next step demands ruthless political calculation.

The good news? He has options.

The bad news? None are easy.

But he has to try.

Let’s take a look — ranked from most effective to least feasible.

1. Convince NDP MPs to cross the floor

It’s unlikely, I’m told. In the style of a last stand, those who remain are true believers.

But politics is full of improbable deals. And the pitch to NDP MPs is simple and could be effective:

Door one — sit against the curtains in lonely opposition, stripped of official party status, wielding marginal leverage in a hostile House.

Door two — cross the floor, join the government, and be rewarded. Committee posts. Cabinet slots. A starring role in a moment of national challenge. Sacrifice the purity of ideology for country.

2. Offer the NDP official party status in exchange for a supply-and-confidence agreement

Not a majority. Not forever.

But a workable governing arrangement to shore up confidence and provide political cover.

3. Name a non-Liberal speaker

In short, a Liberal speaker reduces the government’s voting bloc to 168, meaning Carney would need support from four opposition MPs to pass legislation. But if the speaker comes from outside Liberal ranks, the government holds 169 votes — needing only three.

4. Build pragmatic, issue-by-issue alliances

Unstable, complex, and far from ideal — but sometimes, political longevity is about buying time. Carney may need to pursue legislative wins through tactical co-operation with the Bloc, independents, or dissenting voices in other parties.

He must also be ruthlessly pragmatic with Western MPs of all affiliations — recognizing that many will pose the fiercest opposition to elements of his agenda. On files with potential cross-partisan appeal, he’ll need to think less like a partisan and more like a dealmaker by looking at the individual interests of MPs.

A minority government isn’t just unstable — it’s dangerous in the current climate.

Trump reads weakness like a headline and sees it as an invitation.

This isn’t politics as usual. It’s power politics.

And Canada not only requires strength — it must project it.

Now.

Canada’s new government must act with a speed unseen before — like history demands it

Posted on by

It’s the morning after election night and it is the tale of two profoundly different worlds.

For one, no day more glorious. Power. A flurry of transition memos. Endless congratulatory phone calls.

For the other, the brutal reckoning that there are no more possibilities. Just the sting of public rejection. And a search for that resume, which all of a sudden needs updating.

But both, understandably, start off the day a little slowly.

That’s the tradition. But this time, in the face of the existential threats to our sovereignty and prosperity, that morning after needs to look different.

Because while wild celebrations, pity parties and resultant hangovers might not be going anywhere, Canada — and its next government — needs to rise from this campaign with a sense of alacrity and unrelenting focus: to get to work with a speed and sense of mission hitherto unseen in Canadian history.

Because here’s the reality.

We have not had a functioning Parliament — and therefore no effective federal government — for nearly half a year. Not a single piece of federal legislation has passed since December 2024.

All this set against an existential crisis when we could have — I’d argue needed — strong, decisive legislative responses. Instead, we’ve been fighting with one arm tied behind our backs.

Now, of course, this election is meant to fix that. That’s why, in my last column, I argued that I hope whoever wins this election does so with a strong mandate.

But a strong mandate isn’t enough.

What’s needed now — above all else — is speed. A generational commitment to act swiftly and decisively.

That urgency must show up not only in rhetoric but in structure. And it starts with what’s missing from both major parties at the time of writing: fully costed platforms. That omission isn’t just an insult to voters — it’s a squandered opportunity. Without clearly priced promises, parties forfeit the ability to claim the public’s endorsement of their agenda. Worse still, they lose the chance to pre-empt future opposition by turning their platform into a de facto social contract.

But with the campaign nearly over that window has closed. So let’s focus on what comes next.

If the winning party truly intends to move at a historic pace, it must break from the slow choreography of transition. There’s no time for excessive consultations, performative appointments, or weeks of bureaucratic turf wars. Instead, it must arrive with a mission-ready transition team — not just loyalists, but tested implementers with real track records — prepared to execute from day one.

Next, cabinet ministers need to be empowered to lead. In the traditional model, new ministers are handed sprawling portfolios and told to “consult widely.” That luxury is obsolete.

The next government must identify a small set of nation-shaping priorities and immediately authorize their implementation — whether that means fast-tracking procurement, tearing down regulatory barriers, or launching targeted investment programmes. Finally, Canadians must be told the truth: this will hurt. Building economic resilience, weaning ourselves off U.S. dependence, modernizing supply chains — none of it is free. The next government must be prepared to level with Canadians. Not through spin, but through honesty: that bold action may mean immediate discomfort, but the alternative is long-term decline.

Now, what gives me hope is that there appears to be near-universal agreement on what must get done:

• Radically diversifying trade.

• Abolishing interprovincial trade barriers.

• Fixing productivity.

• Modernizing supply chains.

• Building true economic resilience.

What gives me grave concern, though, is the illusion that these transformations will be swift or painless. That the political obstacles will simply melt away.

During a campaign, leaders point to their platforms as if all that’s required is victory on election night and the rest will follow. As the saying goes: the devil can cite scripture for his purpose.

In practice, the real work begins after the balloons fall.

We’d be fools to think that one election alone can unroot the dense thicket of special interests, vested bureaucracies, red tape and systemic inertia that have held our country back — and left us uniquely vulnerable to the whims of a resurgent Trump.

What we need, the morning after, is not just clarity. We need resolve.

Because one of the most dangerous things about Trump — and all authoritarians of his ilk — is not just their actions but their illusion of effectiveness. The image of cutting through, getting it done. It’s for them, of course, theatre.

What Canada now requires is the real thing: Substance. Competence. Urgency.

Time was never on our side in this fight. It certainly isn’t now. And it won’t be the morning of April 29. Let’s hope the winning party recognizes that.

And moves, at last, like history demands it.

There is only one way for Canada to deal with Donald Trump

Posted on by

A few weeks ago, I argued that the strongest political opposition to Donald Trump resided right here in Canada.

Turns out, that’s an increasingly dangerous place to be.

As the latest round of tariffs on our automotive sector prove, it’s an increasingly economically painful place to be.

And if Donald Trump’s musings over a third term are to be believed — and they should — that may be the case not just for four years, but for at least eight. A near decade more of economic coercion and geopolitical volatility.

So, the question is: what is Canada going to do about it? Not in rhetoric — we have more than enough of that already — but in substance.

Step One

This is a step we should not still need to take: abandon any illusions that guardrails exist to slow Trump down. No one is coming to curb his ambitions. No one is coming to our defence.

The Democratic Party? Forgive me if, like those progressive commentators, I’m not popping champagne because Democrats won a Wisconsin Supreme Court race, Sen. Cory Booker attested for 25 hours straight, or the party gained a few points in a Florida special election. These are symptoms of survival — not signs of a strategic comeback.

Democrats are still in shell shock from November’s election, floundering without leadership and unable to prevent their nemesis steamrolling ahead with his agenda to upend not only the systems of American government but the global world order.

The media? I’ve never seen denialism so confidently expressed. Last week, opinion columnists tripped over themselves to explain that Trump’s talk of a third term was mere theatrics — a distraction from his policy vacuum, a way to shake the lame-duck label.

Perhaps. But this is also the same man who wore a mug shot like a campaign badge of honour. The Constitution has not constrained him before — why would it now?

The institutions of America? The pathetic lack of spine exemplified by top U.S. law firms — too afraid to stand up to Trump’s recent executive overreaches that compromise their independence — demonstrate that institutional courage is in short supply.

Lack of integrity

This abdication of integrity is especially worrying, as corporate America may now be the only element of American society that can act as a bulwark against Trump’s agenda; the other branches of the U.S. government clearly cannot. As markets tumble, a black swan economic event could finally compel corporate America to use its heft to reign in the President.

The rest of the world? To date, they’ve shown little interest in our economic vulnerability.

And now that they, themselves, are subject to punishing tariffs, it is clear this crisis is ours alone to solve.

That puts the spotlight squarely on our current federal election.

While tariffs dominate headlines and Poilievre and Carney spar over who’s better suited to shield Canadians from Trump’s wrath, we risk missing the forest for the trees — at the very moment the entire forest is on fire.

Earlier this week, Tonda MacCharles illustrated the difference between the two leading candidates on Canada-U.S. relations.

Carney’s rhetoric is aggressive. He’s declared the “old relationship” — rooted in tight economic integration and military co-operation — effectively dead. His focus has been on reaction and retaliation.

Poilievre, while more measured in tone, offers concrete policy. His promise to build a “national energy corridor” to bypass the U.S. and get Canadian oil to other markets has potential to be a surgical solution to our economic dependence.

In a few short weeks, Canadians will choose which approach they trust more.

Action required

But here’s the bottom line: rhetoric won’t protect us from Trump. Only action will. We need substance — substance that frees our economy to stand on its own two feet.

What we ought to do now is steal from our enemy. If not in ideology, then in execution. Trump doesn’t nibble at problems — he goes all in. Canada needs that same maximalist mindset.

We need an ambitious, all-hands-on-deck strategy to break our dependency on U.S. trade, diversify our partnerships, and rebuild economic resilience.

That is the best outcome this election could produce — not based on what happens in the campaign’s final days, but in the weeks and years that follow.

I hope whoever wins does so with a strong mandate. Because the real test for Canada’s next government won’t be winning the election, it will be executing a bold national agenda so we can survive what comes after.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on April 6, 2025.

The NDP’s free fall reveals an essential truth about this election

Posted on by

The NDP’s flashy new ads, portraying Jagmeet Singh as a fighter, seem to be borne of an alternate universe. The latest polls aren’t just flashing red — they’re signalling a collapse that could cost the party its official status — Ipsos? 10 per cent. Angus Reid nine per cent. Leger? 11 per cent.

It doesn’t matter which poll you look at. And evidently, it doesn’t matter which Canadian voter the pollsters ask. The federal NDP are on the brink of utter disaster.

While all eyes have been on Prime Minister Mark Carney’s efforts to resuscitate the Liberal party, it’s the other major shift — the collapse of the NDP vote — that will ultimately determine the final outcome of the next federal election. More than that, it reveals with absolute clarity what this election will be fought over.

First, let’s be clear about what this downward spiral represents.

For Liberals, it’s Christmas come early. For Conservatives, it’s a worrying sign that progressive voters are consolidating behind Carney. For the NDP? It’s not just a repudiation of their leader, a rejection of their messaging, or even a reflection of voter frustration. Most critically, it is an indictment of their strategy.

In any other context, for any other party, these numbers should serve as a dire wake-up call. What I fear instead is that it will become an excuse factory — none more damaging than the idea that their eventual downfall will be merely the result of strategic voting by “fake progressives” who were never serious about the NDP’s agenda to begin with.

That’s only half-true. Yes, the NDP are victims of the moment. But more accurately: they are victims of their own failure to build a credible political strategy to meet this moment.

There will be a strong temptation within NDP circles to blame ideological divides within the party — that they should have tacked further left, or that they should have abandoned their progressive principles and moved closer to the centre.

That would be missing the forest for the trees at a time when the entire woodland is on fire.

This isn’t about factional divides in progressive politics.

This isn’t even about the party wearing the stain of propping up the Liberals for years, despite Trudeau’s declining popularity.

This is about a fundamental failure to grasp the ballot question of this election: who is best suited to protect Canadians from Donald Trump?

Because guess what? There will be nothing left to be progressive about if Trump’s influence dominates Canada’s economy, trade, and security.

What the NDP still fails to see is that, for voters of all stripes, this election isn’t about theoretical progressive ideals — it’s about safeguarding the progressive policies that Canada already has, policies that could disappear overnight if Trump makes good on his threats.

At this point, the party’s strategy appears depressingly predictable.

While they are reportedly planning to run a full slate of 343 candidates, their real plan is a retreat: consolidating resources into defending the ridings they already hold and making limited plays for a narrow band of additional seats.

In other words, it will be a thinly veiled furniture-saving exercise.

Meanwhile, voters will be focused on who is best to save the country.

So, here’s the bottom line. This election isn’t about finding the best incremental policy on housing or pharmacare — it’s about who is best suited for the leadership required in an unprecedented moment of global and economic volatility.

That should be Jagmeet Singh’s sole focus.

It should be every leader’s sole focus.

Any failure to recognize this reality and prosecute a strategy that meets the urgency of the moment is not just a political misstep — it is an act of outright political suicide and an unconscionable own goal.