U.S. President Donald Trump’s negative response to Prime Minister Mark Carney’s Davos declaration has mobilized the majority of Canadians—including premiers—in unity.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 2, 2026.

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Mark Carney has a new moniker: Captain Canada.

At the meeting with premiers in Ottawa last week, leaders across the country seemed prepared to work together to grow inter-provincial trade.

The negative response of United States President Donald Trump to Carney’s Davos declaration has had the effect of mobilizing the majority of Canadians—including premiers—in unity.

British Columbia Premier David Eby was positively effusive in his praise for Carney’s Davos speech.

“It’s been a while since I have felt that much pride in being Canadian.”

Trump has started calling Carney “governor” again, and the White House was claiming that the prime minister walked back his Davos speech in a private conversation with the president.

Carney absolutely denied that claim, and the only Canadian party that gave any credence to the president was the federal Conservative Party.

In a statement released after Carney’s Davos speech, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre started with praise for prime minister’s “well-crafted and eloquently delivered” speech, but went on to characterize the approach with a chuckle. “If Liberal words and good intentions were tradeable commodities, Canada would already be the richest nation on Earth.”

Timing in politics is everything, and in this instance, Poilievre’s timing was off.

Carney had a great January, setting the stage with Chinese movement on canola and fish products, and a Davos speech positioning this country as a leader in creating a new world order.

This is a time where the leader of the official opposition should merely be offering praise and support.

When premiers are characterizing Carney as Captain Canada, any comments to the contrary run the risk of putting Conservatives offside with most Canadians.

The last time we saw this kind of federal-provincial harmony was at the height of the pandemic when no party nor political structure had any idea about the path forward to save lives.

During COVID, premiers and the prime minister all sang from the same hymnbook.

This time, they are harmonizing on trade, which can be a lot more politically troublesome than deciding on a medical vaccinations and securing protective medical supplies for hospitals and nursing homes.

Even Eby and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith stated publicly that they were willing to try and work together on issues with the prime minister and other premiers.

The separatist movement in Alberta is still working hard. It was reported last week that the American state department had been in touch with separatist leaders to exchange information.

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent claimed publicly that Albertans are very independent people, and the U.S is a natural partner. ”People want sovereignty. They want what the U.S. has got.”

On Jan. 28, Bessent upped the rhetoric warning the prime minister that picking a fight with the president could put the trilateral trade negotiations at risk.

Most global observers don’t believe that Canada has been the one picking international fights.

But Conservatives were quick to follow Bessent’s line of thinking. In an opinion piece written for the American-owned National Post, Conservative MP Michelle Rempel Garner characterized Canada as a “vulnerable, sclerotic, decadent nation from which talent, intellectual property and financial capital continue to flee.”

The more Bessent and Trump attack Carney, the more Canadians from coast to coast to coast will unite.

The most recent Ipsos poll said the number of Albertans and Quebecers wishing to enter a separation discussion with Canada was 29 and 31 per cent, respectively.

But when the same poll respondents were queried on the real-world consequences, support in both provinces was cut in half. Possible downsides include standard of living declines, pension, or trade renegotiations.

The reality of an October election in Quebec is not lost on anyone. With the Parti Québécois leading in the polls, the possibility of a total Team Canada is definitely at risk.

But, in the meantime, it appears as though the disrespect continually shown by Trump and his officials for our country is driving Canadians into the government’s arms.

Meanwhile, reports surfaced last week that the MP who resigned his seat to Poilievre will get the Tory nomination. Damien Kurek has been approved to return as the candidate in Battle-River-Crowfoot, Alta., while the party has no news on where Poilievre would run in the next election.

Maybe the Conservatives are thinking that Poilievre won’t be around to lead the party into the election.

With Trump’s help, that is becoming increasingly likely.

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

As well as preparing for his own future in an Alberta byelection, Pierre Poilievre will be using the season to reinforce his level of support among the rank and file in preparation for a review vote at the party’s national convention next January in Calgary. It’s going to be a long, hot summer.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 23, 2025.

OTTAWA—The summer barbecue circuit will take on new meaning for Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre this year.

As well as preparing for his own future in an Alberta byelection, Poilievre will be using the season to reinforce his level of support among the rank and file in preparation for a review vote at the party’s national convention next January in Calgary.

On the surface, it appears as though Poilievre’s survival should be a no-brainer. In the last election, his party increased popular support and elected more members, which is usually the measure of any leader’s success.

But in this instance, the lead held by the Conservatives had been so large for so long that most party members were expecting to be celebrating their return to government.

The dramatic drop in support during the campaign, in addition to the leader’s loss of the riding he had held for two decades, put Poilievre in double jeopardy.

Battle River-Crowfoot MP Damien Kurek resigned last week to pave the way for the re-entry of Poilievre into Parliament. The MP had to be installed for a minimum of 30 days before he could resign.

After a member’s resignation, the Speaker must inform the country’s chief electoral officer about the vacancy. Prime Minister Mark Carney has promised to move quickly to call a byelection. But the chief electoral officer must wait 11 days before any move can be made.

If the prime minister moves quickly, Poilievre could be facing an August byelection.

Meanwhile, Poilievre remains in the Stornoway digs that were offered up by Conservative House Leader Andrew Scheer.

Some senior Conservatives privately questioned why the leader didn’t simply move out for a few months to avoid the controversy of remaining in Stornoway without status as official opposition leader.

Instead Poilievre was offered the house after he appointed Scheer to take over as official opposition leader. There appears to be no prohibition in Scheer’s decision to offer the official opposition residence to Poilievre and his family. If the offer were made in return for Scheer’s nomination as the interim official opposition leader, that could definitely be a problem.

Neither the outgoing Alberta MP Kurek nor Scheer can be offered anything from Poilievre in return for their sacrifices.

Likewise, Poilievre has been facing more negative polling numbers in the weeks following the election.

That is to be expected as the Carney government has been enjoying the usual honeymoon period.

But the sharp 10-point drop in numbers has left some Tories speechless.

In a scrum following a Tory caucus meeting, Scheer ran away from a CTV News reporter, claiming an urgent phone call.

As for phones, Poilievre has been working them himself to shore up support, particularly reaching out to social media influencers who were actively promoting the Conservatives during the election.

Members of Parliament have rallied around Poilievre, but they have not had much time to process the negative post-election numbers facing the party leader.

Back home to their ridings this week, they will be getting lots of feedback from constituents about the party’s future.

Hardcore Conservatives are still staunchly behind Poilievre, but those who are more progressive will be telling the party to move toward the centre if they have any hope of defeating the Liberals in an election that could potentially happen within the next two years.

A deeper dive into those numbers will also remind people that Poilievre himself is less popular than his party, which could create further pressure on his survival.

When the party votes on the leader next January, people will be looking at the margin of victory.

In past reviews by the Progressive Conservatives, the leader was expected to get more than two-thirds of the vote or resign. In 1983, former prime minister Joe Clark got two-thirds of party support at a second leadership review. The number was virtually identical to a previous vote two years earlier, but Clark felt the mandate was not strong enough and he launched a leadership race.

The race he provoked, ended up costing his job, with Brian Mulroney defeating him at a party convention Clark called later that year.

Poilievre won’t be making that mistake. But there will definitely be some backroom players making the case for change.

The party’s poor showing in Atlantic Canada and Quebec haunts Poilievre. Quebecers hate to lose, so expect local organizers to drum up anti-Poilievre sentiment.

It will be a long, hot summer for the Conservative leader, campaigning across the country for his survival.

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

The Conservatives have already started their pre-election communications strategy and are well-funded to keep it going. If the government wants to remain in the game, it needs to get in the game.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 11, 2023.

OTTAWA—P.T. Barnum once said that there is no such thing as bad publicity.

Oscar Wilde followed suit with this zinger: “There is only one thing worse than being talked about, and that is not being talked about.”

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre followed Barnum’s advice by vowing to bring in thousands of amendments to legislation until the Liberals change some elements of their pollution pricing strategy.

Poilievre didn’t call it “pollution pricing,” but rather “carbon tax,” which is how most Canadians seem to be viewing the issue.

Government House Leader Karina Gould was quick to repudiate Poilievre’s tactic, accusing him of being a bully, and “not a serious politician.”

She also pointed out that Canadians earning less than $50,000 are actually receiving more in their pockets because carbon pricing includes personal rebates.

Poilievre seems to be winning the ground war, and has not been damaged by his bully tactics on parliamentary bills.

Most Canadians are not watching the machinations of Parliament on a daily basis, but they are feeling the pinch of inflation, and a hike in cost for basics like food and housing.

On the housing front, Poilievre dominated the headlines again, for good or for bad.

He released a 15-minute docudrama on housing which was widely quoted by pundits in both positive and negative news columns.

Globe and Mail columnist Gary Mason called the video “a dime-store analysis of our housing crisis.”

Globe columnist Andrew Coyne, on the contrary, called it, “extremely impressive. Simplistic, tendentious, conspiratorial in places, but by the standards of most political discourse, it is a PhD thesis.”

The video had legs. Within days of its posting, the docudrama had received more than three million views.

That compares with a prime ministerial upload the same day that received fewer than 100,000 views.

Liberal Housing Minister Sean Fraser joked that the Poilievre video got multiple views because of the opposition leader dialling in to watch himself perform.

Anyone can manipulate social media to inflate the number of views.

But the fact that the video occupied so much ink in mainstream media means that Poilievre was getting out his message.

The media and positive polling numbers have emboldened the Conservatives in the House of Commons.

Last week, one member was bounced out of the place for accusing the prime minister of lying on the carbon tax issue.

Alberta MP Damien Kurek ignored repeated invitations from the Speaker to withdraw his comments and was drummed out. Kurek almost immediately posted his exchange from the House on Twitter.

Meanwhile, a journalist for social media Insight has used the incident as a fundraising measure, inviting people who support Kurek to assist by sending money to a media PayPal account.

But this is no ordinary media strategy. Instead, Poilievre and the Conservatives plan to use every social media platform to promote their positions.

On these platforms there is no real rebuttal, so it doesn’t matter much that a number of statements in Poilievre’s housing video were simply false.

To follow the Barnum school of promotion, simply getting out the message on multiple platforms helps reinforce Poilievre’s status.

Screaming matches in the House of Commons are intended to reinforce the Conservative message that the carbon tax needs to be axed.

Liberals have some great talking points to deflate the video, but talking points will not carry this day.

Instead, they need to get serious on social media, attacking the falsehoods that are being perpetrated by Poilievre.

Fraser issued his own video in rebuttal to Poilievre’s housing claims.

But he is a single actor in the parliamentary story. Instead, the government needs to spend as much effort on rebuttals as it does on its own positive announcements.

As long as Canadians are talking about carbon tax and not a price on pollution, it is pretty simple to see who is winning this public relations battle.

But that doesn’t necessarily equate to winning the war.

A hard-hitting rebuttal to the “dime-store” housing analysis needs to come from the Liberals, and it needs to involve social media saturation and paid media messaging.

The Conservatives have already started their pre-election communications strategy, and by all accounts, are well-funded to keep it going.

If the government wants to remain in the game, it needs to get in the game.

Any winning team needs a defensive and an offensive strategy.

By leaving the offence to Poilievre, Liberals look defensive. Only by going into attack mode will they win.

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