It may also be a reflection of how young men feel they are the forgotten generation. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 21, 2024.

OTTAWA—It has been 95 years, on Oct. 18, since Canadian women were given the right to vote.

In recognition of that right, the Ottawa chapter of the Famous Five Foundation will celebrate a Pink Tea event at the Canadian Museum of Nature on Oct. 27.

At the ceremony, the foundation will unveil this year’s recipients of the Famous 5 award for their contribution to the fight for equality.

Dozens of other Famous 5 chapters across the country hosted similar events to commemorate Oct. 18, 1929.

That day, a landmark decision by the Privy Council of Great Britain recognized women as persons before the law, thus conferring upon them the right to vote.

The appeal to the British Privy Council followed an unsuccessful campaign in 1928 at the Canadian Senate for women’s right to vote. The effort was led by five Alberta suffragettes who became known as the Famous Five. Their names are Emily Murphy, Nellie McClung, Louise McKinney, Irene Parlby, and Henrietta Moore Edwards.

The Famous Five is currently the most visited grouping of statues within the Parliamentary Precinct on Wellington Street in Ottawa. The Famous Five Foundation was formed to secure national recognition for those women, and then to fight for recognition of modern-day suffragettes.

At next Sunday’s Pink Tea, five women will be honoured for fighting for Indigenous rights, the rights of Afghan women and others involved in the battle for modern day racial and gender equality, and against misogyny.

The Famous 5 Ottawa will recognize the following award recipients: Mariam Abdel-Akher, Cindy Blackstock, Najia Haneefi, Marie-Noëlle Lanthier, and Christine Romulus for special recognition, each in their own area of expertise.

“These extraordinary women continue to doggedly push the envelope in the face of obstacles and challenges just as the original Famous Five had to do,” said Beatrice Raffoul, chair of Famous 5 Ottawa.

The modern Famous 5 know that much work still has to be done when women in some parts of the world are not even allowed to go to school, and Indigenous women are recovering from the trauma of residential school cultural annihilation.

Canadians think that the fight for equality is over, but one only has to look at the current political situation to understand that we still have much work ahead.

In the upcoming American presidential election, according to an Environics Institute poll published by The Globe and Mail last week, the majority of Canadians prefer the Democratic nominee Kamala Harris over Republican Donald Trump.

But the younger a man is, the more likely he is to support Trump.

Notwithstanding his multiple criminal convictions and Trump’s vehement refusal to accept the 2020 election loss, the former president’s level of support has actually increased since the last election, Environics revealed.

At that time, Trump had the support of 15 per cent of Canadian respondents, and that figure has now increased to 21 per cent. Trump’s greatest level of support comes from young men, and in that cohort, young Conservatives are most likely to support the convicted felon. Conservatives were more likely to support Trump than Harris, with 44 per cent voicing support—an increase of 11 per cent from four years ago.

The vote split in other parties has remained relatively stagnant, with 89 per cent of Bloc Québécois supporters, 85 per cent of Liberals, and 82 per cent of New Democrats preferring Harris over Trump.

The rise in Conservative support for Trump makes one wonder whether the current Democratic candidate’s gender is at play.

Former president Barack Obama hit the campaign trail last week with exactly that message.

He specifically called out Black men for refusing to support Harris simply because she is a woman.

Obama told his audience that while they claimed other reasons for not supporting her, their refusal is based on misogyny because they will not vote for a woman.

Harris is currently working hard to try to bridge that gender divide, reaching out on podcasts and other non-traditional media platforms hosted by men for men.

But, just like in Canada, the gender gap in voting is quite stark in the United States.

Older people and women are supporting Harris, while the younger male generation has been more supportive of Trump.

That the level of misogyny is highest in young voters is troubling. It may also be a reflection of how young men feel they are the forgotten generation.

Some 95 years after Canadian women got the right to vote, we still have a long way to go.

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

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on October 23, 2023.

OTTAWA—I was wrong.

In a previous column, I predicted civility in the House of Commons would last two weeks.

That prediction was predicated on a break week in the parliamentary calendar.

I figured the Members of Parliament could last at least five sitting days without allowing the place to run amok.

Instead, newly-minted speaker Greg Fergus spent two days in a civil chair.

On the third, the place erupted.

It all started out rather calmly. On Oct .18, Fergus was rising from his place to announce a new series of “reflective guidelines” that he would be using in his attempt to replace chaos with order.

He chose to introduce the guidelines just before the most-watched Question Period of the week.

On Wednesdays, all questions are devoted to the prime minister, which makes him a prime target on multiple issues and pretty much guarantees that the opposition will succeed in getting their messages on the news.

Normally, the House Speaker delivers orders, decisions, reflections, introductions, and announcements in the moments following Question Period.

This time, Fergus decided to break with convention, and deliver a lengthy reflection on protocol before questions began. He was obviously trying to make the point that everyone needs to know there is a new level of decorum that has arrived with the election of a new Speaker.

That desire ran smack into the wishes of Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to lead off with his own questions.

When Poilievre refused to cede his spot to the Speaker, all hell broke loose.

Poilievre claimed, “The Speaker has a plethora of occasions to stand on his feet and make any point he wants or any declaration he likes. He does not need to do it in the middle of the sacred period during which we hold the government to account.” Poilievre went on to accuse Fergus of breaking the rules, and then former House Speaker Andrew Scheer backed up his leader’s right to proceed immediately with questions.

Fergus continued with his message about excessive heckling, which fell on deaf ears as Conservative MPs continued to interrupt with heckling.

While Fergus pleaded that “excessive, disruptive and loud heckling must be toned down,” his message simply engendered more disruption in the Chamber.

In the end, Poilievre got to deliver his question after a 20-minute speech from the House Speaker.

People quickly forgot the contents of the question. What came out of Wednesday’s Question Period is that, again, the call for parliamentary civility has simply fallen on deaf ears.

That may surprise the general public, as there was much focus on a kinder, gentler place when Government House Leader Karina Gould took over at the helm back in September.

But it was no surprise to those of us who have been involved in parliamentary matters for decades.

After all, the instrument that gives voice to Parliament is a mace. Ceremonial, of course, it was initially designed to kill people by clubbing them to death. When armour was introduced, it became less useful as a military weapon, but continued in ceremonial form.

Canada’s current mace was fashioned in after the original one was destroyed in the 1916 parliamentary fire that killed seven people.

Its design includes the Arms of Canada, the rose of England, the harp of Ireland and the thistle of Scotland. The staff incorporates the rose, shamrock, thistle, and the fleur-de-lys.

No words can be spoken without the presence of the mace, reminding us that Parliament is a verbal battlefield, and it isn’t always pretty.

The temperature tends to go up toward the end of a Parliament, particularly when there is election fever in the air.

With the Conservatives running so high in the polls, they have the wind in their sails, and it shows in their Question Period vigour.

Vigour includes testosterone, and the closer political parties get to voting day, the more emotions can run wild.

In a minority Parliament, the tension can be even more evident as at any moment the place could be shut down.

The New Democrats are facing some internal pressure from their supply-and-confidence agreement with the Liberals.

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh felt the sting of that pressure in a reduced confidence motion at the party’s national convention in Hamilton last weekend.

However, he has his heart set on completing pharmacare, part of the triad of the supply agreement policy initiatives along with childcare and dental care. Without that, he won’t pull the plug.

If last Wednesday’s Question Period is any indication, Conservatives are raring to go.

From where they sit, an election couldn’t happen soon enough.

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

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 31, 2023.

OTTAWA—Justin Trudeau has rolled the dice.

Last week’s massive cabinet shuffle makes one thing certain: the prime minister plans to lead the Liberal Party into the next election.

The ballot question he is aiming for is the economy, and Trudeau is banking on enough political runway to convince Canadians that the best masters of the economy are already in the job.

The shuffle is a not-so-tacit admission that Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre is hitting the mark when he travels the country on his so-called “Axe the Tax” tour.

It matters little that the majority of Canadians are actually getting money back because of the way the carbon tax remittance has been structured. Canadians are reeling from rising prices and the hike in national interest rates. Global issues may be responsible for the cash crunch, as Trudeau mentioned during his press conference lauding the new cabinet team. But all politics is local.

Polls show that local politics right now is hitting the Liberals hard. On the same day as Trudeau announced the massive change in cabinet, Abacus Data released a poll showing the Conservatives were 10 points ahead of the Liberals. Pollara put out a poll earlier in the month claiming the Tories were 12 points ahead among Indigenous voters.

Trendlines are clear. Tories are climbing and the Liberals are lagging. The shuffle is supposed to staunch the political bloodletting.

Highlights included the appointment of Arif Virani, Canada’s first Muslim attorney general and Rechi Valdez the first Filipina woman in a Canadian cabinet. Original reports cited the appointment of a first Filipino, but that was amended, as the first Filipino member of cabinet was Rey Pagtakhan in the cabinet of Jean Chrétien.

The demographic changes to cabinet are pretty clear evidence that the shuffle is intended to launch an election team. As well as specific nominations in the Muslim and Filipino community, the prime minister also named a Tamil Canadian as minister responsible for Crown-Indigenous relations.

Gary Anandasangaree will have big shoes to fill because outgoing minister Marc Miller developed an excellent relationship with Indigenous communities, as both portfolios he has held in the past eight years involved work with those communities. Indigenous Services Minister Patty Hajdu has regional experience with Indigenous peoples because of her home riding in Thunder Bay-Superior North, Ont.

Anandasangaree is a risky choice because his urban Scarborough background is not exactly a hotbed of Indigenous politics. However, he has a reputation as being accessible and active, and worked on an Indigenous consultation process for the Rouge National Urban Park.

He wouldn’t be the first minister to build a relationship with Indigenous peoples from scratch. But the popularity of Miller and Hajdu were undeniable, and, given the government’s commitment to reconciliation, the decision to make a change is potentially tricky.

The Trudeau inner circle of cabinet makers must be banking on the fact that these new appointments will buttress the party in areas of the country where they will be in pitched battles with the Conservatives. Suburban GTA ridings are always a dogfight, so the appointments of Anandasangaree and Valdez could have an impact on potentially tight races.

Trudeau is also trying to change the “change” message. With three terms under his belt, the prime minister is well known to the public and somewhat shopworn.

As my mother taught me, politics is the only job where the more experience you get, the more people want to get rid of you, and in three terms, you make enemies who want you out.

The change narrative is the movement when governments are voted out. It doesn’t matter what kind of a job they have done; their political time is up. In most instances, people vote governments out, they do not vote opposition parties in.

A new government is given the benefit of the doubt. The thinking is, with this sizeable change in positions, there is an element of newness surrounding the team. While that is true, there is no element of newness in the leader.

Trudeau is obviously banking on the fact the surly side of the Conservative leader will convince enough voters that Poilievre is not the right person to lead the country. While Trudeau may no longer be loved by all, his opponent has never been loved by many.

If the ballot question is the economy, the prime minister stands a fighting chance of re-election. If the question remains a need for change, his bold cabinet move won’t mean much at the ballot box.

This past week, the next election got started.

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

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 26, 2023.

OTTAWA—The four federal byelections last week sent a definite change message.

This time, the call for change went not to the prime minister, but to the leader of the Conservative Party.

Those byelections on June 19 saw the Tories’ percentage of the vote fall in three of the four ridings.

The Conservatives were not even close to being in the running in Winnipeg South Centre, Man., and their victory narrowed to a mere five per cent in Oxford, Ont., one of Ontario’s safest Tory ridings.

That close result was in stark contrast to the 2021 federal election, when the Conservatives in that riding were at 47 per cent of the vote compared to only 20 per cent for the Liberals.

The good news for the Conservatives was the poor performance of People’s Party of Canada (PPC) Leader Maxime Bernier in the Tory stronghold of Portage—Lisgar, Man.

In 2021, the PPC garnered their best national showing in that constituency, winning 21.58 per cent of the vote. With Bernier running this time, they dropped to 17.2 per cent.

The Tories’ right flank could be damaged by Bernier. On the money front, in the last quarter of 2022, the PPC experienced its best non-election fundraising quarter ever, raising $725,293, not far from the $866,505 donated to the Green Party.

But the Tory left flank is in deeper disarray.

The Oxford battle wound was self-inflicted, as Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre parachuted his chosen candidate into a riding where outgoing MP Dave MacKenzie was promoting his own daughter.

The internal party situation got so ugly that MacKenzie endorsed local Liberal candidate David Hilderley after accusing his party of rigging the nomination results.

It is difficult to read much into the shift in the Oxford vote because it was prompted more by internal infighting than by a popularity spike for the Liberals.

The presence of winning candidate Arpan Khanna, a co-chair of Poilievre’s successful leadership campaign and a lawyer who practices in Mississauga, Ont., turned the riding nomination into an internal battle.

The result could simply be a political one-off, but Poilievre doesn’t appear to be changing his strategy in his take-no-prisoners approach to electioneering.

His tactic may delight his hardline supporters, but it is certainly not helping him with moderate Tories.

Another political slap was levelled at the Conservative leader last week when former Progressive Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney praised Prime Minister Justin Trudeau during an Atlantic economic forum in Antigonish, N.S.

Mulroney hailed Trudeau’s leadership on big issues like COVID-19 and free trade, and said that those issues are what he will be remembered for, not for “the trivia and the trash and the rumours that make the rounds in Ottawa.”

Mulroney’s comments were noteworthy, not just for what he said, but also what he didn’t say. The former leader with the largest electoral majority in Canadian history did not even mention the name ‘Poilievre’, instead focusing his criticism on the tone of politics today.

But the message was not lost on anyone. If there is one person responsible for the negative tone in Parliament today, it is Poilievre.

The New Democrats saw their vote percentage fall in all of the byelections. That must also be a cause for concern, as their role in supporting the government’s agenda on progressive social items like dental care and pharmacare appears to be going unrewarded.

That conclusion presents a dilemma for NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, because if he extricates his party from the agreement, it would likely prompt a quick election. The NDP can’t afford a quick vote unless the party can show there is political momentum in their direction.

Instead, the general analysis of the byelection patterns shows voters deciding between the Liberals and the Conservatives, edging out any chance for New Democratic growth.

The Green Party’s candidate for co-leader, Jonathan Pedneault, was also roundly trounced in the Notre-Dame-de-Grâce—Westmount, Que., byelection that saw former Liberal president Anna Gainey elected by a majority vote.

Most of the opposition votes were split equally among the Greens, the NDP and the Conservatives.

General elections are usually dependent on the popularity of the government, not the strength of the opposition. If there is a national desire for change, that is a difficult wave to reverse.

But if the call for change is focused on the person who wants to replace the prime minister, that could complicate the narrative.

Last year, Mulroney warned Poilievre that he would have to moderate his rhetoric if he wants to win.

Mulroney and the byelections last week reinforced a message of moderation.

It remains to be seen whether Poilievre will listen.

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

As the details of who these people are emerge, any person who was associated with their cause is going to suffer residual damage. The ‘Freedom Convoy’ will roll out, but in its dust, Ottawa is left in political chaos.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 21, 2022.

OTTAWA—At the end of the day, from city hall to Parliament Hill, there is no winner coming out of this so-called “Freedom Convoy.”

The truckers will claim victory, because several premiers announced a relaxation of their vaccine requirements at the height of the tension.

But when the dust settles, the story of Canada’s trucker siege is going to cast them in a very negative light.

One leader of the siege fled just as the new emergency law was announced, claiming his work had been done and he needed to move on to the Maritimes.

Another organizer went to YouTube, tearfully announcing she expected to be imprisoned because of her involvement, but claiming she was not afraid.

As the details of who these people are emerge, any person who was associated with their cause is going to suffer residual damage.

And the effect on the body politic is even more profound.

The Ottawa police chief was fired and a new one chosen by the Ottawa Police Services Board without consultation with city officials. That prompted city council to implode as board chair Diane Deans was voted out of her position by a 15-9 council vote.

Councillors were calling for the immediate resignation of Mayor Jim Watson, even though he has already announced that he will leave city hall at the end of this term.

Ottawa residents are not the only ones who have lost confidence in the capacity of politicians to protect them from harassment as they are left to their own defences.

But with the state of hooliganism reigning in an area inhabited by more than 30,000 citizens, the city was hardest hit by the occupations.

A friend of mine, who is 80 years old and recovering from cancer, was out for his daily constitutional near the grounds of the University of Ottawa when he was accosted by three roving hoodlums demanding that he remove his mask. He politely declined, telling them he had pre-existing conditions and they responded by telling him that he was full of shit and that they wanted the mask off.

He turned away from the confrontation by reversing his path, shaking in fear and wondering what has happened to the city he has called home for more than 40 years.

Another friend is the head of a major Canadian non-governmental organization. One of his organization’s members posted some of the “Freedom Convoy” links to international white supremacist groups on social media.

My friend’s address and unpublished personal phone number were found by the supremacists, and then linked to the posted research. He started receiving hundreds of death threats on his cell phone. Police were contacted. At press time, the investigation has not been concluded.

In Alberta, two Edmonton police officers were suspended after participating in the international blockade at Coutts. Near the site, police uncovered multiple assault weapons and four people have been charged with conspiracy to murder after a raid on the blockade.

While politicians prognosticated, citizens acted. Ottawa residents are suing convoy organizers and participants for $306-million and counting, with an additional $15-million in personal harm and charges every day it continues.

At Queens’s Park, it was revealed that a senior member of the solicitor-general’s staff was one of thousands who funded the convoy. Director of communications Marion Isabeau-Ringuette was fired without further comment.

As the donation list becomes public, there will definitely be more questions around support for occupiers from senior politicians and law enforcement officials.

Interim Conservative Leader Candice Bergen embraced the protesters and then claimed the prime minister was at the divisive centre of this debacle.

The prime minister waited far too long before making the decision to invoke special authorities to quell the violence and mayhem.

According to Toronto Star reporter Robert Benzie, recent polling shows that two-thirds of Canadians support the imposition of the Emergencies Act. But that isn’t the end of the story. Eighty-two per cent said the protest has gone on too long, and seventy-one per cent say that Canada’s handling of the situation was an international embarrassment.

Fifty-six per cent also say that premiers caved by lifting vaccine passports and other mandates at the height of the occupation.

So, the prime minister and the premiers have all been damaged by this debacle.

When the dust settles, Canadians will not forget one thing.

Only one party embraced the protesters. And who could forget the image of Conservative Michael Cooper, smiling away for photographs in front of a swastika on an upside-down Canadian flag?

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

As for the Liberals, as people’s fear of COVID diminishes, their support for the government’s get-tough approach will fade away.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 14, 2022.

OTTAWA—Conservative interim leader Candice Bergen may have her way after all.

With Liberals breaking ranks with the government on vaccination mandates, all eyes are on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

And as the days pass with no solution in sight, what was a small Canadian story has become a global phenom.

Everywhere you look, from The New York Times to the BBC and beyond, all eyes are on Canada to see how we will handle the occupation of the nation’s capital.

The soft approach applied to the first two weeks of the standoff does not seem to be working.

Finally, police are planning to move in with arrests if the truckers do not clear the area of the Parliamentary Precinct.

But the success of the convoy in gathering world attention has also led to plans in other countries for similar blockades.

In addition, there is a lot of confusion over what the actual intent of the convoy organizers really is.

I have a dear friend who is an anti-vaxxer and she has been joining the group every day in sub-zero weather to protest what she characterizes as a communist-like grab by the government to force people to do things they don’t want to do.

She should know from whence she speaks as she and her husband fled communist Hungary and arrived in Canada with a baby and three dollars.

They built a wonderful life and became great contributors to Canada but she feels as though the last two years have ruined her life. Because she is not vaccinated, she has been unable to play sports and her lifelong love of tennis has been put on hold.

Many of her friends have tried to convince her about the safety of the vaccine, including scientific findings from international bodies like the World Health Organization and the American Centre for Disease Control. But to no avail.

Likewise, we have tried to point out to her that the convoy she is supporting is rife with anarchists and racists, who are using the pandemic fear as a way of promoting their racist messages of hate.

She does not care, because she feels as though this is the only way of getting her voice heard.

Of course, she is in the minority, as the vast majority of Canadians have already gotten their second dose of the vaccine. But no amount of cajoling, convincing, concern or coaxing will cause her to change her mind.

And unlike the rest of us, she is likely to make future political decisions strictly based on the vaccine issue.

So even though the vast majority of Canadians oppose the blockade and support the government’s vaccine mandate, they will likely not be voting on that issue in the next election.

However, the small minority of anti-vaxers who are supporting the blockade will likely cast their vote specifically for the only party that has opposed vaccine mandates, the Conservative party.

That gives the Tories a solid 10 per cent. That does not look like a big number but these people are zealous in their beliefs and will add money and manpower to the Conservative campaign effort across the country.

Liberal Joël Lightbound added fuel to Conservative fires when he came out against the government’s vaccine mandate and he was joined by Quebec colleague Yves Robillard in claiming that Liberals were politicizing the issue.

Government spokespeople denied the claim, saying they were simply following the science, but there is no doubt that the election schism on mandatory vaccines was key to the Liberal victory.

Although the Grits limped across the finish line, wavering members of the public decided to stick with the governing party because they supported the message that all Canadians should be vaccinated.

Recalcitrant Liberals like Lightbound and Robillard should understand that the vaccination question is a de facto political choice.

But at the end of the day, the supporters of mandated vaccines will move on to other election issues while those who oppose vaccinations will carry their beliefs with them to the grave.

As for the Liberals, as people’s fear of COVID diminishes, their support for the government’s get-tough approach will fade away.

Three premiers have already broken with their counterparts on ending the mandate, and others are making similar promises.

COVID is something we all have to learn to live with. Those who have protected ourselves by multiple vaccinations have already experienced newfound freedoms.

The unvaccinated are pretty much prisoners of their own personal bad choices.

But they don’t see it that way.

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

If the Conservatives would ever like to see another PM among their ranks, they need to understand the road to victory involves reaching out to 37 million people, not 73 caucus members.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 7, 2022.

OTTAWA—Seventy-three people were able to vote out a leader who was chosen by 100,000 Conservatives. This is democracy?

Conservative leader Erin O’Toole’s departure was as hasty as it was dramatic. And in a touch of irony, the author of the private member’s bill that prompted O’Toole’s demise was one of the few people fighting for the leader to stay.

Michael Chong introduced his private member’s bill, designed to give more power to individual parliamentarians, in 2013. Everyone lined up in favour of the legislation in the belief that empowering members would lead to better leadership.

But in a bizarre twist for this strange law, each party is allowed to opt in to the system, or not, at the beginning of each Parliament.

Not surprisingly, the Conservative party was the only one dumb enough to sign on to a piece of legislation which is guaranteed to create chaos for any opposition leader.

The Conservatives have cycled through six leaders in six years, and O’Toole took them closest to power. His popular vote victory didn’t help much because so much of the weight in numbers came from provinces that could never yield a majority.

And O’Toole failed to make a breakthrough in two key provinces that are crucial for election victory, Ontario and Quebec.

O’Toole, an Ontario member, understood that the failure to make sufficient gains in that province was based on the extreme viewpoints taken by many of his team on social issues like abortion.

After the election, he moved quickly to reposition the party by supporting legislation banning gender therapy conversion in the first session of Parliament.

As for the Quebec vote, his Conservative caucus in that province was verbally supporting the legislation on Broadcasting Act amendments at the same time that Tory fundraisers were out trashing the legislation to buck up their coffers.

The bifurcation in the party was not caused by O’Toole. It was prompted by a party schism that has only been exacerbated because of his departure.

Deputy leader Candice Bergen, who enjoyed coffee with the truckers while the occupation of Ottawa’s downtown core was underway, is a well-known opponent of a woman’s right to control her own body.

It was no accident that she was the only leader to neglect to thank O’Toole in the House of Commons for his work as a four-term parliamentarian, until reminded by the prime minister.

Bergen is part of the right wing of O’Toole’s party who will guarantee that they lose the next election because of their refusal to embrace political moderation.

In the hours following O’Toole’s departure, most blame was aimed at the leader’s inability to manage the caucus and to keep people happy.

Negative comparisons were made with previous leaders like prime minister Brian Mulroney who managed to keep his troops onside even when his own popularity numbers were dipping into the teens.

But that comparison is not a valid one. Mulroney was operating from the prime minister’s chair, first among equals. And with that job comes many opportunities to reward and punish internally.

Mulroney also did not face the crazy Chong legislation that could hit any leader on a bad day. The ousters were working for weeks to collect the requisite number of 35 signatures to trigger a caucus vote.

One of them, Pierre Poilievre, is already being touted as a front-runner to replace O’Toole. He is squarely in the camp of the “stinking albatrosses” that former leadership candidate Peter MacKay characterized as the reason for the party’s failure to launch.

Unlike O’Toole, who embraced diversity in supporting the LGBTQ community, Poilievre actually once introduced a private member’s bill to ban health-care funding for transgender individuals, even though the issue is not federal jurisdiction. Other putative candidates include another social conservative, Leslyn Lewis.

But both of them will push the party further to the right.

Those 73 members who booted O’Toole out may not like his message. But upon his departure, he gave a speech which was a potential road map to victory.

The party could win by embracing diversity. The secret of success for leaders like Brian Mulroney was to embrace the Progressives in his party as well as the Conservatives.

As long as there is no place for progressive politics within the party, the Conservatives have zero chance of forming the government.

Instead of dumping O’Toole, the caucus should have heeded his message. Because the road to victory involves reaching out to 37 million people, not 73 caucus members.

Conservatives who are not progressive just won’t cut it.

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

But by associating with these extremists, Tory appeal to ordinary Canadians is diminished. Short-term gain for long-term pain.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on January 31, 2022.

OTTAWA—Hundreds of anti-vaxx truckers descended on Ottawa on Saturday and the longer the convoy actually goes on, the more the Conservatives seem to be tangled in the anti-vaccination web.

Now even the New Democrats have been embroiled in the drama after the brother–in-law of NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh donated $13,000 to support the convoy.

According to Singh’s office, his relative did not fully understand what the convoy was up to and has now applied to have his funds reimbursed through a GoFundMe process.

Meanwhile, the truckers are rolling in the dough with more than $6-million already collected in support of the convoy.

With the funding come questions as to exactly what the money will be used for. Tamara Lich, convoy organizer, is associated with the Maverick Party, a separatist movement in Alberta. She also launched the GoFundMe page which has been under review by the funding platform because of questions about the transparency of the flow of funds and the plan for disbursement.

However, the truckers have no support from any official provincial or national trucking organization. The international vaccine requirement for truckers was instituted both by Canada and the United States, effective mid-January. Almost 90 per cent of international truckers are already vaccinated so convoy protesters represent a very small number of commercial trucking operations.

Truckers are actually ahead of the rest of Canada when it comes to the numbers of fully vaccinated workers.

That hasn’t seemed to stop the Conservatives from throwing their support behind the movement, with vocal, high-profile approval from former leader Andrew Scheer and current deputy leader Candice Bergen.

Likewise, leadership candidate Leslyn Lewis has accused the vaccine mandate of promoting segregation. Outspoken critic Pierre Poilievre has called the federal requirement a “vaccine vendetta.”

As usual, leader Erin O’Toole is sending out a confusing vaccine message. On the one hand, he refused last week to say whether he planned to meet with truckers, but his caucus was collecting signatures for a petition seeking the reversal of the vaccine mandate for federal workers and international truckers.

If the GoFundMe response is any indication, the Tories could raise a lot of money by jumping on the anti-vaxx wagon. But they also risk alienating a huge percentage of the population that is simply fed up with the refusal of anti-vaxxers to consider science and society in defending their positions.

Just last week, Canadian musical icon Neil Young pulled his music from Spotify after the music streaming platform refused to drop anti-vaxxer and podcaster Joe Rogan. In another health twist, a Boston hospital patient was removed from the wait-list for a heart transplant after refusing to be vaccinated.

The hospital explained its decision by saying vaccination is a lifestyle behaviour “required for transplant candidates … in order to create both the best chance for a successful operation and to optimize the patient’s survival after transplantation.”

The medical community is unanimous, and the public is not far behind, in Canada and globally.

Tennis whiz Novak Djokovic was literally run out from Down Under after failing to meet Australian Open tennis vaccination requirements. Djokovic said he was planning on studying the matter further after he was deported. He faces the same requirement for the upcoming French Open and apparently may take a pass there as well.

Bearing the new nickname NoVax, Djokovic has allied himself with the same group of vaccine deniers who came to Ottawa.

Some of the Canadian protesters have even gone so far as to suggest they wanted to replicate the Jan. 6 takedown of the American capital, which resulted in five deaths.

Two Canadian convoy participants were photographed—one wearing a Donald Trump MAGA hat and the other wearing a yellow star of David—mimicking the Nazi requirement for Jewish identification.

Convoy organizers have distanced themselves from racist supporters but that didn’t stop white supremacist Paul Fromm from tweeting “I pray this is Canada’s Budapest, 1956, when patriots and ordinary citizens rose up and overthrew tyranny.”

With so few anti-vaxxers, why would the Conservatives even bother to align themselves with the so-called “Canada Unity Convoy.”

Some of it is about building a power base, with petitioners getting embedded into future Conservative communications. Some is about raising money, because the angry folks attached to this convoy are ripe for campaign donation pitches.

But by associating with these extremists, Tory appeal to ordinary Canadians is diminished.

Short-term gain for long-term pain.

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

Time to move on from COVID.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on January 24, 2022.

The return of Parliament should provide a much-anticipated channel-changer from the constant barrage of COVID news that still saturates the airwaves.

Most people I know have simply tuned out to the daily update of hospitalization and infection information from every part of the country.

They are also taking the medical advice with a grain of salt. Travel advisories emanating from Ottawa are being discounted even by federal government service providers. Last year, the majority of snowbirds heeded the government’s advice to stay home and refrained from travelling because of the danger of contracting COVID.

This year, those same people have decided to ignore the repeated warnings and are heading to warmer climes to avoid the bitterly cold Canadian winters.

Even the federal government pensioners’ payment website has a general proviso that the travel prohibitions emanating from Ottawa have no affect on their insurance policies or plans.

Likewise, the travel industry is starting to fight back publicly.

Last week, the major airlines and Canada’s largest airport joined to urge the government to end the redundant random PCR testing that faces some travellers upon their return to Canada. They pointed out that the infection rate on planes hovers around two per cent and every single passenger has already undergone a PCR test to get on a plane so it makes no sense to undergo a second test on landing when tests are so scarce and the local infection rate stands at 20 per cent.

Infected residents cannot access tests because of a shortage while travellers are double-tested in an effort to discourage their movement.

The opening of the House of Commons will focus public attention on issues other than the pandemic, with inflation rearing its ugly head just in time for the return.

Statistics Canada inflation numbers published last week painted a grim picture with calculations showing the highest levels of inflation in three decades.

Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole immediately tweeted out the negative results, claiming the Liberals are showing zero leadership on tackling the cost-of-living crisis.

O’Toole did not provide any specific suggestions himself, nor did he walk back his finance critic’s claim three days earlier that the cost-of-living figures were “vastly underestimated” in the methodology applied by Statistics Canada to the role played by inflation in the Consumer Price Index data.

Poilievre is great on grabbing the headlines, but the claim that Statistics Canada is cooking the books does not resonate well when his leader is about to launch a national campaign based on the very numbers the critic is questioning.

The chance for the Conservatives to make their mark on the inflation issue should not be muddied because their critic questions the veracity of Statistics Canada.

That kind of dog-whistle politics may serve Tories well in their fundraising endeavours, but it does little to prove to Canadians that they are really ready to govern the country.

To be that government-in-waiting they need to consider the big picture. Just like inflation could be a looming issue in this parliament, the Tories will want to make an example out of cultural policy when the government reintroduces legislation to amend the Broadcasting Act.

But by taking a hard line against new rules that put streaming services like Netflix on a more level playing field with traditional broadcasters, the Conservatives risk being viewed as a marginalized fringe party.

The Liberal legislation that passed a previous House of Commons vote was supported by the New Democrats and the Bloc Québécois so the Tories’ support is not required for passage.

The new minister of Canadian Heritage, Pablo Rodriguez, has also been in the portfolio before and has the kind of political savvy that will make him a real champion for the legislation.

He will not get sucked down the rabbit hole of responding to social media influencers who think their blogs are the equivalent of major streaming services.

If the Tories have any hope of forming the government, they have to be able to broaden their reach in Quebec. And by fighting against C-10, they simply manage to reinforce their image as a right-wing, anti-culture party that really does not care about Canadian content, on traditional media or via the internet.

They have a small rump of ten members of parliament in Quebec. Perhaps those members will be able to convince their colleagues that a more moderated approach to broadcasting amendments will serve their long-term political agenda.

The return of the House will be a welcome channel changer. Time to move on from COVID.

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

Working Families, an anti-Conservative coalition of public and private-sector unions and individuals, failed to overturn legislation reining in third-party capacity to advertise.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 13, 2021.

OTTAWA—An Ontario provincial court judgment just muzzled Doug Ford’s greatest opposition voice.

Working Families, an anti-Conservative coalition of public and private-sector unions and individuals, failed to overturn legislation reining in third-party capacity to advertise.

Previous restrictions on third-party advertising had been thrown out by the courts on the grounds that they violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The Ford government invoked the notwithstanding clause of the Charter in order to introduce legislation that knowingly violates the Canadian Constitution.

The Canadian Civil Liberties Association joined unions and individuals in the unsuccessful appeal, claiming the law may “unreasonably chill people’s willingness to criticize the government or to engage in campaigns related to important policy issues of the day.”

In its factum to the court in November, CCLA argued that restrictions governing the right to vote, violated a Charter right that cannot be overridden by the application of the notwithstanding clause.

Ontario Superior Court Justice Ed Morgan disagreed with that interpretation, claiming third-party restrictions do not infringe on voters’ rights to meaningful participation in the electoral process.

The same judge had previously ruled that the government restrictions on third-party advertising were a violation of the Charter.

The new legislation sets a $600,000 spending limit for advertising campaigns while extending the advertising restrictions from six months to one year before an election.

This further limit on ad spending, prompted unions to argue that the ruling would render third party campaigns toothless.

Union lawyer Paul Cavaluzzo was quoted as saying, “they don’t see how an election can be fair and legitimate when the government …violated their free speech … the court has found that independent third parties have the constitutional right to run ineffective campaigns.”

All this makes great fodder for lawyers on all sides. And in the end, it could have a profound impact on all future election outcomes.

Working Families spent more than $2-million in the campaign that brought Liberal leader Kathleen Wynne to power.

Polls were predicting a Tory win, but Canada’s first elected lesbian leader swept to power when forces opposing Conservative leader Tim Hudak combined to give Wynne the edge.

Wynne moved the Liberals from minority to majority in 2014, marking the fourth successive Grit election victory.

That win was the result of a call by Working Families to vote strategically against the Conservatives, whose campaign promises included a pledge to fire 100,000 public servants.

The third-party campaign was backed up by advertising targeted to let voters know what impact firings would have on teachers and nurses.

Wynne won because most voters who opposed Tory cuts voted for the candidate in their riding who could best defeat the Conservatives.

In previous Ontario elections, centre-left voters often split their ballots between the Liberals and the New Democrats.

The Progressive Conservatives managed to govern in Ontario for 42 years straight by effectively splitting the opposition down the middle.

Until 2014, union help generally went to the New Democrats, but Working Families changed that dynamic as well.

By joining forces in favour of workers, the organization managed to bridge the divide that has always existed between Liberals and New Democrats.

That bridge has definitely worked in favour of the Liberals, as it has been the party best positioned to defeat the Conservatives in an election.

The same strategic vote at the federal level has permitted the Liberals to remain in power for three terms. Progressive voters in Canada definitely outnumber conservatives.

Ford’s court victory last week will definitely change that dynamic.

In this instance, the change will affect the New Democrats most, since in sheer numbers, they are currently best positioned to replace the Tories if progressive voters unite.

If progressives splinter, as is likely the case in the absence of an effective third-party coalition like Working Families, the biggest political winner will be Ford.

Last week’s decision will probably be appealed, with the final ruling in the hands of Canada’s Supreme Court.

Whether that esteemed group will be prepared to validate a court-recognized violation of the Canadian charter remains to be seen.

Whatever their decision, Ontario is heading to the polls in less than six months.

Any definitive court ruling will likely not be heard before that date.

In the absence of effective third-party voices, the current government has definitely strengthened its chance for re-election.

However, current issues like the ragged handling of the pandemic, may outweigh the absence of a strong third-party Working Families information campaign.

In any case, Ford breathes easier today.

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