Chrystia Freeland – one time journalist, and comrade-in-arms with Justin Trudeau since she entered Parliament in 2013 – quit the Prime Minister’s government in the most damaging and dramatic way possible on Monday, December 16.
On the day she was to deliver the government’s Fall Economic Statement, Freeland posted a resignation letter on social media.
In it, she eviscerated the Prime Minister for failing to take seriously incoming U.S. president Donald Trump’s threat of 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods. (See the full text of the letter at the end of the article).
Freeland revealed in her letter that she and the PM had been at odds for weeks. She wrote that, contrary to Trudeau, she wanted to keep Canada’s “fiscal powder dry”.
By that, Freeland meant avoiding costly new initiatives which would add to Canada’s annual deficits and accumulated national debt. She pointedly added that the country cannot afford “political gimmicks” at this time.
The outgoing finance minister didn’t specify what those gimmicks are. But it was clear she was referring to the HST holiday, which was a key part of the fall statement she had been scheduled to deliver on Monday afternoon.
We can safely assume Freeland is not a big fan of the $250 payout to working Canadians Trudeau has championed either.
That plan faltered because the New Democrats would not support it. They wanted the $250 to go to both working and non-working Canadians, including the disabled and the elderly.
Demotion, not policy, prompted Freeland to quit
It is interesting to note that as late as Friday December 13, Freeland was willing to soldier on, despite her profound misgivings about the policies she was about to propose in the Fall Statement.
The straw that broke the camel’s back was a Zoom call with the prime minster on Friday, during which Trudeau told Freeland he planned to remove her from the finance job, and give her another, less powerful position in cabinet.
That was too much for Freeland. She said as much in her resignation letter:
“To be effective, a Minister must speak on behalf of the Prime Minister and with his full confidence. In making your decision, you made clear that I no longer credibly enjoy that confidence and possess the authority that comes with it.”
On Monday, Trudeau hastily asked Dominic Leblanc, the current public safety minister, to add the finance portfolio to his duties. Trudeau’s old friend agreed, though he did not verbally deliver the Fall Economic Statement in the House of Commons, as finance ministers normally do.
Liberal House Leader Karina Gould simply tabled the document without fanfare, late Monday afternoon.
Gould also took most of the questions during Monday’s question period.
The 37-year-old Liberal House Leader has been something of a loyal fixer for Justin Trudeau since he gave her the task of killing the electoral reform process back in February of 2017.
For those interested in electoral reform, Gould’s evasive answers on the day she assumed the role of (soon-to-be-abolished) minister of democratic institutions still leave a bitter taste.
She kept brushing aside reporters’ questions, saying she had to “get briefed up” on the reform process.
(It seems that when political parties lose the script, they can also lose contact with standard English. Less than a day after Freeland’s resignation, Liberal Party president Kathryn McGarry shared an email on fundraising with donors, starting with the words: “…look at this update Crystal sent to Bonnie and I this morning”.)
Conservatives and Bloc want election; NDP not so sure
Monday’s question period provided a golden opportunity for opposition leaders to do some theatrical political grandstanding.
At one point during the proceedings, Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre rose in his place to pose a question, he said, for the minister of finance.
“Who are you?” he asked, to uproarious laughter from his side of the House.
There was, at that time, about a quarter past two in the afternoon, no minister of finance for Canada.
Poilievre, naturally, called for an immediate election, a call which the Bloc Québécois echoed.
The NDP had a slightly more nuanced position, which engendered skeptical, raised eyebrows on the part of Ottawa’s commentariat.
New Democratic leader Jagmeet Singh said unequivocally it was now time for Justin Trudeau to resign and allow someone else to take the helm of the Liberal Party and the government.
But when pressed as to whether New Democrats would thus vote non-confidence in the Liberal government, if given the chance, Singh’s only response was: “All options are on the table.”
Journalists and analysts were almost universally scornful of that seemingly evasive answer. One said Singh was engaging in “political malpractice”.
Commentators were quick to note that according to all public opinion polls the party which has benefited most from the Liberals’ sinking popularity is the Conservative party.
Polls do not show New Democrats to have suffered by association with the Liberals, with whom, until recently, they had a governing (confidence and supply) agreement. But the NDP has not gained much either. It is stuck at about 20 per cent in most polls.
New Democrats might be encouraged by one Ipsos poll, published a few days ago, which showed a gain of four points for their party over the previous Ipsos poll.
Those figures have only evanescent significance, however. More to the point, the four-point gain only puts the New Democrats where most other polls already had them.
By Monday evening, the NDP’s House Leader, Peter Julian, had clarified Singh’s statement about “all options.”
Julian told CBC’s Power and Politics host David Cochrane that if Trudeau does not announce his departure, the NDP will vote non-confidence in the government – if and when a motion to that effect comes before the House.
Parliament is now on a nearly six-week break, and the parliamentary calendar does not allow for a non-confidence vote until, at the earliest, late February, 2025.
Poilievre much worse than bumbling Trudeau
NDPers have to be painfully aware that as maladroit and confused as Trudeau and his government now seem, a slash-and-burn, climate-change-denying, public-broadcasting-destroying Poilievre government would be infinitely worse.
As well, NDP strategists and politicians know a good many of their current and, more important, potential voters live in utter terror of a Poilievre-led government, especially with Trump running the show south of the border.
New Democrats hope the Liberals can hang on to power long enough for the political horse-race numbers to shift.
Ideally, for New Democrats, more anti-Liberal sentiment will move their way, while, with a new leader, some erstwhile Liberals supporters, who now favour Poilievre, return to the fold.
That would make for something like the three-way race we had at the outset of the 2015 campaign.
There is, in fact, a lot not to like about the alternative Poilievre offers.
For instance, Canadians, overall, do not favour de-funding the CBC. Nor are most Canadians sympathetic with the view that climate change is not a real and pressing challenge.
Singh and his New Democratic colleagues will have to work harder, from here on in, to provide a coherent and progressive option for Canadians who want a change in government, but who are not willing to support a shift to the radical right.
Is the NDP up to the challenge?
Here is Chrystia Freeland’s letter of resignation:
Dear Prime Minister,
It has been the honour of my life to serve in government, working for Canada and Canadians. We have accomplished a lot together.
On Friday, you told me you no longer want me to serve as your Finance Minister and offered me another position in the Cabinet.
Upon reflection, I have concluded that the only honest and viable path is for me to resign from the Cabinet.
To be effective, a Minister must speak on behalf of the Prime Minister and with his full confidence. In making your decision, you made clear that I no longer credibly enjoy that confidence and possess the authority that comes with it.
For the past number of weeks, you and I have found ourselves at odds about the best path forward for Canada.
Our country today faces a grave challenge. The incoming administration in the United States is pursuing a policy of aggressive economic nationalism, including a threat of 25 per cent tariffs.
We need to take that threat extremely seriously. That means keeping our fiscal powder dry today, so we have the reserves we may need for a coming tariff war. That means eschewing costly political gimmicks, which we can ill afford and which make Canadians doubt that we recognize the gravity of the moment.
That means pushing back against ‘America First’ economic nationalism with a determined effort to fight for capital and investment and the jobs they bring. That means working in good faith and humility with the Premiers of the provinces and territories of our great and diverse country, and building a true Team Canada response.
I know Canadians would recognize and respect such an approach. They know when we are working for them, and they equally know when we are focused on ourselves.
Inevitably, our time in government will come to an end. But how we deal with the threat our country currently faces will define us for a generation, and perhaps longer. Canada will win if we are strong, smart, and united.
It is this conviction which has driven my strenuous efforts this fall to manage our spending in ways that will give us the flexibility we will need to meet the serious challenges presented by the United States.
I will always be grateful for the chance to have served in government and I will always be proud of our government’s work for Canada and Canadians.
I look forward to continuing to work with my colleagues as a Liberal Member of Parliament, and I am committed to running again for my seat in Toronto in the next federal election.
With gratitude,
The Honourable Chrystia Freeland, P.C., M.P.
Support rabble today!
We’re so glad you stopped by! Thanks for consuming rabble content this year.
rabble.ca is 100% reader and donor funded, so as an avid reader of our content, we hope you will consider gifting rabble with a donation during our summer fundraiser today.
Whether it be a one-time donation or a small monthly contribution, your support is critical to keep rabble writers producing the work you’ve come to rely on as a part of a healthy media diet.
Become a rabble rouser — donate to rabble.ca today.
Nick Seebruch, editor
