Frontier Centre for Public Policy

When retired Lt.-Gen. Michel Maisonneuve, one of Canada’s most decorated former commanders, delivered the Vimy Award address in November 2022, he said nothing radical.

He spoke about service, leadership, unity and the pride that once defined Canada’s military tradition. He warned of declining personal responsibility, the rise of cancel culture, the politicization of the armed forces and a country drifting from the standards that once earned it global respect.

The situation has only grown worse

In the three years since his speech, Canada has not addressed the issues he identified. The situation has only grown worse.

Maisonneuve argued that leadership requires accountability, clear communication and a commitment to the collective good. Canada’s political and institutional leadership continues to fall short.

The federal government still lacks a coherent defence strategy, subsidy-driven policy has replaced long-term planning and public institutions remain politicized.

Rather than uniting Canadians, political leaders often divide them along partisan, regional or identity lines. Confidence in federal institutions continues to slide, and trust in the media, which Maisonneuve criticized for blurring the line between fact and opinion, has fallen further amid polarization and widespread misinformation.

Maisonneuve warned in 2022 that Canada’s military was “woefully underfunded, undermanned and underappreciated.” Recruitment has collapsed, the Canadian Armed Forces struggle to meet NATO expectations and equipment modernization lags years behind our allies.

Veterans battle bureaucracy for basic care, and Canada’s challenges in defending the Arctic or supporting Ukraine have exposed a military stretched thin.

All of this is unfolding against a backdrop of heightened Russian aggression, expanding Chinese hybrid warfare and ongoing instability across the Middle East, threats Canada is ill-equipped to manage.

The moral contract between society and its soldiers, which Maisonneuve emphasized, remains broken, even as service members continue to uphold their duties.

Maisonneuve also criticized cancel culture as corrosive to free debate and historical understanding. Statues continue to be removed, institutions rewrite history to suit political agendas and Canadians are encouraged to apologize rather than accept individual responsibility.

These cultural fractures feed directly into a deeper problem: national unity. Western alienation persists, Quebec nationalism endures and Indigenous reconciliation remains heavy on symbolism but light on outcomes. Canada more often feels like a collection of competing interests than a nation with a common purpose.

NATO allies now openly criticize Canada’s limited capacity and chronic underinvestment

The reaction to Maisonneuve’s warning was predictable. Instead of sparking reflection, it provoked indignation among Ottawa insiders who preferred comfortable narratives. Yet much of what he warned about has since been vindicated.

NATO allies now openly criticize Canada’s limited capacity and chronic underinvestment. Energy and climate policy continues to sacrifice prosperity for symbolism with little measurable impact. Public discourse has hardened, with extremism more pronounced on both the left and the right, and debate increasingly replaced by slogans.

Against this backdrop, looking backward has become easier than facing the present. Nostalgia for a Canada that stormed the beaches of Normandy, launched a respected navy, advanced medical breakthroughs and inspired millions is not enough. The question is whether the country still has the resolve to rebuild the competence it once possessed.

The path forward remains rooted in the principles Maisonneuve outlined. Leadership must again mean accountability. It requires transparent communication and a commitment to the broader good rather than partisan advantage. Canadians must support leaders who demonstrate integrity and understand that meaningful progress depends on shared sacrifice. A credible, well-resourced military must be part of that renewal, not an afterthought.

The costs of inaction are no longer theoretical. Staying on the current path would turn Maisonneuve’s warnings into an epitaph. Three years after he spoke, Canada is weaker, more fragmented and less respected internationally. Yet recovery remains possible. It will require courage from leaders and commitment from citizens.

When leaders avoid accountability, Canada becomes vulnerable to foreign interference and economic stagnation

When leaders avoid accountability, Canada becomes vulnerable to foreign interference and economic stagnation

. Leaving the military underfunded not only betrays soldiers but signals to allies and adversaries that Canada lacks the will to defend itself. Ignoring concerns about historical memory or national cohesion deepens division and accelerates the loss of shared purpose.

The inability to assert sovereignty in the Arctic is not simply a strategic failure; it burdens future generations with a weakened, contested position. The choices Canada makes now will shape the country for decades.

Canadians face a straightforward choice: accept national decline or demand better. It requires insisting on honesty and accountability from those in power and supporting leaders who place country above division. It also requires accepting sacrifice: funding defence even when unpopular, pursuing real energy independence rather than symbolic goals and teaching history as it occurred, not as it is rewritten.

Critics in 2022 dismissed Maisonneuve’s speech as out of step. It was not. It was a mirror held up to a country losing confidence in itself. Canada chose to look away.

There is no time for complacency. Without a deliberate course correction, Canada will continue down the path the general warned against. With shared purpose and a willingness to confront hard truths, the country can reclaim its reputation for unity, strength and competence.

Maisonneuve ended his speech with a simple challenge: “If not us, who? If not now, when?” Three years later, the question remains. Canada must answer it.

Scott McGregor is an intelligence consultant and co-author of The Mosaic Effect. He is a senior fellow at the Council on Countering Hybrid Warfare and writes here for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Frontier Centre for Public Policy——Bio and Archives

The Frontier Centre for Public Policy (FCPP) is an independent Canadian public policy think tank. Founded in Winnipeg in 1997, the Frontier Centre received charitable status in 1999 and currently has offices in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Manitoba.

Our research aims to analyze current affairs and public policies and develop effective and meaningful ideas for good governance and reform. We provide a platform for public debate and engage with the public through our numerous publications and events.

Support Canada Free Press