Olivia Chow – Hope and A New Kind of Politics

Patrick Gossage • December 6, 2023

Recently I watched a bold Bonnie Crombie accept the leadership of the sad Ontario Liberal Party. I’d been catching up on the winning ways of new Toronto Mayor Olivia Chow and listening to her interviews and speeches, and I could not imagine two more contrasting political styles.

Crombie used every classic speech trick to drum up applause from the partisan crowd. Pointing out forcefully she repeated “it’s you who will rebuild the party. We’ll do it together” – and together was used many times. This was addressed to partisans and was light on policy. No mention of the real concerns of Ontarians – especially housing. Brash, loud, she is considered a real threat to Ford – a strong “retail politician”. She accused Ford of not being in touch with the people of Ontario (without saying why she was).   


What a contrast with the calm, authentic, more connected and emotional Chow in her first speech after becoming mayor: “Toronto’s story is my story…imagine a young family arriving here today with the same dreams (as my family had) for their children, for a better future. I think we all know what they’re up against. So, let’s imagine what could be possible, when we meet our challenges with the boundless potential of our ideas and the strength of our collective action. Let us imagine, a newcomer family has just moved into a nice, affordable, secure apartment in a friendly neighbourhood with trees and parks, schools and libraries, restaurants, galleries, and shops. They can rely on the TTC to get to work on time.”

“On a hot evening, even in May, they can enjoy the local swimming pool. On a winter’s evening they can go to their local skating rink or local park and their daughter feels safe riding her bike to school or taking the subway and has many after school activities — mostly very, very affordable. And when one of her friends is having a mental health issue, she knows the number to call to get the care and support.”

“It’s a good life. A better life in a city where they feel they belong. Right here. Toronto. That’s a city worth imagining. A city worth building together, all of us.” 


This is not a speech of honest hope, heart and understanding of real people that John Tory could ever have made. Or few politicians for that matter. Much of her recent campaign strategy to sell Olivia’s own immigrant story and its message of change and hope was built on her role founding the Institute for Change Leadership (ICL) at then Ryerson University in 2016. In this strategy of political organizing, power is not a thing you wield. It’s created through relationships, when people with different but overlapping goals marshal their talents towards a common purpose. And these relationships are built by sharing your “public narrative” with others—why are you doing what you’re doing, and why should I join you? The narrative is what binds. Platforms and policies are secondary. Chow's campaign used this strategy and mobilized more than 2,500 volunteers on election day. They used the story telling technique at the door. "Organizing is bringing people together, building strong relationships with each other, looking at what we have in common. And that strong relationship is really what power is all about," Olivia said.


This is how it worked on the campaign trail. Chow would tell the story of her mother returning from the hospital after being beaten up by her father. A way of illustrating a policy issue: “Because I had a basement apartment (in Kensington market), she was able to stay with me,” she said. So there you have it: affordable housing is needed, for cases just like these, and she would be the one to make sure it was built. Or, as in ICL teaching, she turns the personal story into a “story of us.” And her deep immigrant story resonated in a city where more than half of all residents were born abroad and many more grew up with immigrant parents.


I worked on Olivia’s 2014 losing mayoral campaign. In that campaign she started strong and lost support as it marched on and she came in third. This time, she again began as a front runner, but her support grew. A lot had to do with her unique approach to politics for sure but also with her finding her own true voice, which was pretty well absent in 2014. I and others produced well-intentioned speeches she had trouble delivering authentically. As she told a reporter this time: “I just want to say what I want to say and do what I want to do, and trust my 30 years of experience.” 

How many times have I worked for candidates, including those running for Premier, and found them over scripted and inauthentic. “Let so and so be her or himself,” I’d say. You must believe in what you are telling the electorate and if you don’t, it shows. This is a problem the over-scripted Justin Trudeau appears to be suffering from right now. Not Olivia. She was seen giving aides material back before stepping on stage and instead going from her gut, or more likely, her heart. 


The hyper partisanship and polarization that is threatening democracy in Ottawa was pretty well eschewed by Chow during the campaign. She did not go after Premier Ford or her opponents personally, but instead talked about contrast of ideas. 

Her planks were based on principles. Those with established interests – from Premier Ford to former Mayor John Tory – did all they could to try to defeat her. They attacked her and tried to bait her into arguments. Premier Ford even stated that a Chow victory would be “an unmitigated disaster.” The John Tory establishment tried to paint a tax and spend picture of her, and they divided their support to the candidates that would support the status quo he so fiercely defended. 


Fast forward to today. Just a few months since being elected, she has arguably accomplished more in getting a better deal for Toronto than John Tory did in his almost nine years in office. She has made a mutually beneficial deal with Premier Ford that included some compromises of her own promises. She gave up the small municipally owned land adjacent to Ontario Place, ending the City’s only legal potential roadblock. In doing so, she secured a wider agreement for Toronto and was honest in accepting that it is Ontario Place, and that the fight belonged in the Ontario legislature, not at City Hall. As part of this deal, Premier Ford agreed to upload the expensive Gardiner Expressway and Don Valley Parkway – something he outright rejected when one of Olivia’s opponents raised it during the election. 


To me, what was most notable was the tone and the friendly atmosphere when the two emerged to announce Toronto’s new deal. The two beaming unlikely friends met the media and “focusing on what unites us” (as Ford said) did the deal which could save the cash strapped city $7.6 billion as well as $1.2 billion in next two years for priorities Chow ran on like fighting homelessness and building housing among other things – things that her opponents said could never happen because of cost. At that press conference, Chow opened her remarks starkly describing high food bank usage and the underinvestment in Toronto, the gaping budget hole she inherited, and the fact that there was so little hope until today. She then quickly shared the spotlight, thanking the Premier for partnering in providing hope for so many families that were having a hard time getting by. Also saying that the federal government must join the Province and the City in this. “We are stronger together – to build a city more affordable, more caring and safe for everyone.” Classic Chow.


Her newest target for relationship building is Hon. Sean Fraser, the Federal Minister of Housing. She readily accepted the conditions attached to his $500 million Housing Accelerator Fund grant that is in final negotiation with the city. 


The Mayor’s ambitious housing strategy calls for Toronto to build 65,000 affordable rental units by 2030. Doing so will require tens of billions of dollars. Ottawa and the Ontario government would need to provide low-cost loans, as well as between $500 million and $800 million each, in each of those seven years. Chow knows that building housing must involve an engaged and cooperative federal government. Already, the City has inked several deals under federal programs to build affordable and rent geared to income housing. Leveraging existing programs, the City is partnering Indigenous and not-for-profit organizations to broaden the mix and deliver housing first to those who need it most. is off to a good start, and we can expect to see her form more strong and positive relationships with the federal government. 


Olivia has been called shrewd by several observers because of this early success. But she is more than that. She has a lifetime of service to the disadvantaged and misunderstood, and years teaching groups how to organize to achieve their political ends. This formed a suite of beliefs that would be well for all politicians to study. She believes in empathy and recognizes that division and polarization leads to anger and hate. She advocates for taking the time to hear each other out. The Canadian trait to say you’re sorry when someone jostles us is a good start. She reflects on a Toronto with so many different nationalities and beliefs. “We have to find the common ground among our differences. But we have so many people living in harmony we should be a beacon of hope,” she says. 


“During the campaign she synthesized her beliefs this way to a reporter: “What Jack (Layton, her late husband) wanted, what I want, is an engaged society. Anything with the words ‘community-based’ in front of it is bound to be good. With engaged citizens, you get better decisions. When there is common purpose, a deadline and a good facilitator, democracy works fine. Lately I see a drift towards less participation—in part because families have less money, less time, more debt. Together, this means that there’s less time to participate. Some people in power want that, but it’s not healthy.” 


More participation in democracy is a big ask after decades of the city being run by businessmen and the establishment. Change is happening all around. She’s holding very public pre-budget consultations and only then will she decide to raise taxes by how much to whom, and for what purpose - an illustration of how tough and practical she can be.. 


I believe she has the guts to bring the changes that are needed as well as the dedication to listening to those affected by city policies. A good combination. And if there was ever an approachable mayor, it is the small but mighty Olivia Chow. If Bonnie Crombie really wants to connect with the issues that concern average Ontarians, she might borrow a little heart from Olivia.  

Patrick Gossage Insider Political Views

Two Opposites – Mark Carney and Donald Trump

By Patrick Gossage • March 12, 2026
One of the major differences between these two men is that Carney understands the value of well-thought-out strategy, abundantly clear in his Davos speech, which laid out one for middle powers to deal with the end of a rules-based international order and the rise of hegemony. Trump's lack of strategic understanding is clear in his bumbling attempts to justify the billion-dollar-a-day Iran war. His overall tactic of “flooding the zone” – mounting a new initiative or major announcement every day, or even several times a day to ensure press and opposition can never catch up. This tactic has served him well – confusing the world and his would-be opponents into submission under a valley of activity and harsh opinions from the leader of the world. Contrast this approach to leadership from Carney. He is systematically building a nation less dependent on US trade by travelling the world building new alliances and trading partners. And in the scare of Australia giving substance to his idea of alliances with middle powers. All laid out in the Davos speech. It is instructive to appreciate how much Trump was irritated by the Davos speech. Carney got a standing ovation; Trump’s rambling lengthy diatribe did not. He won’t soon forget being so upstaged. He surely recognized an intellectual power he could never match. Carney is a realist and pragmatic when he stated recently “We take the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.” He is dealing with the world that is being reshaped by an irrational power-mad president, a world the powerful Stephen Miller said “that is governed by strength, that is governed by force, that is governed by power. These are the iron laws of the world.” Does Carney sometimes err on the side of supporting Trump likely to ensure that critical talks on free trade and tariffs have some chance of finding a sympathetic ear? Yes; first he seemed to fully support Trump’s war with Iran. He later made his support more nuanced, saying Trump’s actions were against the rules-based international order. He now says we will not get involved unless a NATO ally is threatened. But generally, Carney is highly rational in contrast to Trump’s self-centered irrationality. Take Trump’s bizarre ill-informed letter to the Prime Minister of Norway, who had no role in deciding if he got the Nobel Peace Prize: “I no longer feel obligated to think purely of Peace (he subsequently engaged in an ever expanding war against Iran). He then reiterated his demand for “complete and Total Control, of Greenland. Thank you!”. His late-night rants, complete with caps, on social media show a mind out of control. Thay are dutifully reported on US news media and often astonish with their non sequiturs and nastiness. One of his more unpresidential quotes came as he fingered White House drapes: “I chose these myself. I always liked gold." The big question for Canadians who are more and more disillusioned with the antics of the President: could these two opposite ever sit down and do a deal that works for Canada. The two do text, and Carney has admitted that in private Trump does listen. But there is also evidence that the trade people in the White House do not like Canada, and as Trump has said, we owe our very existence to the US. And we are “difficult”. They have said that the current trade deal is not good for the US and could be trashed entirely and -deals with Mexico and Canada could be separate and the current trilateral deal may be dead.  Canada was at the brink of reducing the heavy sectoral tariffs on steel, aluminum, and lumber when Premier Ford’s unfortunate ads during the Rose Bowl that featured President Reagan speaking against the usefulness of Tariffs led To Trump suspending talks. They only recently resumed. So can our world-renowned businessman and banker hope to sit down with the unpredictable and unstable President and cut a deal? Some hope that if we extend talks, the President, weakened by the midterms, the bad economic fallout from an unpopular war, and the fragmentation of the MAGA movement may be easier to deal with. On the other hand he may badly need a “win,” bullying big concessions out of Canada and reaping so-cabled benefits from a weaker free trade deal. There is a scenario where Trump gets a black eye if Carney simply walks away with the conviction, perhaps easily shared with an increasingly nationalistic and confident Canada that “no deal is better than a bad deal.” In any case, what a decisive and challenging future we face with Canada at play. Can Carney win for Canada against his opposite by losing a deal?"

A New Canada to Fight for Our Survival

By Patrick Gossage • December 29, 2025
There has been nothing like the mobilization of our country since we went to war against Hitler “for King and Country.” Now we are mobilizing in a new war against Trump’s depredations with renewed patriotic fervour. Our building a resilient sovereignty against the word’s most irrational and powerful regime - who believe we have no right to exist - will require an enormous dedicated and concentrated effort to redefine our nation. . Make no mistake. We are not seen as important in Washington, a lesson I learned as the Minister of Information at our embassy in the Reagan years. Like Trump’s disparaging attitude to Justin Trudeau, Reagan had little use for his crusading father, Pierre Ytudeau. The difference is that with Prime Minister Brian Mulroney r Reagan actually became a key figure in establishing the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA), signed in 1988. Ironically, it is precisely the success of this pact that led to 75% of our trade going to the US, a dangerous dependence which is now under extreme threat. The future of the successor to the FTA is at dtake. The US Canada Mexico Agreement (USMCA) is about to be renegotiated and is by no means secure. Bilateral trade discussions on the sectorial tariffs that are destroying our steel, automobile, aluminum and lumber industries were going well but were cancelled on October 23 after Trump, in a fit of pique was annoyed by Ontario TV ads using a Reagan clip to decry tariffs. Prime Minister Carney clings to the hope that these issues will be addressed in the context of the USMCA talks. They are supposed to begin in January. We live in hope. Make no mistake. Trump recently suggested that USMCA’s future was not certain. His strong belief that Canada would be better as a US state _ “and there would be no tariffs” – seems unshakeable. Perhaps the most striking evidence of what low repute Canada is held in the White House comes from Vice President Vance. He has publicly criticized Canada's our generous immigration policies, blaming them for the country's "stagnating" living standards and referring to our approach as "immigration insanity". Vance pointed to a chart from IceCap Asset Management showing that Canada's GDP per capita growth has fallen behind that of the U.S. and the U.K. in recent years. He argues this stagnation is a direct result of Canada's approach to immigration and not U.S. trade policies. He specifically targeted Canada's multiculturalism model, contrasting it with the U.S. "melting pot". Vance claimed that "no nation has leaned more into 'diversity is our strength’... immigration insanity “ than Canada". The White House recently released National Security Strategy (NSS) which also note how immigrants can destroy our democracies. Thomas Friedman, a New York Times columnist signaled this: “It cites activities by our sister European democracies that “undermine political liberty and sovereignty, migration policies that are transforming the continent and creating strife, censorship of free speech and suppression of political opposition, cratering birthrates, and loss of national identities and self-confidence. “‘Should present trends continue,” it goes on, “the continent will be unrecognizable in 20 years or less.” These views are totally inimical to Canadian values.  As is this, Trump’s most outrageous recent anti- immigrant outburst as reported by NBC : “For a second day in a row, President Donald Trump launched into a hate-filled rant against Somalia and Somali immigrants living in the US, saying they’ve “destroyed Minnesota” and “our country.” Minnesota, Trump said, is “a hellhole” right now. “The Somalians should be out of here. They’ve destroyed our country.“ The NSC also can affect Canada in its focus on the Western hemisphere. an area to be dominated by US interests. The US will secure critical supply chains in its own interests; and insists on the right of the US to have access to “strategically important locations.” The US National Security Council is to identify strategic points and resources in the Western hemisphere with a view to their protection and joint development with regional partners. Obviously, Canada as a source of critical minerals, will be under US scrutiny. Some observers fear that Trump wants Canada to become a “vassal state”. A December Toronto Star editorial states coldly that “Thanks to Donald Trump, we know that nothing about our country is guaranteed anymore, not our sovereignty, our democracy, our prosperity.” We now know the Canadian policies standing in the way of a new USMCA agreement. US Trade representative Jamieson Greer said our online Streaming Act, which will make profitable US streaming services support Canadian programming is a major irritant as is our sacrosanct supply management regime for dairy and poultry products. These both are very difficult bargaining chips for Canada to play. Trump’s love affair with tariffs is unlikely to subside so Canadian products may continue to be frozen out of the US. Prime Minister Carney’s ambitious strategy of finding alternate markets for these may work. And his new policy framework for rebuilding a successful economy, major infrastructure projects and attracting important foreign investment is a significant redefinition of our national political priorities. He enjoys wide public support for his strategy which also receives good business and media support. There is already some optimism about the economy in 2026 - take Bank of Montreal’s recent outlook paper: “We’re looking for a stronger economy in 2026 than 2025. Consumer spending has helped prop up the economy. The “Buy Canadian” campaign has helped, and more people are travelling closer to home. Also, there’s no question that federal government spending has also supported economic growth. As we move into the latter part of the year—boosted by firmer economic growth and lower population growth—we expect the unemployment rate to fall in the second half. “Canada’s position in the trade dispute isn’t as bad as it appeared earlier in the year. The average Us tariff rate on imports of Canadian goods is between 6% and 7%, compared to the 17% rate the U.S. charges the rest of the world on average. (these rates are goods under the existing CUSMA) Sectorial tariffs are heavily focused on certain targeted industries, such as steel and aluminum, lumber, and auto imports and non-USMCA auto parts. These are important sectors, but they represent a relatively narrow slice of the economy. “ In addition there is good news on the overall trade front. Canada’s trade swung to a surplus of C$0.15 billion in September 2025 from a C$6.3 billion deficit the month before and well above expectations for a C$4.5 billion deficit, Exports rose 6.3 C$ 64.231 billion, the largest monthly increase since February. Nine of 11 product sections posted gains. Metal and non-metallic mineral product exports jumped 22.7% driven by a 30.2% surge in unwrought gold; aircraft and other transportation equipment rose 23.4% and crude oil exports climbed 5.8%. We just may have a more resilient economy than we thought. Nevertheless, we cannot count on Trump agreeing to a new trade regime that is as good as the original NAFTA – and the cost of reducing tariffs on key sectors may be too high, Trump’s love for tariffs and distain for us won’t change. We can only hope that a smart, well connected and determined Prime Minister can rebuild an economy that will be immune to the vagaries of our neighbour.
More Posts