All signs point to a stampede towards Pierre Poilievre

HALIFAX—Justin Trudeau is a coach in danger of losing control of the locker room. After losing one Liberal stronghold in Toronto in June, the party has just lost another on the island of Montreal. Toronto St. Paul’s, Ont., and LaSalle-Émard-Verdun, Que., are bookends of a brutal battering. The Grits once seemed to hold the deeds to these political properties. So in the wake of the losses, how does Trudeau sell the game plan going forward to a dispirited and downtrodden team? No one knows. But I would suggest not by promising more of the same. And certainly not by burying his head in the sand. That has been his approach up until now. The political climate in Canada has changed, and Trudeau has suddenly become the climate-change denier. He refuses to acknowledge what poll after poll shows: the majority of Canadians no longer want him on the voyage. Unlike U.S. President Joe Biden, who ultimately saw that he was the problem and not the solution to the woes of the Democrats versus Donald Trump in the United States, Trudeau continues to say that he will lead the Liberals into the next election. Is that political heart, or mere hubris? Here’s how the latest Poll Tracker describes what it might look if Trudeau were to remain at the helm for a another election: a projected 218 seats for the Conservative Party of Canada, and just 64 seats for the Liberals. The same poll found that there was a 96-per-cent likelihood that the CPC would win the most seats, and a majority. It found that there was just a one per cent chance that the Liberals would capture the most seats. This is not breaking news. For a year now, the CPC has enjoyed a wide lead over the Liberals in every province but Quebec where the Bloc Québécois is in front. Now that the BQ has established a beachhead on the island of Montreal, even more traditionally Liberal seats could be lost. It stands to reason that if you lose by a hair in a stronghold, you get clobbered in more vulnerable seats. But Trudeau isn’t the only political casualty of the recent byelections and the polls. Although the NDP held onto its seat in Manitoba, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has reason to be worried. Compared to past performances, the margin of victory was slimmer than most people’s wallets. The riding of Elmwood-Transcona should have been a cake-walk. Yet in an NDP province—and in a working-class riding—Leila Dance won the seat by just over 1,000 votes. Daniel Blaikie and before him his father Bill Blaikie held this same seat for 45 years. They were usually so far ahead of their opponents that no one could see their tail-lights. This time, the CPC ran a respectable second to the NDP, losing by just four percentage points and increasing their vote by 18 per cent. Not close, but close-ish. The Liberals were nowhere. Why is that significant? It means that Poilievre’s novel charm offensive aimed at the labour vote is gaining traction. And it means that his relentless efforts to tie “Sell-Out Singh” to the Liberals are also bearing fruit. If they continue, both of these trends could have a huge influence on the next election. Despite the end of the supply-and-confidence agreement, Trudeau and Singh remain twins joined in political misery. The PM has the greater problem, facing a catastrophic defeat if the Conservatives were to find a partner to bring down the government. There is no obvious way out or up for the Liberals. As Senator Percy Downe, former chief of staff of Jean Chrétien, recently noted, the chance for Trudeau to step down has passed. But Singh has big problems, too. Back in 2015, the NDP won 43 seats. Under Singh’s leadership, that number has dwindled to 24. True, his party won in Elmwood-Transcona, and in politics a win is a win. But the CPC made a fight out of it in an NDP stronghold. According to Poll Tracker, the NDP is sitting at 17.4 per cent with voters nationally—four points lower than the Liberals. It is projected that if an election were held today, the New Democrats would win just 21 seats. That’s not chiselled in stone, but it’s troubling for a party that’s trying to replace the Liberals as the progressive choice in the next election. Over the next weeks and months, Canadians will be treated to the odd spectacle of former allies in governing vilifying each other. Singh has already said that the Liberals are a spent political force with no new ideas, and that the party has too many corporate connections to do anything about high grocery prices for consumers. Trudeau has accused Singh of “caving” on the carbon-tax, and tut-tutted about the NDP’s alleged hard turn to the right. In a way, it is play fighting. Neither wants—nor can afford—an election. But both leaders may be missing the point. The trouble for both the Liberals and the NDP is that an extended period of progressive politics may simply have run its course. When change is in the air, details don’t matter. Nor does the personal popularity of the alternative. After nine years, Canadians are well acquainted with the benefits of a federal government that “invests” in its citizens and their future. Much has been achieved by the Trudeau government. Raising kids out of poverty, dental care, affordable daycare, lower interest rates, mortgage reform, pre-COVID inflation rates, and significant international investment, albeit often driven by generous federal subsidies. But after nearly a decade, and in the midst of stubbornly tough times, Canadians have also seen the downside of the left’s preference for Big Government: a huge expansion of the federal public service, a housing crisis exacerbated by a dubious immigration policy, a faltering and overburdened health-care system, and a doubling of the national debt. This is the old cycle of politics. After eight years of Brian Mulroney’s brand of conservatism, the country went big for Jean Chrétien and the Liberals. After 10 years of Chrétien, the country turned to Stephen Harper. After nearly 10 years of Harper, Canadians switched back to the Liberals and Justin Trudeau. And now, after almost 10 years of Trudeau, all signs point to a stampede towards Pierre Poilievre. It is that inexorable swing of the historical pendulum that has so far allowed the Conservatives to do something quite remarkable. They have waged a campaign for power largely devoid of policy, and full of the sound and fury of name-calling, negativism, and more than a little nonsense. That said, Poilievre is as shrewd as he is hardworking. He knows that in politics, as in life, when your time is up, it’s up. So watch for the Conservative leader to remain on cruise-control, and leave it to his opponents to try to jam the Batmobile into reverse. The grinding noise coming out of Ottawa these days is the sound of change. Michael Harris is an award-winning author and columnist. The Hill Times