If a week is a long time in politics, then a year is a lifetime and a four-year mandate an eternity.
At the beginning of 2025, the Conservatives had a 35-point lead over a fractious and self-imploding Liberal Party.
Then, the unthinkable. After nearly a decade of Liberal rule, Mark Carney assumed the leadership and led them to victory. It was a minority, but a man who had never been elected to anything was the Prime Minister of Canada.
Since then, Mark Carney has continued to pull rabbits out of his hat – if rabbits were opposition Members of Parliament. On the eve of the Liberal Party convention in Montreal, Marilyn Gladue, an unrepentant social conservative broke ranks and joined the Liberals. Within days, Mark Carney and the Liberals had a majority.
Mark Carney’s popularity in Quebec is holding, the NDP have been reduced to non-significance, and the Conservative party remains intent on doubling-down on their unpopular leader whose approach was hemorrhaging MPs with rumours that the exodus will continue.
The Liberals and Mark Carney are selling what Canadians want to buy. MPs are crossing the floor, polls are positive and Pierre Poilievre’s unpopularity is constant.
The Liberals headed into barbecue season with a swagger they haven’t enjoyed in a long time.
But while the Liberal Party is manifesting its place as Canada’s natural governing party, they need to be reminded that as unprecedented a Mark Carney’s success has been, the conditions creating it were equally unprecedented.
In Canada, political parties, Liberal or Conservative, generally have a shelf life of 10 years. Pierre Trudeau was prime minister from 1968 to 1984, but this was interrupted by Joe Clark’s short-lived government. The Liberals were in power under two prime ministers from 1993 – 2006 but they were facing a divided right. Once the two main centre-right parties merged, the Conservatives formed government for, predictably, about 10 years (2006-2015). Even Mackenzie-King, Canada’s longest serving prime minister never served more than 13 years in a row.
So, in 2025, after 10 years in power, smart money was on the Liberals losing the election. Despite all the F*Trudeau stickers, this had less to do with the leader and everything to do with electoral exhaustion.
So, what happened?
Mark Carney is an unquestionably qualified, but being qualified isn’t enough. John Turner and Michael Ignatieff were both highly qualified but could not overcome leading parties whose time was up. Mark Carney won not necessarily because of anything that he did, but because of events. He is uniquely qualified to respond to the political and economic uncertainties from the Trump administration. Those qualities were amplified when compared to the Leader of the Conservative Party, whose affinity for soundbites and pithy criticisms over serious policy made him appear unequal to the job.
Since becoming prime minister, Mark Carney has said and done the right things. He has launched national building projects, aggressively pursued trade deals and has committed Canada to independent defence initiatives.
Carney has done a good job of keeping the ship steady, but despite the swagger, cracks are beginning to show. In the near-term, Mark Carney has three distinct challenges; achieving results, a re-invigorated opposition, and his own party.
Delivering Results – CUSMA, trade deals and nation-building projects
The first thing is CUSMA. The prime minister was elected on his strength to negotiate. Unfortunately, the government of Canada has a less than reliable partner. The United States administration is not looking at CUSMA as a trade deal, but a path to continental dominance. Our concessions only invite more demands. If we respond, they retaliate. Despite the hand wringing and the president’s claims that he doesn’t want a deal, threats of forest-fire-tariffs and dusting off questionable 1930s trade regulations, a deal will be made. The cost of keeping Canadian steel, softwood lumber and auto parts out of the United States will simply be too much for their economy to absorb. But the prime minister needs to get something fast. In the absence of a trade deal, the unpredictability will continue to hurt the Canadian economy.
The prime minister has announced a series of trade deals. He has made progress with China, India, the European Union, Japan, Qatar (and the list continues). How these deals translate into economic benefit in time to offset the reduction in trade with the United States remains uncertain. However, just because these deals take time, does not mean that they are not worth pursuing. These deals will set Canada up to be more resilient as we diversity our trade. In this respect, Mark Carney is in the process of doing what we elected him to do, make our economy more secure.
In other areas, he has met with what some would call “imperfect success.”
Eliminating internal trade barriers has not worked out as promised. Canadian provinces have tremendous powers, powers that have been growing since the conception of the country. Premiers, like all politicians, are hesitant to give up powers and the concept of a trade-barrier free Canada is more a wish than a reality.
On nation building initiatives the jury is still out. The initial projects were criticized for being less than inspiring. Many projects were nearly completed. Projects announced since have been less nation-building than province appeasing. I argued in this space that the Prime Minister missed the opportunity to identify ending boil water advisories on reserves as a nation-building project. Not only have these projects missed the opportunity to fulfill an existing promise, but they have also been announced and promoted in many cases without Indigenous consultation, continuing the trend of treating First Nations as an afterthought.
Despite imperfect policies and falling short of his promises, Mark Carney had a good first year in office. Crediting this to his innate brilliance would be an imperfect explanation. The prime minister has the luxury of governing largely unopposed in the House. Pierre Poilievre, chastened by losing his own seat was not his usual attack dog self while the NDP remained leaderless in the House. Neither has been as effective as they could. It would, however, be a mistake to think that this is going to continue.
Of all the things Pierre Poilievre may be, a political neophyte he is not. After his unexpected election defeat and losing his own seat, he knows that his party is not prepared for an election. Given his weakened position, he couldn’t very well be opposing every measure and calling for the government to resign because he couldn’t risk the Liberals calling his bluff. Even though a minority gave him the power to defeat the government, he knew he would lose an election.
With a Liberal majority, the Conservatives can be aggressive without risking an election. The source of Liberal swagger has become the catalyst for more scrutiny when parliament resumes. Poilievre is preparing by shifting his opposition critics. We can expect more sparks to fly, and Mark Carney will have to stop skipping Question Period.
We can also expect to hear more from the New Democratic Party. Since 2019, the party has been self-muted. It is hard to oppose when you have made an agreement to not oppose. The new leader, Avi Lewis, may not have parliamentary experience but he makes up for it in integrity and communication skills. His Leap Manifesto was overshadowed by Trudeau (the younger) mania, but with the annual forest fires and the unpopularity of pipelines drawing from a beleaguered public purse, voters who feel sidelined from the Liberals may find a home with a refreshed NDP. Avi Lewis has opted to re-set the party rather than seek a seat, but there is already pressure on him to contest an election. It would be surprising for him not to take his place in the House sooner rather than later.
The last few weeks have seen an effective opposition making Canadians aware of the inconsistencies that have characterized the prime minster’s explanation of the new Gordie Howe Bridge deal. As the Prime Minister negotiates with the United States on CUSMA, he will no longer be able to take for granted that he can get by on his self-described, “imperfect explanations.” His recent appointment of Scott Gilmour, who at one time suggested that the solution to Indigenous problems in remote areas was to re-locate them all to the south, as a Senior Advisor has raised concerns that aren’t going to go away. If opposition parties are truly serious about Indigenous issues, we can expect to hear more about this appointment.
Moving forward, another challenge for the prime minister will come from within his own ranks. As much as the Liberals might try to deny it, the party that Mark Carney leads is Justin Trudeau’s party – a party where social activists and progressives found a home with Bay Street Liberals and Laurentian elites.
Carney’s leadership style is vastly different than Trudeau’s. His corporate, goal-driven approach is not necessarily a bad thing, but leading a party is not the same as running a business. The prime minister has reprioritized environmental, social and indigenous issues that many Liberals championed and campaigned on for years. Embracing pipelines, cancelling carbon pricing, overlooking election tampering and politically motivated killings does not sit well with all members of his party.
On the environment, the prime minister has reversed the progressive policies of Justin Trudeau, polices that he advocated as the United Nations Special Envoy on Climate Action and Finance. One of his first moves was to eliminate carbon pricing and offer tax relief on fuel. He has embarked on an initiative with Alberta to fast-track approvals for a pipeline while the associated carbon capture remains undefined. The Liberal tent now has room for social conservatives like Marilyn Gladu, but it no longer can accommodate environmentalists like Guilbeault.
“Taking the world as it is rather than waiting for a world we wish to be” has seen Canada re-engage with countries whose intentions were, up to very recently, considered questionable. In 2024, Canada expelled Indian diplomats over the murder of a Sikh activist on Canadian soil. CSIS determined that China was attempting to interfere with elections in addition to using coercive trade practices, unjustly imprisoning two Canadian citizens for years, and operating illegal policing stations in Canada.
Canada needs to be pragmatic. It would be foolish to sit on our energy resources rather than use them to satisfy a global demand. As a trading nation, we need new markets and cannot ignore China and India who make up 36 per cent of the world’s population. The pragmatic reasoning used to defend this shift is not new, however, it is the very argument that the Liberals countered for the past 10 years. Rank and file Liberals are now defending the economic initiatives they once ideologically opposed.
The reason that governments fall after ten years is not because they have run out of ideas, it’s because the rank and file begin to, as they did with Trudeau, condition their support. For many, after a fourth term, they realize they won’t become cabinet ministers, so they start representing their constituents and listening to their conscience over blindly following any prime minister’s lead.
Most Liberal MPs were willing, at least temporarily, to put their ideology aside to support a Prime Minister who would manage the President and secure a trade deal. But with no deal in sight, increasing tariffs and the Gordie Howe Bridge fiasco, exuberant caucus support can’t be taken for granted.
When the House resumes in the fall, Mark Carney will face a new set of challenges. A trade deal has not been signed, tariffs are increasing and questions are being asked about nation-building projects. He will face a re-vamped opposition front bench who are itching to fight while his own Caucus will not be docile.
Despite all of this, if an election were called today, the Liberals would win, largely because of the enduring unpopularity of the Conservative Leader. But if the Liberals continue to pin their hopes on a struggling Pierre Poilievre staying put, they will find themselves lost if he leaves before the 2029 election.
Rona Ambrose is 56, Peter McKay is 60, Doug Ford is learning French and Jason Kenny has emerged from self-imposed exile.
Three years is an eternity in politics.
Donald McFarling is the former executive assistant to Carmen Provenzano, Sault Ste. Marie MP from 1997 to 2004. He is currently an assistant professor at the Royal Military College of Canada, Department of Economics and Political Science.