By invoking the Emergencies Act, Trudeau tries to seize a new crisis

This was not a "just watch me" moment. Even if another prime minister named Trudeau will now own the implications of another unprecedented attempt to come to grips with a new crisis.

There was no swagger from Justin Trudeau. He was at pains to explain that his government's actions under the Emergencies Act would be "time limited, "geographically targeted," "reasonable" and "proportionate." 

After carefully listing the "tools" that would be employed, Trudeau made a point of being "equally clear" about what he was not doing. He was not calling in the military, nor suspending fundamental rights, nor overriding the Charter. He was not limiting freedom of speech or freedom of peaceful assembly.

Justin Trudeau was not, in other words, doing as his father had done when Pierre Trudeau invoked the War Measures Act in October 1970. 

He did not ridicule the views held by some of the protesters — as he has done in the past — nor did he take the bait when reporters offered him chances to criticize the Ottawa police and Ottawa Mayor Jim Watson. There were no pithy one-liners that will echo through history, though there were at least a few sentences that underlined the gravity of this moment.

WATCH | Trudeau announces he will invoke Emergencies Act for 1st time ever: 

"It is now clear that there are serious challenges to law enforcement's ability to effectively enforce the law," Trudeau said. "This is about keeping Canadians safe, protecting peoples' jobs and restoring confidence in our institutions."

That confidence needs to be restored is indicative of a crisis, but Trudeau also stressed that he was taking a measure of "last resort."

There will be some debate now about whether the Trudeau government should have done something earlier — or even whether it should have done anything at all.

Though every situation is unique, it is fair to say Trudeau and his government — a team that is generally averse to sudden movement — aren't quick to act aggressively when they find themselves in a difficult situation. 

They mostly ignored the provocations of Donald Trump while the North American Free Trade Agreement was being renegotiated, and they declined the Conservative party's demands to poke a stick in China's eye while Michael Spavor and Michael Kovrig were imprisoned. 

When the Walloons threatened to scuttle a trade deal with Europe, Chrystia Freeland responded with sadness, as opposed to anger. When British Columbia Premier John Horgan got in the way of the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion he wasn't threatened with reprisal.

In some cases, that reluctance to stoke the fires may have worked out in the end. In the case of British Columbia, it may have led to the federal government owning a pipeline. 

Almost exactly two years ago, Trudeau stood in the House of Commons and appealed for "patience" in the face of railway blockades organized by Indigenous protesters. That patience would run out just four days later and the most significant blockade would end in arrests.