10 ms·

I hadn't heard that this was likely to happen. Any Canadians here able to weigh on whether this was expected or is a normal procedure for your elected officials

I hadn't heard that this was likely to happen. Any Canadians here able to weigh on whether this was expected or is a normal procedure for your elected officials?

busterarm 2y ago
All the Canadians that I talk to (including some CBC news employees) have been insistent that this was an eventuality and also that he would drag it out to do it as embarrassingly as possible.
darrylb42 2y ago
Yes, once they can not lead their party effectively they will usually resign. It has been building to this over the last month or so.
brianbest101 2y ago
Yeah, he pretty much had no choice. Most of his party had given him the ultimatum. This has happened a bunch of times outside of the Trudeau Harper Chrétien eras, it’s normal.
mlekoszek 2y ago
Generally, governments in Canada are voted out in roughly 9-year intervals. Trudeau took office in 2015, so nothing unusual there. Moreover, Trudeau is exiting with approval ratings just a percent below his predecessor, Stephen Harper (22% vs. 23%, respectively). So, in a wider sense, this is not so unusual. But we're facing a trade war with the States and less-than-joking threats of annexation, so it's a bad moment to have our leadership in a shakeup.
- redeux 2y ago
  I haven’t been following the news recently. What is the talk of annexation? First I’ve heard of it.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Trump I feel like a single word should explain it, but I know HN abhors single word responses. Trump has threatened tariffs and has mentioned annexing Canada. He's also mentioned buying Greenland, trading Puerto Rico for Greenland, and a bunch of other notions.
    - gpm 2y ago
      Taking back the Panama Canal comes to mind. It seems to me that he really wants to do some empire building, but hasn't figured out a way that people would actually accept (and isn't interested in the modern version of treaty based "empires").
      - busterarm 2y ago
        In fairness, the US paid for the Panama Canal and have continued to sustain it despite no "ownership". Panama is only relevant because of the US investment in the Canal and they claim ownership when it suits them and then cry poverty every time investments need to be made. Panama is currently playing with fire by courting foreign interest that doesn't align with the US, who are effectively their paymasters. It's not a sudden "empire-building" move by the US. The fact that the canal exists at all has always been because of the US Empire. Panama is playing a dangerous game of FA&FO.
        csomar 2y ago
        You can replace Panama with Ukraine, or Taiwan. The double standard is getting out of control. Respect for Trump for laying it as it is without all the BS.
      - dylan604 2y ago
        To me, the canal thing is the only thing he's mentioned that is possible. There's a stipulation that does allow for that, just like there's a stipulation that the crown can do away with parliament in the UK. Doesn't mean it's an unlikely provision to be invoked without a lot of negative baggage to the point they are not likely to happen.
- dylan604 2y ago
  > less-than-joking threats of annexation This is an interesting statement in that, sadly, the person making the threats is not joking yet to those that have not drunk the kool-aid it is an utter joke of a concept.
  - MattGaiser 2y ago
    > those that have not drunk the kool-aid it is an utter joke of a concept Problem is that they aren't the ones in power in the USA.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      Right, but even if the US actually wants to annex Canada, Canada would have to allow that to happen. That's what makes it insane. Russia wanted to annex Ukraine, and it didn't go so well. So playing the tape to the end, what do people think Trump is actually proposing? A war? A "special operation"?
      - NewJazz 2y ago
        It didn't go so well because the US and the rest of Europe resisted the invasion of Ukraine. Who will help Canada? They'll be blockaded on day one by both land and sea. They won't have any food.
        dylan604 2y ago
        A whole group of countries joined together and came to the aid of Kuwait when Iraq attempted to annex them. Edit: are you suggesting that Europe would not come to the aid of Canada just because it's Canada or because they would be going against the US? The rest of the world could turn around and isolate the US with sanctions and tariffs at a minimum. Would that be worth it for the US?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
- aaron_m04 2y ago
  Annexation is not a joke?
- krashidov 2y ago
  > and less-than-joking threats of annexation If Poilievre gets elected, will he willingly join the USA? It seems that the world is more and more aligned by political spectrum rather than national allegiance.
  - tokioyoyo 2y ago
    Not being a part of the states is our national identity. It’s just very fringe minority who dabbles with the idea of joining the USA.
    - mlekoszek 2y ago
      I think the Overton window has become much easier to slide around with social media influence campaigns. If someone powerful wants something -- even if it's against everyone else's interests -- it's now much easier for them to drum up popular support for it through underhanded tactics. Remember that Brexit started as a joke.
      - tokioyoyo 2y ago
        Everyone gets manipulated one way or another. It’s up to the person to carry the weight and responsibility of their actions. When it comes to US - Canada relations, if Canadians decide to be a part of the states, then it’s their will. I don’t support it, but if super majority changes their minds… well, we live in a democracy, and such is the will of people. Frankly, I think US is in a panic mode as they realize they can’t outcompete China anytime soon by themselves. So they’re trying every possible thing to see what sticks to increase their chances. China is also in panic mode because of internal issues that stem from the younger generation’s dissatisfaction. Natural fix is to claim some wins to rally and unite people. So the ideas of reunification, playing to win in manufacturing, showing how much better they can overcome the economical problems using their 1B population are on the play now. For whatever reason, I think the common lives of people who live in countries that play for both sides will be the only ones that get elevated. And frankly, I think, Canada should do the same.
- BunsanSpace 2y ago
  This is the crux of the issue honestly. Trudeau should have had the humility to read the writing on the wall in the fall, and stepped down so we could have a stable government to deal with the incoming US administration and give his party a fighting chance next election. He could have rested on his laurels knowing history would likely forget his shortcomings & scandals, and be remembered as the prime minister who got us legal weed, navigated the covid pandemic, brought clean drinking water to FN reserves and advanced social programs (childcare, dental care). Instead he's likely going to be known as the prime minister who had to be forcibly walked to the door by Canadians and his party, while leaving the country in a precarious position during tumultuous times.
  - bryanlarsen 2y ago
    Neither Freeland nor Carney want to be the next Kim Campbell. The Liberals are going to lose the next election badly whether or not Trudeau is leading it. I'm sure that Trudeau made the decision to step down ~6 months ago and is now just playing with the timing to maximum effect. Stepping down now basically pushes the election three months further out than it would otherwise be due to a prorogation to pick a new leader. That gives Pollievre 3 more months worth of rope and Trump time to sabotage Pollievre.
    - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
      Yeah my expectation is this next leadership campaign will be half-assed and "fought" by people who know they will never be PM. Instead they'll expect 4-5 years of PP and somewhere in the middle another leadership campaign that they'll then try to win. I do think Freeland is too tainted by Trudeau now to be a success. Very intelligent woman, but I think her political career is ending. (I should check back on this comment in 5 years)
      - BunsanSpace 2y ago
        I agree she's tainted which makes her a bad choice to be his successor. But people have short memories and I think in 3-4 years the Trudeau stains will have washed off. In that time she'll have a chance to make a name for herself. I think if she wanted she could very well be a contender in the next election cycle.
hmmm-i-wonder 2y ago
Its been expected since before the Christmas break. There was a cabinet reshuffle, and its come out he's lost the support of his finance minister Chrystia Freeland, wasn't able to replace her with Marc Carney his top choice as Carney seems to be distancing himself from the current Govt on top of public support being at an all time low. Both the opposition Conservatives and the supporting NDP parties (NDP in particular was holding up the Liberal Minority Govt) have been planning non-confidence motions this month that would result in a new election. There was no path to victory for Trudeau after that, so the next best move is to resign and hope the liberals can pick a new leader before the next electoral cycle is too far along and avoid the issue the Democrats had by rushing to select a replacement candidate and alienating some portion of voters by doing so.
- BenoitEssiambre 2y ago
  Yup, I hear the top candidates to replace him are Chrystia Freeland or Marc Carney (maybe known to this community since he's on Stripe's board). These top candidates might not accept to play this round though as the chances of winning are slim in the current circumstances. Some people are calling the next leader of the party a "sacrificial lamb".
  - hmmm-i-wonder 2y ago
    Its very possible the next candidate inherits the overall sentiment and is indeed a 'sacrificial lamb'. The anti-Trudeau sentiment is high, but if he steps back its an open question if the left wing/ABC crowd and centrists revisit their support for the liberal party. IMO Chrystia Freeland would be a great pick for the country. She was firm and capable during the NAFTA/USMCA renegotiations, and seems to have stood up against political games from the current administration to her eventual detriment of losing her cabinet position. Marc Carney certainly has appeal, but I can't help but see him as Ignatief 2.0 and that didn't go well with many Canadians.
    - I-M-S 2y ago
      Neither of them can reverse the Liberal fortunes. Chrystia Freeland was too close to Trudeau for too long (their fallout notwithstanding) to be perceived as anything than Trudeau 2.0 Marc Carney is a (two time!) head of a central bank - he hasn't got a chance in the current anti-elite climate.
acc_297 2y ago
Yes and yes. Canadian prime ministers often expire after 10 years for one reason or another There will likely be an election in 3ish months with a new liberal leader in place of Trudeau
- dralley 2y ago
  "Canadian federal governments tend to last 6 months, or 10 years. After 10 years the roof falls in"
- gpm 2y ago
  > There will likely be an election in 3ish months At earliest, May 5th (March 24th parliament comes back, instantly votes no confidence, governor general issues writ the same day, the shortest possible campaign period is 37 days and election day must fall on a Monday). At latest, Oct 27th (regularly scheduled election is Oct 20th, but that might be delayed by 7 days due to scheduling conflicts - see Bill C-65). Likely somewhere in between there. All the opposition parties have been signalling that they intend to vote no confidence. Assuming that doesn't change though, there's likely at least a few days lag between parliament coming back, and that happening. The campaign period is likely not to be as short as possible (with an allowable range of 37 to 51 days).
gspencley 2y ago
Canadian here. It's certainly not normal. News broke yesterday that this was coming. The opposition kept tabling no confidence votes and trying to get an early election called... and Trudeau's approval rating is so low that it might even be the lowest of any Prime Minister in history (though I don't know so if someone does by all means fact check that). However, our upcoming election is this year. It certainly does not surprise me that Trudeau is stepping down from leader of the Liberal party in light of the polling, since the polls are predicting that if an election were called today, the conservatives would win in such a landslide that I don't think many countries have even seen that before. Of course polling and actual election results are two very different things... but I think the Liberal party sees the writing on the wall. If they hope to have any shot of getting re-elected, they can't do it with Trudeau at the head. ... but that doesn't necessarily mean that we all saw him resigning as PM incumbent coming. He's also proroguing parliament until March. This is probably a move to get the other parties to step back and "STFU"; to not pass any motions during the party shift (particularly related to calling an early election etc). Lastly, as others have said, the PM position is usually held for an average of 9-10 years (and that's multiple terms .. most incumbents just get re-elected into second and third terms). Trudeau was elected in 2015 so he's about due to exit anyway if we go by averages (though some have served longer).
- AnimalMuppet 2y ago
  What does "prorogued" do here? Does it prevent a no-confidence vote? And, what would a no-confidence vote do?
  - gspencley 2y ago
    It means it is suspended. (slightly off topic: I have no idea why tf my comment got down-voted. I'm not even expressing any personal opinions about Trudeau or politics. I'm just answering the question as factually as I can from the point of view of a Canadian who is observing what is going on.. I have data and sources for everything I said .. including how low Trudeau's approval rating is as well as the polling... the only thing I wasn't sure of is how his rating compares to that of previous PMs. Thing is, I even know people who have voted Liberal their entire lives, and plan to in the upcoming election regardless of who the leader is, and even they can't shut up about how much they despise him. So regardless of your partisan affiliation, I don't think I even said anything that most Canadians would find the least bit controversial).
vivekd 2y ago
This was definitely expected, people within and outside of the party have been calling for Trudeau to resign for a while and that chorus has been getting louder and picking up more prominent figures. I suppose standard procedure in a Westminster parliament is to have a non confidence vote and an election - which is what the opposition parties said would happen when Parliament sits again. Poroguing parliament and having a leadership race is probably a way to try and avoid that or at least go into the election with a less unpopular leader. Proguing parliament is probably the best thing for the liberal party to avoid an election with an unpopular leader. But I don't think it's good for Canada as it states down Trump's tariffs
fidotron 2y ago
Looking at Canadian polls might indicate some things: https://338canada.com/districts.htm https://338canada.com/districts.htm Particularly look at the projected Liberal seat count. This gov was propped up by a supply agreement with the NDP in order to maintain parlimentary confidence. The NDP leader becomes eligible for a generous pension scheme if he stays an MP to some point in February. As such the timing for all this is no coincidence, and people have been expecting this for a while, but it is shocking just how shamelessly self serving it all is.
- lesam 2y ago
  The NDP party does not want a Conservative landslide government either, regardless of Mr. Singh’s pension.
macspoofing 2y ago
Yes. It's pretty normal in the Westminster system and more generally in Parliamentary systems. Was it expected? Eh - kind of. In the last few weeks much of Trudeau's cabinet has resigned or voiced their disapproval. NDP has signaled they would support bringing down the government.
99_00 2y ago
It’s expected and it is normal. There is no term limit for PM or members of parliament. They stay on until they lose the support of their party. He lost the support of his party due to his extreme unpopularity and the impact it will have on the future election. As seen by polls and bye elections. More often the leader loses party support after an election loss. However in this case, a loss is so likely and expected to be so bad that his party would rather go to the polls with a different leader.
quantisan 2y ago
As others have said, this came after historically significant low popularity and mounting political pressures. His government faced criticism over falling poll numbers, by-election losses, and a broken agreement with the NDP. Tensions with the US and internal dissent within the Liberal party added to his challenges. One of the final nails in the coffin was the resignation of Chrystia Freeland, his last standing ally and Finance Minister. This video from CBC a couple weeks ago on Freeland explains the rifts in Trudeau's government well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuZTLWNlpc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuZTLWNlpc
boringg 2y ago
Highly expected - he was trying to put it off to get to the convention without having to trigger an election.
incomingpain 2y ago
>I hadn't heard that this was likely to happen. Any Canadians here able to weigh on whether this was expected or is a normal procedure for your elected officials? For many months liberal backbenchers have been calling for him to resign. Though obviously not 'likely to happen' Only weeks ago(mid december) Trudeau refused his own caucus' call to resign. Saying he was staying on to fight for Canadians. Freeland quit with a flaming public letter and he still said he's staying in the game. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-renew-calls-trudeau-resign-1.7412642 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-renew-calls-trudea... Didnt really do much, it took weeks more before he finally resigned yesterday. Despite this, still no resignation. Now parliament has been mostly suspended due to the liberal's failure to submit documents. A significant scandal. The reason his caucus is upset is because the vast majority of them will lose in the next election. Polling suggesting they hold onto ~20 seats in an Ignatief level of fail. Resignation will still be quite unlikely. From a strategic point of view, taking the L election night and then letting a new liberal leader rebuild their reputation over 4 years is the right move. You'll now have a leadership race where nobody wants the career ending job. The rats that try to fight for it just want their name as prime minister. Yet here he finally resigned. Change Control dictates it was the gun ban. The polls post-gun ban put the liberals in single digit seats. It was over for him. The gun ban ended Trudeau.

I hadn't heard that this was likely to happen. Any Canadians here able to weigh on whether this was expected or is a normal procedure for your elected officials?

busterarm 2y ago

All the Canadians that I talk to (including some CBC news employees) have been insistent that this was an eventuality and also that he would drag it out to do it as embarrassingly as possible.

darrylb42 2y ago

Yes, once they can not lead their party effectively they will usually resign. It has been building to this over the last month or so.

brianbest101 2y ago

Yeah, he pretty much had no choice. Most of his party had given him the ultimatum. This has happened a bunch of times outside of the Trudeau Harper Chrétien eras, it’s normal.

mlekoszek 2y ago

Generally, governments in Canada are voted out in roughly 9-year intervals. Trudeau took office in 2015, so nothing unusual there. Moreover, Trudeau is exiting with approval ratings just a percent below his predecessor, Stephen Harper (22% vs. 23%, respectively). So, in a wider sense, this is not so unusual. But we're facing a trade war with the States and less-than-joking threats of annexation, so it's a bad moment to have our leadership in a shakeup.

redeux 2y ago
I haven’t been following the news recently. What is the talk of annexation? First I’ve heard of it.
- dylan604 2y ago
  Trump I feel like a single word should explain it, but I know HN abhors single word responses. Trump has threatened tariffs and has mentioned annexing Canada. He's also mentioned buying Greenland, trading Puerto Rico for Greenland, and a bunch of other notions.
  - gpm 2y ago
    Taking back the Panama Canal comes to mind. It seems to me that he really wants to do some empire building, but hasn't figured out a way that people would actually accept (and isn't interested in the modern version of treaty based "empires").
    - busterarm 2y ago
      In fairness, the US paid for the Panama Canal and have continued to sustain it despite no "ownership". Panama is only relevant because of the US investment in the Canal and they claim ownership when it suits them and then cry poverty every time investments need to be made. Panama is currently playing with fire by courting foreign interest that doesn't align with the US, who are effectively their paymasters. It's not a sudden "empire-building" move by the US. The fact that the canal exists at all has always been because of the US Empire. Panama is playing a dangerous game of FA&FO.
      - csomar 2y ago
        You can replace Panama with Ukraine, or Taiwan. The double standard is getting out of control. Respect for Trump for laying it as it is without all the BS.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      To me, the canal thing is the only thing he's mentioned that is possible. There's a stipulation that does allow for that, just like there's a stipulation that the crown can do away with parliament in the UK. Doesn't mean it's an unlikely provision to be invoked without a lot of negative baggage to the point they are not likely to happen.
dylan604 2y ago
> less-than-joking threats of annexation This is an interesting statement in that, sadly, the person making the threats is not joking yet to those that have not drunk the kool-aid it is an utter joke of a concept.
- MattGaiser 2y ago
  > those that have not drunk the kool-aid it is an utter joke of a concept Problem is that they aren't the ones in power in the USA.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Right, but even if the US actually wants to annex Canada, Canada would have to allow that to happen. That's what makes it insane. Russia wanted to annex Ukraine, and it didn't go so well. So playing the tape to the end, what do people think Trump is actually proposing? A war? A "special operation"?
    - NewJazz 2y ago
      It didn't go so well because the US and the rest of Europe resisted the invasion of Ukraine. Who will help Canada? They'll be blockaded on day one by both land and sea. They won't have any food.
      - dylan604 2y ago
        A whole group of countries joined together and came to the aid of Kuwait when Iraq attempted to annex them. Edit: are you suggesting that Europe would not come to the aid of Canada just because it's Canada or because they would be going against the US? The rest of the world could turn around and isolate the US with sanctions and tariffs at a minimum. Would that be worth it for the US?
        deleted 2y ago
        [deleted]
aaron_m04 2y ago
Annexation is not a joke?
krashidov 2y ago
> and less-than-joking threats of annexation If Poilievre gets elected, will he willingly join the USA? It seems that the world is more and more aligned by political spectrum rather than national allegiance.
- tokioyoyo 2y ago
  Not being a part of the states is our national identity. It’s just very fringe minority who dabbles with the idea of joining the USA.
  - mlekoszek 2y ago
    I think the Overton window has become much easier to slide around with social media influence campaigns. If someone powerful wants something -- even if it's against everyone else's interests -- it's now much easier for them to drum up popular support for it through underhanded tactics. Remember that Brexit started as a joke.
    - tokioyoyo 2y ago
      Everyone gets manipulated one way or another. It’s up to the person to carry the weight and responsibility of their actions. When it comes to US - Canada relations, if Canadians decide to be a part of the states, then it’s their will. I don’t support it, but if super majority changes their minds… well, we live in a democracy, and such is the will of people. Frankly, I think US is in a panic mode as they realize they can’t outcompete China anytime soon by themselves. So they’re trying every possible thing to see what sticks to increase their chances. China is also in panic mode because of internal issues that stem from the younger generation’s dissatisfaction. Natural fix is to claim some wins to rally and unite people. So the ideas of reunification, playing to win in manufacturing, showing how much better they can overcome the economical problems using their 1B population are on the play now. For whatever reason, I think the common lives of people who live in countries that play for both sides will be the only ones that get elevated. And frankly, I think, Canada should do the same.
BunsanSpace 2y ago
This is the crux of the issue honestly. Trudeau should have had the humility to read the writing on the wall in the fall, and stepped down so we could have a stable government to deal with the incoming US administration and give his party a fighting chance next election. He could have rested on his laurels knowing history would likely forget his shortcomings & scandals, and be remembered as the prime minister who got us legal weed, navigated the covid pandemic, brought clean drinking water to FN reserves and advanced social programs (childcare, dental care). Instead he's likely going to be known as the prime minister who had to be forcibly walked to the door by Canadians and his party, while leaving the country in a precarious position during tumultuous times.
- bryanlarsen 2y ago
  Neither Freeland nor Carney want to be the next Kim Campbell. The Liberals are going to lose the next election badly whether or not Trudeau is leading it. I'm sure that Trudeau made the decision to step down ~6 months ago and is now just playing with the timing to maximum effect. Stepping down now basically pushes the election three months further out than it would otherwise be due to a prorogation to pick a new leader. That gives Pollievre 3 more months worth of rope and Trump time to sabotage Pollievre.
  - cmrdporcupine 2y ago
    Yeah my expectation is this next leadership campaign will be half-assed and "fought" by people who know they will never be PM. Instead they'll expect 4-5 years of PP and somewhere in the middle another leadership campaign that they'll then try to win. I do think Freeland is too tainted by Trudeau now to be a success. Very intelligent woman, but I think her political career is ending. (I should check back on this comment in 5 years)
    - BunsanSpace 2y ago
      I agree she's tainted which makes her a bad choice to be his successor. But people have short memories and I think in 3-4 years the Trudeau stains will have washed off. In that time she'll have a chance to make a name for herself. I think if she wanted she could very well be a contender in the next election cycle.

hmmm-i-wonder 2y ago

Its been expected since before the Christmas break. There was a cabinet reshuffle, and its come out he's lost the support of his finance minister Chrystia Freeland, wasn't able to replace her with Marc Carney his top choice as Carney seems to be distancing himself from the current Govt on top of public support being at an all time low. Both the opposition Conservatives and the supporting NDP parties (NDP in particular was holding up the Liberal Minority Govt) have been planning non-confidence motions this month that would result in a new election. There was no path to victory for Trudeau after that, so the next best move is to resign and hope the liberals can pick a new leader before the next electoral cycle is too far along and avoid the issue the Democrats had by rushing to select a replacement candidate and alienating some portion of voters by doing so.

BenoitEssiambre 2y ago
Yup, I hear the top candidates to replace him are Chrystia Freeland or Marc Carney (maybe known to this community since he's on Stripe's board). These top candidates might not accept to play this round though as the chances of winning are slim in the current circumstances. Some people are calling the next leader of the party a "sacrificial lamb".
- hmmm-i-wonder 2y ago
  Its very possible the next candidate inherits the overall sentiment and is indeed a 'sacrificial lamb'. The anti-Trudeau sentiment is high, but if he steps back its an open question if the left wing/ABC crowd and centrists revisit their support for the liberal party. IMO Chrystia Freeland would be a great pick for the country. She was firm and capable during the NAFTA/USMCA renegotiations, and seems to have stood up against political games from the current administration to her eventual detriment of losing her cabinet position. Marc Carney certainly has appeal, but I can't help but see him as Ignatief 2.0 and that didn't go well with many Canadians.
  - I-M-S 2y ago
    Neither of them can reverse the Liberal fortunes. Chrystia Freeland was too close to Trudeau for too long (their fallout notwithstanding) to be perceived as anything than Trudeau 2.0 Marc Carney is a (two time!) head of a central bank - he hasn't got a chance in the current anti-elite climate.

acc_297 2y ago

Yes and yes. Canadian prime ministers often expire after 10 years for one reason or another There will likely be an election in 3ish months with a new liberal leader in place of Trudeau

dralley 2y ago
"Canadian federal governments tend to last 6 months, or 10 years. After 10 years the roof falls in"
gpm 2y ago
> There will likely be an election in 3ish months At earliest, May 5th (March 24th parliament comes back, instantly votes no confidence, governor general issues writ the same day, the shortest possible campaign period is 37 days and election day must fall on a Monday). At latest, Oct 27th (regularly scheduled election is Oct 20th, but that might be delayed by 7 days due to scheduling conflicts - see Bill C-65). Likely somewhere in between there. All the opposition parties have been signalling that they intend to vote no confidence. Assuming that doesn't change though, there's likely at least a few days lag between parliament coming back, and that happening. The campaign period is likely not to be as short as possible (with an allowable range of 37 to 51 days).

gspencley 2y ago

Canadian here. It's certainly not normal. News broke yesterday that this was coming. The opposition kept tabling no confidence votes and trying to get an early election called... and Trudeau's approval rating is so low that it might even be the lowest of any Prime Minister in history (though I don't know so if someone does by all means fact check that). However, our upcoming election is this year. It certainly does not surprise me that Trudeau is stepping down from leader of the Liberal party in light of the polling, since the polls are predicting that if an election were called today, the conservatives would win in such a landslide that I don't think many countries have even seen that before. Of course polling and actual election results are two very different things... but I think the Liberal party sees the writing on the wall. If they hope to have any shot of getting re-elected, they can't do it with Trudeau at the head. ... but that doesn't necessarily mean that we all saw him resigning as PM incumbent coming. He's also proroguing parliament until March. This is probably a move to get the other parties to step back and "STFU"; to not pass any motions during the party shift (particularly related to calling an early election etc). Lastly, as others have said, the PM position is usually held for an average of 9-10 years (and that's multiple terms .. most incumbents just get re-elected into second and third terms). Trudeau was elected in 2015 so he's about due to exit anyway if we go by averages (though some have served longer).

AnimalMuppet 2y ago
What does "prorogued" do here? Does it prevent a no-confidence vote? And, what would a no-confidence vote do?
- gspencley 2y ago
  It means it is suspended. (slightly off topic: I have no idea why tf my comment got down-voted. I'm not even expressing any personal opinions about Trudeau or politics. I'm just answering the question as factually as I can from the point of view of a Canadian who is observing what is going on.. I have data and sources for everything I said .. including how low Trudeau's approval rating is as well as the polling... the only thing I wasn't sure of is how his rating compares to that of previous PMs. Thing is, I even know people who have voted Liberal their entire lives, and plan to in the upcoming election regardless of who the leader is, and even they can't shut up about how much they despise him. So regardless of your partisan affiliation, I don't think I even said anything that most Canadians would find the least bit controversial).

vivekd 2y ago

This was definitely expected, people within and outside of the party have been calling for Trudeau to resign for a while and that chorus has been getting louder and picking up more prominent figures. I suppose standard procedure in a Westminster parliament is to have a non confidence vote and an election - which is what the opposition parties said would happen when Parliament sits again. Poroguing parliament and having a leadership race is probably a way to try and avoid that or at least go into the election with a less unpopular leader. Proguing parliament is probably the best thing for the liberal party to avoid an election with an unpopular leader. But I don't think it's good for Canada as it states down Trump's tariffs

fidotron 2y ago

Looking at Canadian polls might indicate some things: https://338canada.com/districts.htm https://338canada.com/districts.htm Particularly look at the projected Liberal seat count. This gov was propped up by a supply agreement with the NDP in order to maintain parlimentary confidence. The NDP leader becomes eligible for a generous pension scheme if he stays an MP to some point in February. As such the timing for all this is no coincidence, and people have been expecting this for a while, but it is shocking just how shamelessly self serving it all is.

lesam 2y ago
The NDP party does not want a Conservative landslide government either, regardless of Mr. Singh’s pension.

macspoofing 2y ago

Yes. It's pretty normal in the Westminster system and more generally in Parliamentary systems. Was it expected? Eh - kind of. In the last few weeks much of Trudeau's cabinet has resigned or voiced their disapproval. NDP has signaled they would support bringing down the government.

99_00 2y ago

It’s expected and it is normal. There is no term limit for PM or members of parliament. They stay on until they lose the support of their party. He lost the support of his party due to his extreme unpopularity and the impact it will have on the future election. As seen by polls and bye elections. More often the leader loses party support after an election loss. However in this case, a loss is so likely and expected to be so bad that his party would rather go to the polls with a different leader.

quantisan 2y ago

As others have said, this came after historically significant low popularity and mounting political pressures. His government faced criticism over falling poll numbers, by-election losses, and a broken agreement with the NDP. Tensions with the US and internal dissent within the Liberal party added to his challenges. One of the final nails in the coffin was the resignation of Chrystia Freeland, his last standing ally and Finance Minister. This video from CBC a couple weeks ago on Freeland explains the rifts in Trudeau's government well https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuZTLWNlpc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SuZTLWNlpc

boringg 2y ago

Highly expected - he was trying to put it off to get to the convention without having to trigger an election.

incomingpain 2y ago

>I hadn't heard that this was likely to happen. Any Canadians here able to weigh on whether this was expected or is a normal procedure for your elected officials? For many months liberal backbenchers have been calling for him to resign. Though obviously not 'likely to happen' Only weeks ago(mid december) Trudeau refused his own caucus' call to resign. Saying he was staying on to fight for Canadians. Freeland quit with a flaming public letter and he still said he's staying in the game. https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-renew-calls-trudeau-resign-1.7412642 https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberals-renew-calls-trudea... Didnt really do much, it took weeks more before he finally resigned yesterday. Despite this, still no resignation. Now parliament has been mostly suspended due to the liberal's failure to submit documents. A significant scandal. The reason his caucus is upset is because the vast majority of them will lose in the next election. Polling suggesting they hold onto ~20 seats in an Ignatief level of fail. Resignation will still be quite unlikely. From a strategic point of view, taking the L election night and then letting a new liberal leader rebuild their reputation over 4 years is the right move. You'll now have a leadership race where nobody wants the career ending job. The rats that try to fight for it just want their name as prime minister. Yet here he finally resigned. Change Control dictates it was the gun ban. The polls post-gun ban put the liberals in single digit seats. It was over for him. The gun ban ended Trudeau.