Murray Wood: Waiting a week is not customer service, it's failure
Murray Wood argues that too many companies confuse automation and delay with customer service. After waiting a week for ...
ST. JOHN’S, N.L. — The surprising resignation of two well-liked Atlantic premiers has left some political experts shaking their heads in disbelief — and marvelling at the mounting demands on anyone running a province.
Andrew Furey said Tuesday he would step down as premier of Newfoundland and Labrador as soon as the Liberals choose a new leader; Dennis King resigned as premier of Prince Edward Island on Friday at noon. Furey’s resignation in particular was a “complete and utter shock,” said Alex Marland, a political science professor at Acadia University.
“The thing that is a commonality — and that is a little perplexing — is the abruptness of both resignations,” Marland said in an interview Wednesday. “Usually, when leaders leave, they don’t want to leave … and when they do step down, it’s usually because they’re behind in the polls. And that’s not the case in both of these premiers.”
Two Atlantic provinces and the federal Liberal party are looking for new leaders as the country faces threats of punishing tariffs and annexation from United States President Donald Trump, said Jörg Broschek, a political science professor at Wilfrid Laurier University.
“This is not the stability we would actually need,” he said in an interview.
During their resignation announcements, Furey and King told reporters about leading their provinces through crises and Trump’s threats to impose 25 per cent tariffs on Canadian goods. The duties are set to take effect next week, though a White House official said the tariff plans could change through negotiations.
Trump has also threatened to use “economic force” to make Canada the 51st state — words Furey has said Canadian citizens and leaders should take very seriously.
King, a Progressive Conservative, stepped down after six years in power. Education Minister Rob Lantz was chosen as the new party leader and sworn in as premier on Friday. Lantz told reporters he had no intention of running as the party’s permanent leader.
Furey, a Liberal, announced his resignation after almost five years on the job.
As of November, both premiers enjoyed healthy public approval: Narrative Research polls that month suggested 59 per cent of Islanders were satisfied with King’s government and 56 per cent of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians felt the same about Furey’s leadership.
Both premiers faced a punishing series of calamities during their tenure, including the COVID-19 pandemic and numerous environmental emergencies, including post-tropical storm Fiona, which destroyed about 100 homes in southwestern Newfoundland and left tens of thousands of Islanders without power for more than a week.
And there may still be chaos ahead: P.E.I.’s potato farmers would be hit hard by Trump’s tariffs, as would Newfoundland and Labrador’s fish harvesters.
But Marland said it may not be the crises that are burning out premiers, but rather the context in which they unfold.
“The difference is the intensity that comes with interconnected media now,” he said. “The intensity of the crises, and the frequency (don’t) really give you time to come up for air. The media cycle is different. It’s not about just filing things once a day, it’s about all the time.”
Premiers face near-constant attacks from the public and opposition parties, in increasingly polarized societies, Marland added.
Broschek wondered if a lack of coordination between the federal and provincial governments too often leave premiers to shoulder massive burdens on their own, including Trump.
“I can totally see the pressure on our premiers and all politicians,” he said. “There’s so much more weight on individual premiers, those who are at the forefront, than there would be if we had a much more institutionalized system.”
Some political scientists have long called for national policy frameworks that would help guide provinces through major problems, and help them work together toward common goals, Broschek said. He pointed to the current “Team Canada” response to Trump as an example of incoherence.
So far, provinces seem to be on the hook to lead Team Canada, he said. But when “Team Canada” phrasing has been used in the past — during negotiations of the Canada-European Union trade agreement, for example — Ottawa led the way, he said.
“It’s highly ambiguous, and it’s only ambiguous because we don’t have the institutions that actually clarify who’s doing what in what situation,” he said, adding, “I would say we need to institutionalize Team Canada.”
This report by The Canadian Press was first published Feb. 26, 2025.
Sarah Smellie, The Canadian Press
