Martin C. Barry, Local Journalism Initiative

Does a sophisticated banker, with well-established connections in the global realm of high-finance – yet with potential conflicts of interest over his personal investments – make for a good Prime Minister?

Or would Canadians perhaps be better off with a once obscure Parliamentary backbench politician, who had enough raw ambition to become leader of his party, yet embraced far-right political causes while scaling the political ladder?

As we approach Canada’s April 28 election day, these are perhaps the only real choices voters will have. Especially taking into consideration that the NDP could be facing what is already being predicted as an electoral wipeout of historic proportions.

With the sudden and rather abrupt dumping of former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in January, followed by nearly as sudden arrival of Mark Carney, who had been lurking for years in the wings, we are reminded that this is certainly not the first time the Liberals have travelled down this road.

If there is a lesson even before election day, it is perhaps that initial appearances tend to be deceiving – especially in the realm of politics.

When Paul Martin during the early 2000s started stealthily to let the word go around that he might be interested in being eased into the position that Prime Minister Jean Chrétien had no initial intention of vacating, the former finance minister could hardly have suspected that the Liberals would be so weakened they would open the door to a parliamentary defeat and a Conservative government.

Or then there was the case of Michael Ignatieff, establishing that a respected professional (be it a university academic, or a banker for that matter) isn’t necessarily always cut out for politics.

After being drafted by the Liberals, who seemingly expected Ignatieff to duplicate what another intellectual, Pierre Elliott Trudeau, had done to raise the party’s profile into the stratosphere, Ignatieff turned out to be a dud. After three years as leader of the Liberal opposition, the Liberals’ supposed star simply vanished back into the exalted halls of academia.

As for Poilièvre, what he may lack in charisma and cosmopolitan flair, he makes up in sheer brazenness. The kind that led him to embrace the participants in the February 2022 Freedom Convoy protests in Ottawa.

They disrupted the national capital’s local economy and drove residents batty. And let’s not forget the heated threats directed by Freedom Convoy participants at MPs as they tried to enter the Parliament buildings. After all, Poilièvre was there among them.

It’s notable that in keeping with what appears to be his obviously opportunistic nature, not a word about the episode is being spoken during the current election (except perhaps for a few fleeting references by the Liberals). Nor does he seem any longer to show much enthusiasm for the underlying far-right.

Like Ignatieff, Carney may have international recognition. But at the same time, he may also know squat about politics. And for whatever it’s worth, the latter talent (which might be compared to a chessmaster’s natural skill) is something you can’t necessarily learn at the University of Oxford.

But ironically, it is something Justin Trudeau understood instinctively. Which is probably why he survived for almost a decade as Prime Minister. Significantly, politics is something Pierre Poilière also instinctively seems to grasp closely, having apprenticed in it since he was a teenageer.

If Carney wins (which many polls are predicting – along with a minority or majority Liberal government), the true test will be whether he has the mettle to persist with courage and conviction against the strong headwinds.

Otherwise, he may simply fade back to where he came from. A place where – like Ignatieff – he feels more comfortable.