The image is telling. While Canada’s men’s football team battled on the pitch in their World Cup qualifier, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau was elsewhere. He was not in the stands offering moral support. He was not even at a cabinet meeting. According to reports, he was fulfilling “boyfriend duties” watching his partner, Sophie Grégoire Trudeau, perform with pop star Katy Perry. The decision has been ridiculed as a leadership farce, a moment that underscores a cultural shift in how we perceive public office.
In a country where political leaders have traditionally been seen as stoic figures of national unity, Trudeau’s move feels like a break from protocol. It is not the first time he has been accused of prioritising personal image over substance. But this incident cuts deeper. It comes at a time when Canada’s football team is making headlines for its resilience, a rare bright spot in Canadian sports. The team’s hard-won match deserved the nation’s attention. Instead, the prime minister chose spectacle over solidarity.
The reaction has been swift and brutal. Social media erupted with memes and criticism, with many questioning the prime minister’s commitment to his duties. “Boyfriend duties” is now a trending phrase, dripping with irony. It captures a shift in public expectations: Canadians want a leader who shows up, not just for photo ops but for the quiet moments of national pride. Trudeau’s absence felt like a snub, a sign that he is more comfortable in the celebrity orbit than in the stands with ordinary citizens.
What does this say about class dynamics in Canada? Trudeau, with his photogenic family and celebrity connections, inhabits a world far removed from the middle-class voter. His choice to attend a Perry concert over a football match reinforces a perception of elitism. It suggests that the prime minister’s inner circle values entertainment over engagement.
But beyond the politics, there is a human cost. For the players who gave their all on the field, the prime minister’s absence is a disappointment. For the fans who support the team through thick and thin, it is a reminder that their passion is not always matched by their leaders. This is not about demanding that politicians be everywhere at once. It is about basic priorities. A prime minister has a schedule, yes, but he also has a symbolic role. He is meant to embody the nation’s spirit. When he chooses a celebrity concert over a national team’s match, he sends a message about what he values. And that message is not lost on those who feel increasingly disconnected from their leaders.
The cultural shift here is subtle but significant. We are moving away from the era of the stiff, statesmanlike leader to one where politicians are expected to be relatable, to share their personal lives, to be “real”. But that authenticity has a dark side: it can be used to excuse a lack of decorum. Trudeau’s defenders might argue that he has a right to a personal life. But when that personal life intrudes on a clear national moment, it becomes a political act. And it is one that many Canadians find hard to swallow.
In the end, this is not just about a missed match. It is about the erosion of trust. When a prime minister is seen to shirk his duties for a pop concert, it feeds a narrative of self-interest. It makes people wonder: if he will not show up for the football team, will he show up for them? The answer, for many, is already forming. And it is not a flattering one.
