What new leadership should look like for Failing Liberals

Patrick Gossage • December 27, 2024

Most Ottawa watchers have thrown up their arms in disgust with the all too obvious leadership mismanagement in the appalling chaos of the last few days: the dismissal of one of Canada’s most respected Ministers and deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland

over basic disagreement over economic policy, then her resignation. The shameless offer of the Finance post to Mark Carney – obviously turned down. Then her very damaging resignation letter the day she was supposed to unveil her economic update. And an invisible Prime Minister now considering his future with his caucus support imploding. His future is now the issue, as parliament adjourns with the government’s future in severe jeopardy.

This unprecedented weakness in the Trudeau minority government, and the base and angry polarized political discourse, makes one wonder what kind of Canada we have become, and what do we have a government for? It clearly has not served our economy or its anxiety ridden citizens, or given them hope or confidence for many months. We also face the nastiest election ever in Canadian history with apparently deep divisions about the kind of nation we should have. And a severe threat to a divided weakened nation from the incoming President. This without a clear path to change and renewal of the Liberal party, and a disliked and feckless opposition leader showing few signs of strength to seize important national and international policies.


For the first time there are signs that Trudeau may make way for a leadership change. There are strong contenders, not the last, Freedland herself, who will run again and has shown a taste for the big job. It’s predictable that Carney has no desire to join what seems to be the failing party. And given the wide public distaste for the Liberals, it would take a major new powerful leader to reverse its fortunes. Perhaps the Trudeau pal, the very politically sage Dominic LeBlanc.


What might a totally renewed Liberal leadership look like? One thing is certain. Canadians need a new and robust belief in the country. Pride in Canada dropped from a high of 78 per cent in 1984 to just 34 per cent this year, according to a recent Angus Reid poll. Little surprise, given that Trudeau once said that Canada had no national identity, and played to the country’s particularisms. This lack of belief in one’s country is particularly evident among young people. And much is due to the inability of the government to speak to their needs and concerns. It is the

young who celebrate our evident sports and music accomplishments, not our leaders.


Is there a politician capable of reigniting national pride and confidence? One might also ask if Trudeau decided to stay, if he has the rhetorical chops to reinspire Canadians? Unlikely, but something he may be considering. In any case, it’s a tall order, but perhaps the only way the country could be lifted to trust that a new and strong nation could be rebuilt; that there is a politician who puts the nation, not himself, or herself, first. I really believe we are tired of being told our country is broken, and that we have to keep apologizing for past errors and have little in our past to be proud of. The world outside is indeed a fearful one, and some of our most cherished values are being questioned in many countries. Trump’s insanities contrast with our relative stability, and respect for law and order and the caring society we have built. The Canadian spirit is cautious, observant and critical, where the American is assertive. One reason is that many are turned off by the constant negativity of Poiliviere. We celebrate and value diversity and welcome immigrants. Reducing their numbers does not reduce the value we put on our multicultural society. And however difficult it becomes, we are committed to reducing the number of assault weapons that produce such regular horror south of the border.


We may be more politically divided than ever, in a partisan sense, but if someone can rally us to the values we share and show us that Canada’s most valued institutions like universal health care can be improved, he or she will be listened to. Trudeau might look at the lines at the bottom of the his father’s Charter document for inspiration: “We must now establish the basic principles, the basic values and beliefs which hold us together as Canadians so that beyond our regional loyalties there is a way of life and a system of values which make us proud of the country that has given us such freedom and such immeasurable joy.” This is a worthwhile strategy for some leader to consider. There are positive signs. Our indigenous people, especially their leaders and creators, are being appreciated and heard as never before. And this should be celebrated. We are acutely aware of racial issues and working hard so that the egalitarianism promised by the Charter is evident in all our dealings with each other. This all sounds like some sort of dream of a latter-day Canadian Roosevelt, I know. But surely anyone who wants to lead this country must be fundamentally committed to its core values that unify us all, and commit to new ways of institutionalizing them. Hope springs eternal, and out of the recent chaos new leadership and a strong new Canada might just emerge.

Patrick Gossage Insider Political Views

A couple in matching formalwear walks the red carpet, surrounded by photographers and camera flashes.
By Patrick Gossage August 11, 2026
Watching cringeworthy video of our former PM’s hand on popstars Katy Perry’s bum at the Tribeca film festival gave me pause about who our former leader had become.
By Patrick Gossage April 14, 2026
In contrast to US inaction after almost weekly mass killings, it took one horrible shooting rampage at the Ecole Polytechnique in Montreal, in 1980, to start the drive for public policy changes around gun control. But years delays between the mass shooting outrage and actual policy to rid the country of assault rifles doomed the eventual gun buyback program. The polytechnique horror was huge news in our relatively massacre-free nation. That December day, 25-year-old Marc Lépine stalked the hallways and classrooms of the École Polytechnique de Montréal with a semi-automatic rifle and murdered 14 women and injured another 13 people before killing himself. A year later, the Coalition for Gun Control was formed to push for stricter gun laws, led by survivors of the Montreal massacre. Later that year, the federal government passed Bill C-17, which imposed safety training and a mandatory waiting period to get a firearms licence-- not an effective means of controlling automatic rifles. Much later, in1996, Parliament passed the Firearms Act, Bill C-68, driven in part by a push for stricter gun laws following the Montreal massacre. The act created a national firearms registry and imposed new rules for obtaining a gun licence, including background checks. The former Conservative government, under prime minister Stephen Harper, abolished the long-gun registry, which it said placed an unnecessary burden on law-abiding gun owners. Quebec subsequently created its own provincial registry to replace it. It took another horrific killing nine years later in Nova Scotia to force Ottawa to take real action on miliary-style guns. On April 18 and 19, 2020, 51-year-old Gabriel Wortman committed multiple shootings and set fires at 16 locations, killing 22 people before he was killed by the RCMP. On May 1, 2020, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, following through on a 2019 campaign promise, announced an immediate ban on some 1,500 makes and models of assault weapons.. The Canadian government sought to follow New Zealand's lead when at the same time it announced the ban it promised a plan to force gun owners to surrender military-style firearms. But while New Zealand acted quickly, in 2019, Ottawa only launched a long awaited buyback program in 2026. In contrast, the government of then New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda announced its firearms buyback program shortly after a white supremacist killed 51 people at two mosques in Christchurch in March, 2019. In order to move quickly, New Zealand set up mobile units where firearm owners could get refunds in exchange for their firearms. They worked hard to get co-operation from gun owners. Meanwhile, here, the firearms industry and individual gun owners vigorously opposed the project, and it was delayed for years. The program was finally initiated this year with little of the sense of urgency it could have had right after the Nova Scotia killings. It has not been going well. In April, the federal public safety minister's office said more than 67,000 assault-style firearms have been declared by 37,869 firearm owners across Canada. That's just under half of the 136,000 firearms the government had budgeted for when it set aside aside $248.6 million for the program. The precise number of banned firearms in Canada is unknown due to the end of the long-gun registry in 2012. There are other deeper problems. Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba have indicated they will not assist with the program, meaning police are not co-operating as in New Zealand. Conservative MPs and firearm owners say the buyback is a wasteful exercise that targets law-abiding citizens. The original gun-control advocacy group, PolySeSouvient, blames “weak political leadership” for what it calls “poor participation” in the compensation program. It looks like Ottawa - to put it mildly - has blown the opportunity to really reduce the number of people-killing guns in this country.
More Posts