Category: Chairman’s Desk

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.

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 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.

If there’s anything to be said beyond vindictiveness, caprice and outright insanity about the first 30 days of the Trump presidency, it’s the appalling lack of a coherent opposition from the Democratic party.

A crisis of confidence and nerve could not have been more painfully on display than the party’s pathetically weak response to U.S. President Donald Trump’s address to a joint session of Congress this past week.

Funnily enough, it turns out courage and conviction were hiding North of the border. In our political leaders. In our institutions. In our patriotism and our collective sense of responsibility.

Let that sink in. The strongest, most articulate, the main opposition to Donald Trump now exists outside America. And for the foreseeable future, that’s exactly where it will stay.

Make no mistake — Canada must now prosecute the most consequential political persuasion campaign in our nation’s history.

“Off again, on again, off again” — let’s be clear: the threat of tariffs isn’t going anywhere.

That’s why I use the word “political” very deliberately. Diplomacy will still have its place as part of the cover story, but the real fight — the one that matters most — is a bare-knuckle, down-on-the-ground, political street fight.

As Trump reminds us every day, this is the era of the permanent campaign. And so, fire must meet fire. Just as Trump tries to persuade Canadians that they’d be better off as America’s 51st state, we must continue our full-scale political counteroffensive to persuade Americans that Trump’s tariffs and trade wars (even the threat of them) are making their lives more expensive, more difficult, and more uncertain.

And we need to tie that pain directly to Trump personally.

Reciprocal tariffs are the blunt-force instrument, they trigger economic pain. But tariffs alone aren’t enough. This is a crisis and we need to go to end game. That means realizing the only thing that will change Trump’s mind is political pressure. And therefore, we need a persuasion campaign layered on top to effect that pressure — one designed to convert every ounce of economic pain into political pain, one that ensures every price increase, supply chain snag and lost job is strapped to Trump’s ankles like a lead weight.

And to do that most effectively, we ought to follow three basic rules of political persuasion.

First, define the audience.

The strategy cannot be to simply influence coastal elites and Democrats who already agree that tariffs are, as Prime Minister Justin Trudeau echoing the Wall Street Journal put it, a “dumb” idea. That’s not a path to victory. And it’s a waste of time.

We need to convince every last American consumer, no matter how they voted, Trump’s tariffs are making or will make their life worse.

Second, steal what works.

Put another way: use the tactics that are proven to work most recently with your target audience and only pivot if you need to.

Remember those viral gas station stickers — the ones with former U.S. president Joe Biden pointing at the pump price and saying, “I did that!”? That’s the template.

We need to ensure Donald Trump owns the specific price of specific everyday essential items.

Egg prices through the roof? “Trump did that.”

Paying more at the pump? “Trump did that.”

Paying more for a fridge, a sofa, a pack of diapers? “Trump did that.”

Third, underline the disconnect.

The core vulnerability of Trump’s populist brand is that he’s fundamentally out of touch with the reality he claims to champion.

As Congressman Eric Swalwell (in a rare example of effective bite back from the Democratic party) recently put it:

“This guy has gone to the Super Bowl … the Daytona 500 … a UFC fight.

He should go to the f—king supermarket and look at what people are spending to feed themselves, because that’s where they want him to go and he won’t go there.”

That’s precisely the tone and message Canada needs to amplify.

We need to drag Trump — kicking and screaming — to the grocery store, to the gas pump, to the dinner table where families are staring down higher electricity bills and overpriced food.

Here’s the bottom line: Trump didn’t just win, with the margin he did, solely because Americans were fed up with Biden. He won because he made them a simple promise — he would bring down prices. On day one.

That promise is already in pieces and tariffs will only drive prices higher. And our job — Canada’s job — is to make sure every American knows exactly why.

We cannot wait around for the Democratic party or anyone else to drive this political message. This is Canada’s fight — and it starts now.