Canadian democracy is failing the moment

There should very obviously be an election, and a new prime minister. So why do we have neither?

In a recent video, I described Canada as being ruled by a “necrocracy,” or government by the dead, given our prime minister has such rock-bottom numbers it’s inconceivable he’ll be re-elected to another term. Situations like these invite partisan jeering, since the desperation of an administration with one foot in the grave can be deeply pathetic — Prime Minister Trudeau’s $250 handouts, for instance. Yet they also manifest something darker, and the subject of another recent video of mine: the paradoxes of democracy.

In standard republican theory, the opinions of the people are expressed through the politicians they elect. But in an age of constant, widely-available public polling, the politician’s necessity as middleman declines. To the question of whether the Canadian parliament should vote non-confidence in Trudeau, for instance — the highest act of democratic rejection in the Canadian system — we need only look at his 29% approval rating and the fact that 68% of voters don’t want him in power as evidence of a strong public mandate for parliament to remove him.

The rebuttal would be an appeal to Burkian elitism — the notion that politicians possess insights that voters don’t, and should be offered deference to their judgement. Yet the modern world also makes our politicians’ motives less mysterious, and there’s little evidence the Canadian parliamentarians withholding the votes needed for a confidence motion are animated by any remotely defensible logic.

We can excuse Liberal members of parliament for remaining doggedly loyal, and the Conservatives are doing their best in the other direction, having instigated three confidence votes this year. This leaves the Bloc Quebecois and the NDP as the parties most responsible for keeping Trudeau in power, and yet neither of them agrees to concede this obvious reality, let alone justify their culpability in perpetuating it.

The Bloc Quebecois is a strange and cynical party that refuses to understand the Canadian government as anything beyond an insecure parent to extort goodies from. Since its politicians dwell in a cuckooland where an independent Quebec is as imminent as the Great Pumpkin, they prefer to ignore indignities like the fact that Justin Trudeau is their prime minister too, and their behaviour as Canadian parliamentarians partially responsible. The Bloc is now rhetorically in favor of a confidence vote, but they refuse to frame this as anything but an act of retaliation against some recent Trudeau policies they’ve declared contrary to Quebec’s interests, as opposed to a holistic assessment of Trudeau’s fitness for high office.

The NDP delegation cannot hide behind self-delusion. They are overtly patriotic and believers in the Canadian system, and Jagmeet Singh has repeatedly declared that Justin Trudeau is a bad and failed prime minister, a man who has “proven again and again he will always cave to corporate greed,” as he put it when the NDP backed out of his coalition with the Liberals in September.

And yet – he will still not support a confidence motion. The NDP is polling badly and will not benefit from triggering an emergency election, and many NDP parliamentarians will not meet the six-years-in-office qualification necessary to receive a government pension unless the parliamentary term extends to October of 2025.¹ As a progressive, Singh could argue that as bad as Trudeau is, it would be worse if the Conservatives replaced him, but he does not make this argument. He instead makes the ludicrous claim that he is running for prime minister himself, and dismisses the very idea of a confidence vote as “playing games,” hoping this thought-terminating cliche will suffice in place of an explanation.

When politicians are this cynical or disingenuous, the principles of parliamentary democracy break down. The system presumes parliamentarians will take seriously their responsibilities of ensuring the nation is equipped with a leader capable of facing the challenges before it. It does not anticipate politicians who prioritize self-serving, extra-constitutional partisan interests that knowingly prolong misgovernance.

President Trump’s tariffs represent a severe danger to the Canadian economy and the country’s greatest crisis since Covid. A recent Abacus poll, had 45% of Canadians saying they believe Trump will prefer working with Pierre Poilievre over Trudeau, which only makes sense. As a conservative, Poilievre will communicate with Trump in language he understands, while evidence suggests Trump’s handlers have radicalized him into seeing Trudeau as a member of the leftist horde he just finished campaigning against. Reagan and Mulroney singing Irish folk songs it won’t be, but from an objective national interest perspective, Pierre’s election as prime minister is understood as necessary and inevitable.

Every day the Canadian parliament delays this inevitability, by contrast, and instead chooses to perpetuate the rule of a zombie administration the public doesn’t trust or want is a day the country is made to endure a pointless, destructive era of instability, mismanagement, and uncertainty regarding the future of US-Canada relations and countless other matters. It is an indictment of Canada’s pretence of “responsible government” and casts a harsh light on the myths of Canadian democracy.

1. In May, the NDP said it was in not in favor of a provision in a bill before the parliament that would delay the date of the 2025 election just enough to ensure the six-year mark would be hit. Liberals say the NDP was aware of this provision, given the bill was crafted during their period of political cooperation and are just opposing it now because it’s become controversial. It’s unclear if the NDP will do anything to remove the provision. Jagmeet Singh needs the parliament to continue to at least February to qualify for his pension.