On the day after Alberta Premier Danielle Smith dug herself out of an anti-vaxxer hole, she decided to add some levity to her Twitter feed. To do so, she took a picture of her nylon-clad legs and patent leather pumps with the tag line: ‘It’s a beautiful day.’

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 17, 2022.

OTTAWA—#ableg has taken on a whole new meeting in the Twitter world. It used to be a hashtag for the Alberta legislature.

Now it is a hashtag for the premier’s legs.

Does that sound bizarre?

If so, that is because it is.

On the day after Alberta Premier Danielle Smith dug herself out of an anti-vaxxer hole, she decided to add some levity to her Twitter feed.

To do so, she took a picture of her nylon-clad legs and patent leather pumps with the tag line “It’s a beautiful day.”

Supporters lauded her sense of humour. Opponents accused her of poor judgment and sexism.

The vast majority simply asked the question, “Why?”

Why would a premier post a photo of their legs? As a woman, Smith must know how her gender has fought hard to avoid being defined by body parts.

But the post also prompted a larger question. What kind of judgment will Smith exhibit as a leader?

So far, she has not had a stellar start.

She spent her first post-inaugural day explaining away the claim that those people who chose not to be vaccinated were “the most discriminated group” she has witnessed in her lifetime.

Smith refused to apologize for the comments, but tried to put them in context, saying she did not try to “create any false equivalencies to the terrible historical discrimination and persecution suffered by so many minority groups over the last decades and centuries.”

But she did. She also used her first day in office to announce the firing of Alberta’s chief medical officer of health, Deena Hinshaw.

Hinshaw, who was seen as a capable manager of the pandemic, received public scorn earlier this year when it was revealed she received a $228,000 bonus for her work during the pandemic.

In the private sector, the bonus would likely have been expected, given the number of additional work hours attached to the pandemic response. In many ways, it literally became a 24-hour-a-day response.

But of particular concern, is that Smith supports the current and former health minister, both of whom were laudatory about Hinshaw’s leadership throughout the pandemic.

The premier is supporting the politicians who managed the pandemic and firing the scientists and health professionals. What does that say about the kind of government she would run?

Two days have produced two lapses in judgement.

The leggy tweet won’t do any lasting damage, but the decision to rewrite COVID history by turning anti-vaxxers into victims will.

That revisionist history couples with her backpedalling on the proposed Alberta Sovereignty Act.

During the campaign, Smith said she was prepared to fight federal laws and court rulings that were not in Alberta’s interest. She characterized Trudeau’s involvement in provincial affairs as “lawless.”

But within hours of taking office, she was already changing her position, promising to uphold any Supreme Court decision on jurisdiction, and claiming that her new sovereignty legislation would respect the rule of law.

The reversal was probably necessary. Even her United Conservative Party leadership opponents said her proposed sovereignty law did not pass the smell test.

But what about those UCP voters who supported her precisely because of her attack on the “lawless” prime minister.

Her comment on the mistreatment of anti-vaxxers is a sign that she wants to continue to appeal to the small percentage of Albertans who did not get vaccinated.

More than 80 per cent of Albertans have received at least one vaccination, so her target audience is less than 20 per cent.

But that same group does not expect her to reverse her sovereignty position within a day of taking office.

UCP opponents are pushing hard for an election. They claim Smith will not have a mandate until she is elected by all the people.

Smith’s predecessor, outgoing premier Jason Kenney, will have nothing to do with her, even though they hail from the same party.

By law, the election is expected to happen in little more than six months, on May 29 of next year.

If Smith’s next few months are like her first week, the opposition should hope that the election is delayed a little. The more she speaks, the less she appeals to the average voter.

But in the next six months, she may be able to harness the power of conservatism in Alberta to win.

Given the missteps of her first few days in office, that seems unlikely.

Her path to power may involve keeping her mouth shut and staying off Twitter.

And that’s no mean feat for a politician.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Most commentators ignored the paucity of diversity on his team. But for those of us who care about these issues, the photo was a stark visual reminder that in Poilievre’s party, it is still a man’s world.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 19, 2022.

OTTAWA—Will Rogers said you never get a second chance to make a first impression. Pierre Poilievre must not have been listening.

If so, his first week as leader could have been a winner.

On the evening of his coronation, even with regal funereal news competition from across the pond, Poilievre knocked it out of the park.

His spouse’s introduction placed the new leader exactly where he needs to be, a happy family man whose soft edges are inclusive.

His embrace of personal diversity, including his own family story, were certainly not aligned with the narrative he had used to steamroll his way into the win.

The party endorsement was overwhelming. Two-thirds of the vote went to him, while former premier Jean Charest was reduced to the teens.

Poilievre’s opening performance seemed to indicate that he was prepared to pivot. Having convinced the vast majority of fellow Conservatives that he was their man, his job is now to convince the country.

The acceptance speech got a lot of Liberals worried. Several former cabinet colleagues were gathered at a Toronto symposium on foreign policy the same weekend.

The group’s consensus was that the government would be foolish to assume that Poilievre could not win an election.

The good news for Liberals is that most people do not tune in to party conventions.

And the softer side of the new leader was immediately disposed of at his first post-leader press conference.

After opening the presser with a refusal to take questions, Poilievre was heckled by Global News reporter David Akin, who insistently raised his voice to ensure a question period.

Poilievre accused Akin of being a Liberal plant, set up to heckle him on his first day.

His tone was crisp and angry. That was the first impression he left with those who were seeing the Conservative leader for the first time.

Akin, hardly a Liberal troll, was immediately attacked by Tories heeding Poilievre’s call to “go around” the media.

Later that day, Akin posted a Twitter apology, characterizing his outburst as “rude and disrespectful.”

But that did not stop the Tories from using the incident as a fundraiser.

Within 48 hours, Poilievre’s team sent out a fundraising email, claiming the party could not count on the media to carry their message, saying, “we have to go around them and their biased coverage.”

He also reiterated his promise to defund the CBC.

Poilievre has obviously decided that his best path to victory is in bypassing the media, mobilizing followers to use social channels and attack the messenger.

In the Akin instance that worked, as the apology actually set up the narrative of an aggrieved party that cannot count on reporters to tell the truth.

But Poilievre tried the same tactic in French and he got his clock cleaned.

This mistake will prove a lot more damaging than Poilievre’s decision to bypass the mainstream media in English.

When former Quebec lieutenant Alain Rayes announced he was leaving the party because Poilievre’s leadership was incompatible with his values, Tory trollers were whipped into high gear.

Instead of adopting a conciliatory tone which could have downplayed the departure, the leader came out with fists swinging.

He accused Rayes of refusing to fight Justin Trudeau’s inflation and went on to claim that he had the support of the majority in Rayes’ riding as 53 per cent of the 663 Tory ballots cast there were for Poilievre.

That may be the only time Poilievre gets a majority in Quebec.

His thrashing of a native son did not play well, and his next move was career-shortening.

The leader sent a message to electors in Rayes’ riding, asking them to phone the office of their Member of Parliament to demand his resignation.

When that news became public, the backlash was so horrendous that Poilievre became the one doing the apologizing.

Two apologies in a week marked Poilievre’s public foray as leader.

The announcement of his leadership team, complete with a photo on the steps of the West Block, was also a step backward.

In a team of 10, Poilievre only managed to include two women and one racialized Canadian.

Compare that to the equity cabinet of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. It makes one wonder if the Tories are going back to the future.

Most commentators ignored the paucity of diversity on his team.

But for those of us who care about these issues, the photo was a stark visual reminder that in Poilievre’s party, it is still a man’s world.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

One thing they should not forget. A government that has been in power for three terms, even one that has done a terrific job on many files, is starting to look a little frayed around the edges.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 12, 2022.

OTTAWA—The end of summer brings winds of political change.

The Conservative Party of Canada has a new leader. There is no doubt the new leader will have some healing to do. Pierre Poilievre’s main rival, former Quebec premier Jean Charest, made it clear during the race that there was no place for extremism in his vision of the party.

Poilievre played to the extremes, and it worked very well for him.

Party habits may not accurately reflect the public’s perspective. According to a poll published on the eve of his victory, the vast majority of Canadians would not think well of a leader who aligned himself with the Ottawa trucker occupation.

But that hasn’t stopped Poilievre from running on the “freedom” ticket, the same clarion call that came from the “Freedom Convoy” organizers.

In the short term, that will not bode well for Poilievre. But that doesn’t really matter because the Conservatives will likely have more than a year to reposition themselves closer to the political centre.

The Liberals have lived up to their commitment to the New Democrats on the issue of dental care, promising a package that will go out to low-income families in the near term.

While that may not be ambitious enough for Jagmeet Singh, chances are it will be sufficient to ensure the Liberal-NDP agreement will live to see another year.

The Tories will want that time to pivot. And no one should underestimate Poilievre’s power to pivot.

Over the course of his career, he has shown astute political acumen and his communication skills are powerful.

Some may make fun of his recent sortie on plain language government, as it certainly does not seem to be the top-of-mind issue for the political class in Ottawa.

But for most Canadians, who do not follow the machinations of government, the notion that Ottawa would become less complicated is powerful.

That is especially true when it comes to the tax system.

Most people do not want to be bothered with the details of governance, but they like the idea that it is becoming simpler and more plainspoken. It won’t necessarily get Poilievre any votes, but it works to position him as a guy who understands the concerns of ordinary Canadians and is prepared to listen to them.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau also told cabinet last week that he intends to seek another term.

Party insiders think the election of Poilievre will assist the Liberals in achieving an almost unheard of fourth term in government.

Trudeau’s announcement is not necessarily etched in stone. In fact, it would be unlikely for him to signal anything else this early in his minority mandate.

A departing prime minister is weakened the moment they announce they have no intention of staying on. Most caucus members look to shift their alliance to the new leader as soon as the outgoing one signals their intention.

But cabinet members must be fairly certain he is staying because as soon as that admission was made, rumours were circulating that deputy prime minister Chrystia Freeland is looking to leave government to take up a potential position heading up the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

Freeland is a quick learner. She has only been in politics for seven years, but already she is feeling the itch to move on. If so, she must be convinced that Trudeau is there to stay because otherwise, she was well-positioned to move in and replace him.

The reports that she is looking to jump ship may not be accurate, but once that message gets out, her political capital is spent.

A departing minister doesn’t have too many friends around the table. That leaves an open door for the positioning of other Liberals for the leadership.

One thing they should not forget. A government that has been in power for three terms, even one that has done a terrific job on many files, is starting to look a little frayed around the edges.

Trudeau has carved out a tremendous personal legacy in the areas of Indigenous reconciliation and the battle to lift kids out of poverty.

The dental program will be another step in that direction, along with the childcare agreements being negotiated by Karina Gould with every province.

Unfortunately, people don’t vote for what happened yesterday. They vote on what will happen tomorrow.

So don’t count out Poilievre.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

It would be a huge mistake to think that a right-wing Conservative is unelectable in Canada. In politics, anything is possible.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on August 8, 2022.

OTTAWA—Jean Charest was at his most eloquent during the recent Conservative debate last week.

The only problem, the lights were on, but there was no Tory home.

The debate did not attract major television attention and was held at 6 p.m. Eastern Time, pretty much the worst possible slot for widespread coverage.

But the whole purpose of the event was to avoid national attention.

After all, what political party has a debate where the front-runner refuses to attend and simply pays a $50,000 fine to absent himself from the proceedings?

Pierre Poilievre and Leslyn Lewis both coughed up the $50,000 so the party actually made money by allowing two candidates to duck out of a leadership debate.

That will probably not be the end of the story.

Elections Canada, which has some oversight of party nomination processes, will probably be asked to take a look at the payments, as the Tories might have benefited from a tax credit courtesy of the Canadian taxpayer.

But the sad thing about the non-debate is that nobody beyond those actually voting in the leadership even care about this egregious abuse of process.

Too bad for the Conservatives. Had they actually watched Charest in action, they might have come to the conclusion that the rest of the country has already arrived at: Charest stands the best chance of all Tory candidates of defeating the current government.

He is seen as capable, moderate, and appeals to those in the centre who have kept the Tories out of power for years.

The debate was a bit of a moot point. According to official Conservative records, in excess of 100,000 ballots have already been mailed into headquarters, more than a month before the winner’s announcement on Sept. 10.

If the twitterverse is any indication, dozens of voters claimed that Charest’s performance could not change their minds, as they had already voted for Poilievre.

The eligible voters’ list is more than 600,000, but there is a chance many of them may not vote.

The decision of the party to turf candidate Patrick Brown because of alleged irregularities will undoubtedly cause some of his supporters to boycott the race.

Others will likely throw their support behind Charest, who is the most closely linked to Brown in political ideology.

But if history is any indication, the party will be hard-pressed to get a 50 per cent voter turnout in the dog days of summer.

The whole intent of the campaign was to keep it as low-key as possible, which plays in the favour of front-runner Poilievre.

The race is certainly as close to a coronation that any party could carry out. Sometimes, a healthy and robust leadership race can be good for the process.

Liberals had their experience with a coronation and it did not end well. When the party believed that finance minister Paul Martin was the obvious choice, the race became a coronation.

At the final Toronto celebration, in a standing-room-only Air Canada Centre event, even international celebrities like Bono attended to congratulate the future prime minister.

The biggest question facing Martin’s leadership at that moment was how many years he would stay. In the end, the coronation fractured the party.

In the current Conservative leadership, a similar front-runner phenomenon is unfolding.

Unlike Martin, who was already extremely popular with the public at large when he was chosen, Poilievre mainly appeals to the right-wing of his own party.

He will have a hard time convincing the moderate middle to support him.

That is what all other parties, especially Liberals, are counting on.

If Charest were to be successful in September, Liberals on the Hill would sit up and take notice.

They know he has the capacity to turn things around in Quebec, and whither Quebec goes, so goes the country.

Charest would also bring progressive Conservatives back into the fold. These are the Red Tories who the party must attract to win elections.

If Poilievre succeeds, as is most likely, Liberals will be counting on him to stay in the opposition benches.

However, there is a truism in politics.

When it comes to elections, opposition parties don’t win, governments lose.

When voters decide they have had enough, they will move to throw the government out. In most cases, they are prepared to give the opposition leader the benefit of the doubt.

A Poilievre win could be very feasible.

It would be a huge mistake to think that a right-wing Conservative is unelectable in Canada.

In politics, anything is possible.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

By retreating into a cone of silence over the specific allegations that led to Patrick Brown’s disqualification, Conservative Party brass stand to delegitimize the whole leadership process.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 11, 2022.

OTTAWA—Patrick Brown has just suffered his second political assassination.

The first was at the hands of the provincial Progressive Conservative Party in Ontario, when he was dumped from his leader’s job based on allegations of sexual impropriety, which he denies.

In that first instance, Brown claimed he was the victim of a “fabricated political assassination.”

The story led to a late-night emergency meeting of the provincial party executive and a quick decision to dump Brown as leader.

The network stood by its story, but in the end, issued a correction saying that certain aspects of the story were “factually incorrect and required correction.”

The correction came four years after the career-ending story, just before Brown joined the current federal party leadership race.

History repeated itself last week as, right in the middle of a leadership race, the Conservative Party of Canada turfed Brown, alleging serious but secret breaches of Election Act financing rules by the Brown team.

After announcing the expulsion, the party went mum, explaining that as the matter is under further investigation, there will be no additional official comments on the specifics of the allegations.

Buried in the entrails of the allegations was a ruling by the party that Brown’s campaign had not and would not receive a copy of the interim membership list, as a result of the firing.

Why is that relevant?

Well, the only political game in town over the next two months is an opportunity to switch voters who have already registered.

The persuasion campaign will be undertaken by all the candidates, but it is believed the top two candidates in voter sales were frontrunner Pierre Poilievre followed by Brown.

I was told by a Tory insider that Poilievre outsold former Quebec premier Jean Charest 11 to one in Quebec.

But the difference between Brown and Poilievre sales is less evident.

So, if the party has airtight information on election breaches, why not publish it and let the voters decide?

By retreating into a cone of silence, the brass stands to delegitimize the whole process.

Brown thinks there is more to this than an alleged violation.

His lawyer fired off a letter to the party, requesting it safeguard all communications, including those with the Poilievre campaign, that are pertinent to the allegations.

“Please take immediate steps to ensure that all documents and records of any kind whatsoever including emails, text messages, WhatsApp messages, and any other forms of electronic communication concerning the disqualification and the process leading to it are preserved …. advising all members of LEOC [Leadership Election Organizing Committee] to retain all of their communication with members of the Pierre Poilievre campaign and other stakeholders in relation to Patrick Brown,” the letter said.

Brown retained the firm of Henein Hutchison, which is no slouch when it comes to high-profile legal proceedings. Marie Henein was the lawyer who successfully defended Jian Ghomeshi against sexual assault charges.

Toronto Life magazine dubbed Henein “the fixer,” saying she was the most sought-after defence lawyer in Toronto.

In Brown’s case, there are no criminal charges as yet, but there is certainly a case pending, with huge political implications, that will garner the attention of the whole country.

This is one controversy the Conservative Party does not need. Just recently, long-term former senator and staunch Conservative Marjory LeBreton gave a candid television interview in which she feared that Conservative leadership candidates jumping on the “grievance brigade” would fracture the party irreparably.

LeBreton said she feared the union of the Progressive Conservatives and the Reformers, orchestrated by Peter MacKay and Stephen Harper in 2003, may not survive this leadership change.

Those ominous reflections occurred even before Brown’s expulsion from the race.

One can only assume that the cleavage between the former Progressive Conservatives and Reformers will only grow as a result of last week’s bizarre firing.

Multiple senior Conservatives came out publicly to demand more transparency regarding the decision

Strategist Tim Powers said the party could be damaged if it continues to withhold information from the public.

Ballots for the September vote were sent out before Brown was removed, which means his name will remain as a leadership choice.

That seems strange, because if the party was investigating allegations, it could have delayed striking the ballots until the investigation was concluded.

Instead, the ballot is going to include an ineligible candidate on the progressive side, instead of clearing the field for a fight between Poilievre and Charest. And that can only benefit Poilievre.

On the surface, it certainly looks as though the party fix is in.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Lionizing illegal occupiers has nothing to do with freedom. Instead, it is an attempt to overthrow the social compact that Canada was built on.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 4, 2022.

OTTAWA—Freedom obviously means different things to different people.

In some parts of the world, freedom is survival.

If you don’t have access to food or water, how can you worry about anything more than securing the basics of life?

If you are a woman in some countries, you do not even have the right to leave home unless accompanied by a male member of your family. Absurd though it may be, your son may actually have the authority to keep you locked inside.

If you are a girl in Afghanistan, you don’t have the right to an education. Even if your family could afford to send you, schools are verboten for those who have been born with a vagina.

If you are not a straight male, there are many places in the world where you could be imprisoned or even killed simply for loving someone.

You are not free to be who you are, but must either hide your sexual orientation or simply bury your sexuality to be free.

In some countries, there is no freedom.

But that is not the case in Canada. And as we celebrated our national holiday on July 1, it is time to start calling out those fakers who claim they are fighting for freedom in our country.

Can you imagine any other country in the world where you are so free you can park a bouncy castle in front of Parliament for weeks, paralyzing the operations of government, without being arrested?

Threatening judges and disobeying court orders is common amongst those who claim they are fighting for our freedoms.

Our “freedoms” involve infecting others with variants of COVID simply because they refuse to embrace the reality that vaccines make us all safer.

Why would any political party want to associate themselves with a bunch of fake freedom fighters whose main claim to fame is an illegal occupation of Canada’s capital?

Last week, interim Conservative leader Candice Bergen authorized all caucus members to meet with these fakers, in the name of democracy. She told CTV “I support peaceful and legal demonstrations, and if my MPs want to be there, they’re free to do whatever they want and they’ll answer to their constituents.”

Conservatives are currently battling with the People’s Party of Canada for the favour of those illegal occupiers who continue to display their disdain for the very system they claim to support.

Illegal convoy organizer Tamara Lich was released from prison in March after she agreed to bail conditions which prevented her from inciting another illegal occupation.

Instead, her lawyer confirmed she was arrested last week in Medicine Hat, Alta., for allegedly violating bail conditions. Meanwhile, political parties battle to share the spotlight with Lich.

“This is disgusting,” tweeted Maxime Bernier, leader of the People’s Party of Canada. “Tamara Lich is a political prisoner and the Liberal regime is persecuting her like all authoritarian regimes do with dissidents. We will continue to support this courageous woman.”

Meanwhile, one judge involved in convoy prosecutions is alleging claims of harassment, intimidation, and even death threats.

In an interview with Radio Canada under concealed identity, the judge said multiple threats forced them to change the locks on their home, vary their daily path to work and consider moving their children out of the family residence.

This is harassment and intimidation from a group that claims to be fighting for freedom. The fact that any of these illegal protest organizers could be characterized as political prisoners illustrates just how bizarre our political narrative has become.

Even more strange is the fact that any legitimate political party would want to be associated with this group of twisted malcontents.

Conservative front-runner Pierre Poilievre constantly peppers his speeches with references to freedoms, underscoring that his political goal is to give liberty back to Canadians.

There may be many challenges facing our country, including the bite taken out of our wallets by rising inflation, but it is pretty hard to absorb the notion that we live in a country replete with political prisoners.

That claim has zero credibility.

As we celebrated our real freedoms on Canada Day last week, let’s not fall into the trap of legitimizing the goal of those who use illegal means to make their message heard.

Shutting down communities, blocking roads with bouncy castles and hot tubs, lionizing illegal occupiers has nothing to do with freedom.

Instead, it is an attempt to overthrow the social compact that Canada was built on.

Living in society comes with collective responsibilities.

Happy and Free Canada Day!

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

If he doesn’t connect with the truckers who are promising weeks of disruption, he runs the risk of being outed as a non-supporter. If he does stand with the truckers, he runs the counter-risk of facing the ire of citizens in the Ottawa region, including those in his own Ottawa riding, Carleton.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 27, 2022.

OTTAWA—Pierre Poilievre’s Canada Day celebrations may blow up in his face.

If he doesn’t connect with the truckers who are promising weeks of disruption, he runs the risk of being outed as a non-supporter.

If he does stand with the truckers, he runs the counter-risk of facing the ire of citizens in the Ottawa region, including those in his own Ottawa-area riding, Carleton.

They handed him a healthy plurality in the last election but just last week, Mainstreet Research published some interesting data about how the trucker-Pierre tango was viewed by voters.

Amongst 555 constituents polled by Mainstreet between June 13-14, Poilievre enjoyed a healthy 10 per cent majority over his closest opponent in the last election.

If that same election were held today, Poilievre would still be in the lead, but his margin of victory would shrink by half.

According to respondents, the single biggest factor in their dissatisfaction was Poilievre’s support for the Ottawa convoy blockade.

Forty-nine per cent of those polled said they would be less likely to vote for the Conservatives if the riding representative was Poilievre.

It appears as though the trucker occupation played a huge rule in Poilievre’s fall from electoral grace.

The Mainstreet question was clear: “During the trucker occupation … Pierre Poilievre met with and encouraged the freedom protesters. How has this impacted your opinion of your Member of Parliament?”

Fifty-six per cent of those interviewed said they had a “much less favourable” opinion of Poilievre because of his blockade support. An additional 10 per cent said they had a “somewhat less favourable opinion.”

By contrast, only 15 per cent said they had a “much more favourable” opinion, while three per cent claimed a “somewhat more favourable” opinion.

In the next month, the truckers have vowed to return to Ottawa to disrupt Canada Day and remain in the capital throughout the month of July.

They may be pleased to return to the scene of the crime, but Poilievre and the Conservatives can’t be too thrilled.

So far, Poilievre’s support of the truckers has not made much news beyond the nation’s capital.

It really is an “inside the beltway story.” But inside the beltway is Poilievre’s own constituency, and he could vault to the top of the Tories, only to be spurned by local voters in the next election.

Most party leaders are supported by their constituents. It is only when the party faces dire straits that the leader is defeated. Witness the rejection of Liberal Leader Steven Del Duca in his own riding the recent Ontario election.

But being a representative in the nation’s capital is not the same as other ridings across the country.

There, people do expect you to stare down the Freedom Convoy and support the residents, not vice versa.

Last January and February were brutal times for the 30,000 people who live in Ottawa’s downtown core.

According to a friend who lives there, the only dialogue that happened between truckers and residents was a volley of epithets that started with “f” and ended with “u.”

The city is bracing for the same nastiness next week. And Poilievre has to make up his mind whether he represents his constituents or the freedom convoy, because, if the Mainstreet poll is accurate, it cannot be both.

It remains to be seen whether Poilievre can translate his obvious internal popularity into votes across the broad spectrum of Canadians.

But the early signal from his riding sounds a warning bell.

Swinging so far right may win support within Conservative party circles.

But that swing also alienates the majority of mainstream voters.

With the crash of crypto-currency and the pushback on his view of the governor of the Bank of Canada, Poilievre appears to be resonating within his own party.

His situation is so strong that, not only did Patrick Brown’s co-chair bolt, as referenced in last week’s column, but also Brown’s campaign manager quickly followed Michelle Rempel Garner, abruptly leaving Brown’s campaign to work for her potential Alberta leadership entry. Rempel Garner has since decided not run for the UCP leadership.

Jean Charest continues to insist publicly that “I will win this.” He is pumping up his supporters with audacious declarations of victory. But his own numbers do not appear to back up those words.

Poilievre and Brown membership sales allegedly amount to 75 per cent of the total, so it is tough to see how Charest will win.

Poilievre is definitely ahead.

How he handles the Canada Day convoy will signal much about his capacity to win an election.

Like Icarus, flying too close to the truckers might burn him badly.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

After devoting 11 years to federal politics, the Calgary-Nose Hill Member of Parliament would be a shoo-in for a senior position if Brown were to win the leadership. Michelle Rempel Garner would likely have been in contention as well if Jean Charest were victorious, as he could win the leadership only with the support of the Brown team.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 20, 2022.

OTTAWA—Michelle Rempel Garner must be reading the tea leaves.

She was running the federal Conservative leadership campaign for Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown.

And mid-way through the campaign, the Twitter-verse has been filled with stories that she will likely be leaving federal politics to run for the top job of Alberta’s United Conservative Party.

Using Twitter as her preferred platform, Rempel Garner announced last week that she was stepping down as Brown campaign co-chair to give “serious consideration” to a provincial leadership bid.

“I owe it to Albertans to give this critical decision my full and complete attention,” she wrote on Twitter.

Rempel Garner went on to say that “I continue to be inspired by the optimism of Albertans, who have been through much but remain hopeful. We are—and always have been—worth fighting for. I’ll have more to say soon. Giddyup.”

In reality, Garner Rempel could pursue twin goals, a provincial leadership race along with the co-chairing responsibilities for her chosen leadership candidate.

There is more than a month separating the federal conclusion and the provincial vote, and much of the work on both fronts is carried out via internet and Zoom.

The sale of Conservative memberships is closed on the federal scene, so there is no need to travel extensively to recruit new members.

Instead, the campaign is entering the persuasion stage, where the candidates themselves need to keep travelling in order to attract undecided voters or switch those who have committed to an opponent.

Her decision to step aside comes as the final membership numbers place Pierre Poilievre in an unbeatable position. His campaign claims to have sold double the number of memberships of the Brown team.

Rempel Garner’s withdrawal is a blow to the Brampton mayor’s leadership bid, but not an unexpected turn of events.

The Alberta Member of Parliament is a proud, gun-toting Albertan and many observers feel her place in a provincial race would be as front-runner.

As for Brown, Jean Charest and other federal leadership candidates, the membership deadline confirmed the Poilievre front-runner status.

He is also extremely popular with current Conservative voters. Last week’s Léger poll claimed his support among Tory voters is almost triple that of his closest rival, Charest.

Poilievre was the choice of 44 per cent of Tory supporters while his nearest challenger, former Quebec premier Charest, polled at just 14 per cent. Brown was in the single digits at four per cent, clearly a signal that he has not resonated with the group he needs to win. Those numbers are almost reversed when it comes to polling opinions of Liberals and New Democrats. They believe Charest would be the best Tory leader. Charest polled 25 per cent support from Liberal and NDP supporters, while Brown polled at 11 per cent. Front-runner Poilievre garnered only six per cent support from those who vote Liberal or NDP.

But he doesn’t need those voters to win the leadership.

He only needs Tories. And Rempel Garner’s early departure is a clear signal that he is going to get them.

After devoting 11 years to federal politics, the Calgary-Nose Hill Member of Parliament would be a shoo-in for a senior position if Brown were to win the leadership. She would likely have been in contention as well if Charest were victorious, as he could win the leadership only with the support of the Brown team.

As for Poilievre, she has already burned that bridge. Two months ago, Rempel Garner took to the internet to call out Poilievre as a “fringe party on the right” leader and she went on to say “we can’t go through another leadership with the result being somebody who is unelectable.”

But it appears as though that is exactly what her party is going to do. Two Brown supporters in the caucus recently defected to Poilievre and the departure of Rempel Garner leaves Brown with only one Member of Parliament supporting his leadership.

Poilievre has 56 MPs supporting his candidacy, so the list of those seeking senior positions on his team is very long and there won’t be any room for Garner Rempel in the event the front-runner wins.

So, the timing for Garner Rempel to switch to provincial politics is perfect. She is well-known in Alberta and currently represents one of the most Conservative ridings in the country.

She will enter a crowded field of candidates, but her background and experience could reward her with an easy win. Her toughest job will then be building those Conservative bridges back.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

That is what we can expect if Pierre Poilievre wins the Conservative leadership, according to chief rival Jean Charest.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 30, 2022.

OTTAWA—The Americanization of Canadian politics. That is what we can expect if Pierre Poilievre wins the Conservative leadership, according to chief rival Jean Charest.

Charest pulled no punches in an aggressive closing statement at the party’s French, and final, debate in Laval last Wednesday night.

“The question we face is a very serious one. Will we in the Conservative Party take the path of American-style politics, the politics of attack, the politics where we play one group against another, the politics where every answer is a dodge? Or are we going to do Canadian politics for Canadians. That is the option I offer, not to be a pseudo-American. That is not what we want as a country. We want a leader who is able to unite the party and who has judgment, who does not send signals about conspiracy theories, who spills over into theories about the Bank of Canada or Bitcoin.”

Fellow candidate Patrick Brown doubled down in tandem attacks on Poilievre. Both candidates appeared so closely aligned in their views of Poilievre that they were asked whether they had already crafted a political pact to defeat the putative front-runner.

Brown ventured even further in a presser following the debate. He went so far as to say Poilievre has no chance of becoming prime minister.

By contrast, Charest insisted that his character and experience included the qualities to become prime minister, not just the leader of the official opposition.

But Charest’s record also provided fodder for attacks from Poilievre, who accused the former Quebec premier of raising taxes, and supporting carbon pricing.

When Poilievre was attacked for supporting the Truckers’ Freedom Convoy, he blasted back that he had no lessons to learn from Charest, referencing the Charbonneau Commission as an example of Charest’s questionable record.

When Charest told the crowd it would be his job as Conservative leader to retire the 32 Bloc Québécois members currently sitting in the Canadian Parliament, Poilievre retorted that Charest was the one who was retired by separatists.

At the end of the fiery debate, the other three candidates for the Conservative leadership were literally left in the proverbial dust.

Their poor grasp of the French language left them all ill-equipped to spar with the ease of the three on top.

Leslyn Lewis struggled with her cue cards, and Roman Baber used his limited French to primarily decry his birthplace in the former Soviet Union.

Scott Aitchison managed to master the ask in multiple, comic attempts to direct viewers to his website.

That recruitment technique will not vault him to the top, but all candidates are pushing hard to sell as many memberships as possible before the cut-off date on Friday, June 3.

As of Friday, the second phase of the campaign moves from recruitment to conversion. Just because one campaign signed up a member, that new recruit can actually change their mind and vote for another candidate in the voting system on Sept. 10.

Whatever the outcome, it is awfully hard to see how the losers will actually line up behind the winner.

The bad blood amongst the party front-runners could end up killing their chances of forming the next government.

It is hard to see how Charest could align himself with a potential Poilievre prime minister if the former Quebec premier loses the race.

He is an experienced politician who knows what it means to burn political bridges. His attack last week sent the signal that if he does not win, it is unlikely that he will be running as part of the Conservative team.

And the charge of “pseudo-American populism” is one that will stick.

In addition to the Tory leadership last week, the whole country witnessed another mass murder in Texas carried out by an 18-year-old American who had no trouble securing two assault weapons after his 18th birthday.

But instead of tackling the gun availability issue, Senator Ted Cruz blamed the massacre on the fact that the school’s back door was left open.

It is painful to watch the mounting pile of bodies dying at the hands of crazed gunmen almost weekly in the United States. As the issue is so polarized, nothing is ever really done to limit access to weapons beyond the usual plethora of post-mortem platitudes from political leaders.

American president Joe Biden has again promised to fight the gun lobby, but his level of success remains to be seen. Regular mass murders without consequence are one reason that Canadians fear “pseudo-American populism.”

Tory populists may disagree.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Jason Kenney’s departure was unexpected as he had gathered together a group of key supporters for what was expected to be a victory celebration.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 23, 2022.

OTTAWA—Internal party warfare can be fatal.

Alberta Premier Jason Kenney eked out a bare majority in a party vote on his leadership, only to be forced out by advisers’ pressure.

Kenney’s departure was unexpected as he had gathered together a group of key supporters for what was expected to be a victory celebration.

Days before the United Conservative Party mail-in vote was announced, Kenney claimed that he would stay on if he secured a single-vote majority.

A large gathering of supporters was expecting to see Kenney continue in the job, but instead, he dropped a bombshell last Wednesday night.

In the end, the pressure inside his own party was just too great, so Kenney decided to step down after 48.6 per cent of UCP review voters said they wanted him out.

Meanwhile, the internal fight in the federal Conservative party gets more bitter by the day. Last week, saw candidate slagging candidate, and supporters’ slagging each other.

The climate got so difficult that former finance minister Ed Fast felt compelled to quit his job as Conservative caucus finance critic in opposition to Pierre Poilievre’s promise to fire the governor of the Bank of Canada.

Claims of party-based racism and sleazy politics were traded as candidate Patrick Brown accused Poilievre of aligning with racists in his support of the trucker occupation on Parliament Hill.

Brown supporter, Michelle Rempel-Garner weighed in on the racism theme, accusing Poilievre of being too slow to condemn the race-based slaughter south of the border in Buffalo.

Brown also attacked Poilievre supporters for allegedly criticizing his campaign’s push to sell memberships to racialized minorities.

The past week in the Conservative party has seen the temperature increase as the end of the membership sale period looms.

The federal party Twitter feed was vitriolic, with candidates lining up to accuse each other of stoking the flames of racism. In a media interview, Poilievre promoted his use of “Anglo-Saxon” language, a lift from white supremacists’ vocabulary.

Compare federal Tory accusations to the civilized official Ontario election debate last week. Hosted by TVO’s Steve Paikin and Althia Raj of The Toronto Star, the debate was positively benign in comparison.

Candidates respected rules and time limits. They were careful to attack their opponents on policies, not personalities.

New Democratic Party Leader Andrea Horwath delivered a surprisingly listless performance, absent her usual excellent communication skills.

Later in the week, she joined Ontario Green Party Leader Mike Schreiner with a diagnosis of COVID. Both were forced into virtual campaigns in the final stretch of the election.

While the NDP leader flagged, the Green leader shone in the debate. Schreiner was personable, articulate and knowledgeable, particularly on climate change issues.

Premier Doug Ford carried out his usual, aw shucks schtick, claiming friendship with everyone on the podium and defending government policies.

The most controversial was the Conservative promise of a $10-billion investment to build a highway which is not supported by any other leader.

In the last campaign, Ford promised a buck a beer in an attempt to reach out to the blue-collar cohort that was key to his victory.

This time, Ontario Liberal Leader Steven Del Duca promised a buck a bus ticket, vowing to take thousands of cars off the road by making public transit more affordable.

The Grit leader also promised to divert Ford’s $10-billion proposed road investment into education, repairing and building schools and cutting class sizes.

Horwath pitched an increase in the minimum wage, in direct contrast to Ford’s decision to abolish planned increases early in his term in office.

The NDP leader primarily focused on her base. But she took a direct hit when the premier claimed that unions were moving away from their traditional support for her party in favour of his re-election.

Ford’s strategy worked, with NDP support slipping after the debate.

That was good news for the Liberals because many anti-Ford voters want to rally behind the party that has the best chance to defeat the current government.

The latest six-point difference keeps Ford in the lead with just two weeks to go before voting day. But the 10-point difference between the Liberals and the New Democrats really favours a potential momentum shift to Del Duca.

As for internal Conservative struggles, on the federal level it is difficult to see how the angry differences among leadership camps of Poilievre, Charest and Brown can be healed in a post-campaign show of unity.

Centrist Conservatives may not elect a party leader.

But they hold the key to 24 Sussex.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.