The centre is where the majority of Canadians would like to be. But there’s a big question as to whether Dominic Cardy’s party can become more than just a one-man show.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on August 19, 2024.

OTTAWA—Dominic Cardy registered a new party with Elections Canada this month, planning to field candidates in all upcoming federal byelections.

In an interview with The Toronto Star, the interim leader of the Canadian Future Party says he considers the current federal Conservative leader “terrifying.”

He says he plans to offer a centrist option to voters tired of electoral polarization, telling The Star: “Our tag line is saying we’re not left, not right, (we’re) going forward.”

Ironically, that was the same tag line that led the Liberals to form a minority government in 2021, with their slogan being, “Forward, for everyone.”

The former minister in the New Brunswick’s Progressive Conservative government is no stranger to new parties.

He served as the leader of that province’s New Democratic Party from 2011 until 2017.

He ran unsuccessfully for a seat in the legislature as a New Democrat, but won the same seat as a Progressive Conservative in 2018.

He endorsed Maxime Bernier for the federal Conservative leadership, so if Cardy needs advice on how to make a new party work, he can always reach out to Mad Max.

Both men must realize that in the current political system, building and sustaining a new party is almost impossible.

Just ask the Green Party that has been in existence since 1983.

In the 2004 election, the Green Party, under the leadership of Jim Harris, secured candidates in all ridings and received 4.3 per cent of the popular vote.

When Elizabeth May took the helm in 2006, she again moved the dial for the Greens, taking them to 6.8 per cent of the national popular vote in the 2008 election.

That was the party’s apex, followed by multiple elections which eventually saw the election of three Members of Parliament. May has held her seat in Saanich-Gulf Islands, B.C., since 2011, and is the longest serving woman leader of a political party in Canadian history.

But despite a national showing in multiple elections, the Green Party has never been able to make a real breakthrough.

So how does the Canadian Future Party think it can do things differently?

It is targeting the centre, and claims a membership of former Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats, although Cardy has been coy on who those supporters are.

The party hopes to appeal to former Tories who are not happy with the shift to the right that has happened since the party dropped its progressive wing in order to merge with the former Reform Party.

Canadian Future also hope to attract Liberals who think their party has moved too far to the left in its alliance with the New Democratic Party.

The centre is certainly where the majority of Canadians would like to be. But there is a big question as to whether the Cardy party can become more than simply a one-man show.

The party’s standing in the upcoming byelections in LaSalle-Émard-Verdun, Que., and Winnipeg-Transcona, Man., will be a bellwether of its possibilities.

The party has not managed to secure well-known candidates in either riding, which may be some indication of how uphill the climb will be.

The Liberals are unlikely to give up the coveted centre as it has spelled success for them in the majority of elections since the beginning of Canada.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has moved the party to the left with programs like pharma care, childcare, and dental care. During the pandemic, that move has worked well for Canadians, especially those who were thrown out of work through no fault of their own.

But the chance of another party making any headway when the Conservatives, Liberals, and New Democrats are fighting for votes is unlikely.

The bigger question is: if they get any traction, from whom will the Canadian Future Party skim votes?

Most progressives have already left the Conservative Party, and Poilievre appears to be shaping his campaign far from the centre.

His promise to shut down the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation is sure to scare off centrists, especially those in Atlantic Canada who depend on the public broadcaster for their only local coverage.

Poilievre’s new campaign attacking NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh is also not attracting the centre. Instead, he is going hard after the left in order to encourage NDP voters to vault over the Liberals and join the Conservatives.

It is ironic but true that some blue-collar voters are more likely to switch from NDP to Conservative than to ever vote Liberal.

But the centre is still where political victory lies.

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

The fallout from the parliamentary foreign activity report did nothing to re-establish Canadians’ trust in the system.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 17, 2024.

OTTAWA–The cloud of suspicion hanging over Members of Parliament was partly lifted by Green Party Leader Elizabeth May last week.

May spoke out at a lengthy press conference on June 11 after having read the classified document on parliamentary foreign activity produced by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP).

May said she was “relieved” to read that, in her opinion, none of the “few” Members of Parliament mentioned in the document are being disloyal to Canada.

There was one former MP who knowingly colluded with a foreign government, but their identity was not revealed. May stated that her reading of the report concluded that no current MPs were involved in any malfeasance.

May asked, “are there currently MPs sitting with us in the Chamber who would set out knowingly to sell Canada out for personal benefit? If there are, there’s no evidence of that in the full report.”

She urged other party leaders to read the report, and to draw their own conclusions.

Reports of the document state that “the committee has also seen troubling intelligence that some parliamentarians are, in the words of the intelligence services, ‘witting or semi-witting’ participants in the efforts of foreign states to interfere in our politics.”

New Democratic Party Leader Jagmeet Singh, who also read the report, said he was even more concerned after reading it, and urged Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre to do the same. The current leader of the opposition refuses to seek the security clearance required to read the document.

Singh also questioned whether Poilievre was refusing to read the document because it included references to potential foreign influence in the Conservative leader’s own party leadership bid. The NSICOP report references interference by Indian and Chinese governments in the Conservative leadership race.

Singh said: “In short, there are a number of MPs who have knowingly provided help to foreign governments, some to the detriment of Canada and Canadians.” CBC News later reported that Singh’s office would not confirm if he was referring to current sitting MPs.

Meanwhile, with no specifics on which Members of Parliament have been named, the House of Commons agreed on June 11 to a Bloc Québécois motion to refer the parliamentary report to the public inquiry into foreign interference.

That inquiry, led by Commissioner Marie-Josée Hogue, is already reviewing the issues surrounding foreign election-meddling allegations.

Hogue produced her interim report last month, which said there is evidence of foreign interference, but the integrity of Canada’s electoral system remains intact.

The commissioner also concluded that “vigorous measures” must be taken to re-establish Canadians’ trust in the system after unveiling evidence that foreign governments did interfere in the elections of 2019 and 2021, leaving “a stain on our electoral process.”

The fallout from the NSICOP report did nothing to re-establish Canadians’ trust in the system. Instead, the report left the impression that there were multiple Members of Parliament knowingly sharing confidential information with foreign influencers.

Poilievre and his Alberta-based attack dog Michael Cooper both called on the prime minister to immediately release the names of all members cited in the document.

Public Safety Minister Dominic LeBlanc told a parliamentary committee that it would be illegal to release names. “I am not going to violate the Security of Information Act, and risk prosecution for a political stunt,” he said.

He, too, encouraged Poilievre to get full security clearance so the Conservative leader could read the report, and decide for himself what level of foreign influence has affected our democracy and electoral process.

Poilievre refuses to read the report himself, claiming that to do so would prevent him from asking pertinent questions. The Conservative leader says clearance would limit his capacity to comment on issues, since top-secret material is usually only for the eyes of the security-cleared reader.

But his refusal to gather all the data begs the question: if Poilievre were to win the election, would he be able to become prime minister without a full security clearance? And if so, why would he want to make decisions without being in possession of all the facts?

Wouldn’t it make more sense for a leader to gather as much background as possible before deciding on what direction s/he would be taking on the foreign interference question?

Poilievre is simply demanding that the prime minister name names. He cares not for illegality, or due process.

His insouciance really makes you wonder what kind of prime minister he would be.

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

The government would like nothing more than a channel-changer on foreign interference investigations. Even if the Liberals succeed, with the appointment of a special rapporteur and multiple committees, all eyes are still on government foibles. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on March 13, 2023.

OTTAWA—In one month, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau will celebrate 10 years as leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.

That celebration will be fêted in early May at the party’s national convention in Ottawa.

There will be much to celebrate. Back in 2013, pundits were writing off the Trudeau leadership.

He was leading a third party that was supposed to be on the verge of extinction.

Then came the blockbuster campaign of 2015, in which he was able to ignite the youth vote and encourage many non-Liberals to swing over to support the prime minister’s vision, including the legalization of marijuana and a commitment to end the current first-past-the-post voting system.

Back in 2015, Liberals moved ahead with their promise to legalize marijuana, but shelved their promise to change the voting system.

One out of two ain’t bad.

But in the lead-up to a potential election later this year, a 50 per cent success rate won’t help the government attract more swing voters.

Some say the Liberals promised to bring in proportional voting. But that is not accurate. In the prime minister’s mind, he was looking at the possibility of a weighted vote, with Canadians choosing to rank their choices in every local election.

Whatever Trudeau’s vision, the change was not accomplished and that failure is one of the issues that will affect the next election.

The promise to change the voting system appealed to those in smaller parties, like the New Democrats and the Green Party, as neither realistically hoped to form government.

Instead, they would be satisfied to have direct influence in shaping government policy.

Minority government has given them that opportunity. The New Democrats have been key to the introduction of dental care and potential pharmacare.

But whether the third party will be rewarded by the electorate for promoting these initiatives remains to be seen.

New Democrat supporters who switched to the Liberals in 2015, left in 2019 and did not return in 2021.

Green Party voters may make a switch as their party’s internal challenges have definitely damaged their credibility.

Looking forward, voters can be expected to make decisions on what parties will do in the future, not what they promised in the past.

Liberals will be particularly challenged since, as government, the party has been in power for eight years, and politics is the only job where the more experience you have, the more voters want to dump you.

Trudeau hopes to make history as only the second prime minister in Canada to be elected four times in a row.

He would follow in Liberal Sir Wilfrid Laurier’s footsteps by pulling off a four-peat.

But it is a daunting task.

The government is working hard to put some successes in the window. The recent health-care agreement is a great win.

It will help assuage Canadians’ fears about access to health care: from primary providers through to mental health and continuing care.

The next election will not be fought on political successes.

Public attention is focused on allegations of foreign interference in elections, in particular from the Chinese government.

Most Canadians don’t follow the allegations closely. They will be aware that the heated political temperature in Ottawa is putting pressure on the current government.

Trudeau stepped up earlier last week with a series of measures to respond to the allegations, but whether that is enough to cool things down remains to be seen.

If not, the Liberals may be positioning to move to an election sooner rather than later.

The official opposition has been searingly critical in recent exchanges in the House of Commons. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has been clear and concise in his attacks, and is obviously trying to keep the issue front and centre in the public mind.

The Liberal hope is to dampen down the heat and move the issue to the back burner.

Conservative MP Michael Cooper may have inadvertently helped the Liberals when he made a clearly sexist attack at Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly while she appeared before committee.

Even New Democrats demanded an apology.

The government would like nothing more than a channel-changer on foreign interference investigations.

Even if they succeed, with the appointment of a special rapporteur and multiple committees, all eyes are still on government foibles.

With that in mind, a successful Liberal convention in May and a summer spent travelling and rolling out budget announcements may mean we are heading for a fall election.

That could be the only way to douse the parliamentary fires.

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

There are four putative candidates considering a run at the Liberal leadership. Shockingly, they are all current Liberals and each has something unique to offer. So it’s insulting to assume that their talent is ignored by 38 ‘insiders’ looking for another saviour. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 6, 2023.

Green Party of Ontario chief Mike Schreiner leads a party of one. After 14 years at the helm, he has only managed to get himself elected. He has had five years to grow the Green base after being elected as the Greens’ first member of Ontario Legislature.

It’s been five years and he hasn’t managed to a recruit a single additional successful Green candidate to the legislature.

Yet for some bizarre reason, a few big names in the Ontario Liberal Party want him as their next leader.

In an open letter that landed like a fart in church, several high-profile Liberals including the first woman leader Lynn McLeod and former deputy leader Deb Matthews penned an open letter, calling on Schreiner to consider joining the Grits.

Their rationale was this: “Our party needs to rediscover the politics of purpose and principle…that’s why we’re turning to you.”

At first blush, the letter seems like a call to arms for party reform. The biggest change would be to elect a leader who is not currently a Liberal.

But amongst four potential leadership candidates, three are racialized Canadians and the fourth is under the age of 40. So how is anointing an over-50-year-old white male going to appeal to a new generation?

In the last election, some of the authors of the open letter were actively working for the coronation of Steven Del Duca. The race was finished before it started because the rules were so restrictive.

Del Duca was a great organizer, but a lousy communicator.

Schreiner is the opposite.

But communications is just part of the job. The biggest challenge facing the next Liberal leader is to recruit a team that could credibly transition to government.

Del Duca did a great job in recruitment and had some fantastic candidates who are still working in their ridings.

And that’s what it will take: hard work on the ground. There is no saviour in politics. The party has to do the work from the ground up. That means recruiting new members in every part of the province. It also means opening up to new people. In some cases, riding associations consist of a few people who have been there for years, without ever having won a single election.

That is quite often the case in the Green Party. Look at its current national situation. The last election was a disaster for party, with their leader more focused on party infighting than winning elections.

When they decided to make a change, it was a simple: it was back to the future. Retired leader Elizabeth May returned as co-leader. May and Schreiner have a lot in common. Both born in the United States, they emigrated to Canada.

Like May, Schreiner is a great communicator. But when it comes to organization, the Greens have decided to embrace a leader who took over the party in 2006. Almost 20 years later, the party has topped out at four seats in Parliament and that number is dwindling because of internal party division.

It’s hardly a recipe for government.

Schreiner was an excellent addition to the leaders’ debate as was May, who held her own in every debate she entered. But neither have demonstrated the organizational skills needed for government.

There are already four putative candidates considering a run at the Liberal leadership. And shockingly, they are all current Liberals.

All four have already been elected, and two have served in cabinet.

The party will be reviewing a more open voting process at its annual general meeting in Hamilton next month.

Three of them are racialized Canadians. Mitzie Hunter would be the party’s first Black leader. Yasir Naqvi would be the first Muslim, Ted Hsu would be the first leader of Asian heritage. Nate Erskine-Smith would be the youngest leader ever elected.

Those demographics should be of interest to the “insiders” who want to reach out to a new generation.

None is a saviour.

But all have proven that they are not simply flyby Liberals. Two have been elected federally and provincially in ridings that were very tough to win. Two have survived the wipeout experienced by most candidates in the last election.

Each has something unique to offer. It is insulting to assume that their talent is ignored by 38 insiders looking for another saviour.

These candidates are offering experience, hard work, organizational skills, and a commitment to Liberalism.

The last thing the party needs is a walkover Liberal.

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.

In the end, the only party that really ended up ahead at year’s end is the Bloc. But this party also has the benefit of never having to be held accountable for what it might do in government as it vows never to form government.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 20, 2021.

OTTAWA—As the year draws to a close, it is time to reflect on politics past and future.

In the past year, the governing Liberals limped out of an election, barely making any inroads into their dream of a governing majority.

In the past year, the newly-minted Conservative leader dreamed that this was his party’s time to form government. He opened with a slick campaign brochure that promised change, but everything cratered during the campaign.

In the past year, the New Democratic Party leader was crowned by young people as the king of TikTok. But in the end, his clock ran out as too many followers simply did not turn out to vote.

In the past year, the Green Party leader went from breaking through a glass ceiling only to be covered in shards as her party imploded in internal infighting.

In the past year, the Bloc leader went from being almost forgotten in the House of Commons to reinserting himself in the public domain with a strong election effort.

In the end, the only party that really ended up ahead at year’s end is the Bloc. But this party also has the benefit of never having to be held accountable for what it might do in government as it vows never to form government.

So the new year offers opportunity for all political parties. In the case of the government, being in command of a progressive agenda will heal a lot of the wounds caused by an aborted attempt at a majority.

The childcare agreements with almost every provincial and territorial government are a great place to start. In addition, the all-party decision to move ahead with a ban on conversion therapy, showed that parties can accomplish much when they work together.

Continued management of the COVID situation will dominate politics for everyone in the new year, but if the government manages the Omicron threat well, the Liberals will be the greatest beneficiary of public support.

As for the Conservatives, the first step in the right direction was the unanimous support for the anti- conversion bill. The new year will provide opportunities for Erin O’Toole to continue to make movement toward the moderate middle. The only thing holding him back is the right-wing pull in his own party. And with an 18-month review process roiling inside the party, his freedom as a leader is certainly curtailed.

His party also needs to moderate its image as a collection of angry, white men. The finance critic, Pierre Poilievre, while a wonderful wordsmith, simply creates the impression that his work is being done for Bay Street and not for Main Street. While Poilievre is anxious to tag Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland as the inflation minister, most Canadians still don’t think the moniker fits.

As there is inflationary pressure worldwide, it is pretty hard to hang that problem on a single minister in a single government. Poilievre is no doubt banking on the fact that growing inflationary pressures will become a potent political tool for the Tories. That remains to be seen, but in the meantime, his overheated rhetoric could not pass a reality test.

In the new year, the New Democrats need to flex their muscles in Parliament to ensure that any legislation gets their seal of approval. Otherwise they risk being eclipsed by the government in the field of progressive politics. They also need to start spreading the news about their team. The current messaging is so fixated on the leader that it is hard for anyone to recognize the bench strength in Jagmeet Singh’s party. He has some excellent performers who need to take centre stage in the battle for the hearts and minds of Canadians.

In the new year, the Green Party needs to go back to the future, with emphasis on its roots and why the party was created in the first place. Internecine warfare based on Middle East politics is not going to win the party any support. And with a swathe of doctorates around the political table, one has to wonder who is able to guide the party back to a winning path.

With an unexpected breakthrough in Ontario, when Kitchener Centre sent Mike Morrice to Parliament, there is an opportunity to rebuild the party from scratch. Their interim leader, nonbinary astrophysicist Amita Kuttner certainly has her work cut out for her.

As we sweep out the old to ring in the new, all parties have a chance to right their respective ships. Happy Holidays.

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

Annamie Paul could survive by recanting the threats tweeted by her former staffer. But it is hard to see how the internal strife is going to do anything but consign the Greens to the scrap heap of political history.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 21, 2021.

Internal party battles are the ugliest part of politics. And when they spill out into the open, everyone gets hurt.

The current debacle in the Green Party may fatally damage the leadership of Annamie Paul.

She could survive by recanting the threats tweeted by her former staffer.

But it is hard to see how the internal strife is going to do anything but consign the Greens to the scrap heap of political history.

One of the most important jobs of a leader is to keep their caucus happy.

In Paul’s case, she only had three members to worry about and last week she lost one of them.

But instead of standing down and spending some time in personal reflection on what went wrong, she concocted a crazy theory that it was Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, the anti-feminist, who worked against her to convince Fredericton Green Party MP Jenica Atwin to cross the floor to the Liberals.

Meanwhile, the two remaining MPs did not back Paul when the fight went public, with former leader and Green dean Elizabeth May calling on Paul to apologize to the floor crosser.

After a fiery press conference in which Paul blamed the internal turmoil on racism and sexism within the Green Party national executive, not a single caucus member came to her defence.

According to Paul, it was a busy day.

But the party executive decided that Paul’s only path to survival is to organize a joint press conference with British Columbia Green MP Paul Manly, in which she repudiates attacks on caucus members by her former chief adviser Noah Zatzman.

Zatzman is seen to have played a crucial role in Atwin’s defection, having responded to her pro-Palestinian tweet with a Facebook accusation of anti-Semitism against unspecified Green MPs.

Zatzman vowed in a post on Facebook to defeat them and replace them with “progressive climate change champions who are antifa and pro-LGBT and pro-Indigenous sovereignty and Zionists.”

The substance of his tweet should have been raising eyebrows even before Atwin bolted the tiny caucus.

Most Canadians currently believe that a vote for the Greens is a way of putting climate change at the forefront of the political agenda.

But when it is mixed with antifa and Zionism, the message gets a lot more muddled. And those Canadians who might have cast their ballots in principle for the Greens will likely decide to park their votes elsewhere in the next election.

If Paul cannot even manage a caucus of three, how can she possibly expect to run the country?

Instead of following the advice of elder Green statesman May by trying to get Atwin back into the fold by apologizing, Paul simply dropped another verbal bomb, accusing members of her own national executive of racism and sexism.

Two Atlantic Green national council members resigned last week. In a written statement to The Globe and Mail, departing Nova Scotia representative Lia Renaud said the subject of the national council meeting was “Annamie Paul’s leadership approach and relationship building skills.”

Renaud called the claims of sexism and racism against council members as “just another example of the toxic relationship and work conditions.”

There is no doubt that as a black Jewish woman, Paul is facing the kind of scrutiny that would not have been levelled at a middle-aged white man.

In Paul’s own words, the Green party’s historic vote for her leadership was intended to change the current Canadian gender and race dynamic.

Even if Paul is successful in repairing the recent damage done to the party’s reputation, how will she respond to her own accusations of Green Party racism and sexism?

With an election expected within the next two months, this fight has done irreparable damage to Green chances across the country.

And environmental supporters who previously parked their votes with the Greens will definitely be looking elsewhere.

According to an Abacus poll published last week, the Green Party is sitting at six per cent. The front-running Liberals are at 34 per cent with the Conservatives closing in at 29 per cent.

The New Democratic Party, following a Prairie uptake, is sitting at 21 per cent.

The Conservatives are not likely to benefit from this Green implosion. A fragmented status quo on the left is their path to victory.

The majority of loose Green votes could deliver a majority government to the Liberals.

Atwin’s move could prove prescient.

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

The in-house method of choosing the Speaker is of little interest to the broad Canadian public. That’s a pity because the ranked preferential ballot could fix one of the major problems in Canada’s modern, fragmented democracy.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on December 9, 2019.

OTTAWA—The ranked preferential ballot is how we ended up with a new House Speaker last week.

Many arcane processes surrounding the opening of a new Parliament are obscured by the subject matter of the Throne Speech. Political parties, especially in a minority, are most interested in discerning whether their political wish lists are included in what constitutes the government’s broad-brush agenda.

Interest groups focus on whether their specific area of expertise gets a mention in the Speech from the Throne. If it does, even minus any details of budget and timing, that constitutes a win.

But the in-house method of choosing the Speaker is of little interest to the broad Canadian public. That’s a pity because the ranked preferential ballot could fix one of the major problems in Canada’s modern, fragmented democracy.

With five political parties represented in Parliament, Canadians can arguably claim that there is no party with clear support from across the country. The Liberals managed to form a robust minority with the support of only 33.7 per cent of the population. The seat count for the Liberals was much higher than the Conservatives, even though the Tories got a bigger popular vote, because of the efficiency of their vote.

But the Conservatives still have bragging rights for securing the largest popular vote, with 34.41 per cent, bumped up by hyper majorities in the Prairie provinces.

And the other national parties in this minority Parliament have electoral reform on their wish list for a productive political agenda. The Bloc is not particularly interested in changing the current voting system because the first-past-the-post system has served them well. They have only one province to promote in their political agenda and with the huge increase in numbers in this past election, they are not going to be calling for an electoral change.

But both the New Democratic Party and the Green Party have made electoral reform an element of their political wish lists.

Political experts can make a compelling argument about how the current composition of Parliament misrepresents the views of Canadian voters when a party with less than 32 per cent of the popular vote can form government.

But the Greens and the NDP falsely claim that the only alternative system to fully represent the views of Canadians is that of mixed-member proportional representation. The problem with that claim is that their proposed system takes power away from ordinary voters to give it to political parties. In the PR system, even when it is mixed, some Members of Parliament are chosen by their own party based on a ranked list. In order to succeed in Ottawa, the focus of a listed Member of Parliament is to keep their party happy.

It doesn’t matter whether Canadians are satisfied with your work because they don’t vote for you. PR supporters dispute that claim because in the mixed-member proportional system, citizens vote twice, once for a local member and another for a party list choice.

Nonetheless, in three provincial referendums, citizens have voted the system down. But instead of going back to the drawing board and reviewing other systems that could achieve fairer representation, PR supporters restart their campaign after every election.

The new iteration of recycled PR supporters has just launched an organization called Unlock Democracy, raising money and promoting their message through social media. Their website claims the current system leads to a “hostile and polarized insiders’ game” and claiming that their system would deliver elections that are “fair, friendly, inclusive and diverse.”

The government of Israel has been in crisis for the last several months, because in their system, a party with eight members in the 120-seat Knesset currently wields the balance of power. The Parliament also includes more than 25 political parties, with a fragmentation that makes the country almost ungovernable.

Even though the PR system has been rejected by three different provincial referenda, across the country, proponents appear unwilling to consider any available alternative.

The best alternative is a preferential ballot. Your vote is efficient. Like that of the new House Speaker’s vote last week, voters rank their preferences from first to last. So, the winner needs to reach out to everyone. In that circumstance, the candidate who is everyone’s second choice, could beat out the frontrunner.

The key element in voting under a ranked ballot is that the person who has the most support from all sides wins.

Not a bad model to consider if we truly want to elect a government supported by the majority of Canadians.

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 on Monday, January 8, 2018 in The Hill Times.

OTTAWA—The new year comes with new resolve. The most important resolve for political parties is to win the next election.

More than halfway through the current Liberal mandate, now is the time to consider a new year’s victory resolution for each party.

Let’s start with the Liberals.

In my New Year’s list, resolution number one should be to keep Prime Minister Justin Trudeau out of the limelight. This may seem counter-intuitive, as their charismatic leader is still the Liberals’ best weapon. Trudeau is a sought-after international draw, stalked for selfies at every turn. He has the ‘it’ factor, that combination of charisma and mystique that casts him in the unique role of a non-politician.

But the longer he stays in politics, the more Trudeau runs the risk of becoming just another boring politico.

Less exposure would position Trudeau to preserve his wow factor for the election circuit. By Canada Day this year, the prime minister will have followed up on his all-important promise to legalize marijuana. He will also be basking in the afterglow of a successful G-7 summit in the heart of Quebec.

Facing an election on Oct. 21, 2019, Trudeau should spend the last year of his mandate promoting his team. Nobody would expect any Trudeau to hide his light under the bushel, but to remain fresh, that should be his New Year’s resolution.

Conservative leader Andrew Scheer has the opposite problem. He needs to keep his mug front and centre, in an effort to build more personal visibility and positive feedback in the run-up to the election.

To achieve the kind of popularity that could eclipse Trudeau, Scheer needs to play down his ‘aw shucks’ family man image and focus on appealing to more urbane voters.

That also means toning down the hard-core Conservatism that marginalizes his potential voter appeal. His decision to name an anti-choice member to chair the parliamentary status of women committee was a huge mistake. During his leadership bid, Scheer said he would not reopen the question but his pick for status chair casts doubt on that claim.

Thus far, Scheer has not made many mistakes and he comes across as personable and approachable. His personal warmth is a far cry from the unappealing, frigid demeanour of his predecessor, prime minister Stephen Harper.

But there is concern that under that teddy bear exterior is another right-winger who wants to determine what a woman can do with her own body.

Scheer needs to dampen down that perception, if he stands any chance of upending the governing Liberals come October, 2019.

As for Canada’s third place party, the New Democrats, their challenge is to get their leader into the House of Commons. Jagmeet Singh’s most crucial new year’s resolution should be to get a seat in Parliament as quickly as possible.

One of his deputies needs to step aside in order to give their leader a fighting chance in a must-win by-election effort.

A Toronto area seat would be his best bet, preferably one with a strong NDP history. That will be hard to find as the party was swamped in the Liberal sweep, losing every GTA seat. Perhaps one of the two New Democrats in neighbouring Hamilton could step aside. The most senior and well-established David Christopherson represents a riding with a long New Democratic history.

The longer he remains outside the House, the more Singh fades into oblivion. He is a bystander in the two-way parliamentary duel between Trudeau and Scheer.

Singh’s own charisma cannot shine through as long as he is travelling the country while the other main protagonists are battling it out on the floor of the House of Commons.

Last but not least, Green Party leader, and long-time veteran in the House, Elizabeth May, should resolve to turn her party over to a new leader before the next election. She made departure noises last summer after her party passed an Israel sanctions resolution that she opposed. But in the end, the lure of the political arena was too strong.

May has made a fantastic contribution to the country and to her party. But national Green momentum has stalled, and she might be happier in provincial politics, working in the coalition government in British Columbia. Her skills would certainly be put to good use and she could thrive in government.

Of course, May could simply ignore my advice and stay on to fight another day.

After all, free political advice is usually worth what you pay for it.

Happy New Year.

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 Monday, May 15, 2017.

OTTAWA—The minority victory of the Liberal Party in British Columbia will shortly become a majority.

The nine-vote New Democratic Party margin in Courtenay-Comox will flip when the results of the military and absentee vote are counted. As the Liberal candidate was formerly the base commander in that riding before the election, he will surely lap the NDP to deliver a razor-thin majority to the Grits.

After 16 years in government, it is a credit to Premier Christy Clark’s campaign skills that the Liberals are even there at all.

And while the focus has been on her tenuous hold on government, the real story is the split vote on the left.

Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne will be poring over these results, looking for clues as to how the Ontario Liberals can trump their hat trick in an election next June.

But the real power grab in the British Columbia election is that of the Green Party. With three new players in the legislature, their clear agenda on financing reform is a no-brainer.

Less clear is where the province goes on resource development. The Liberals were able to carve out a new base in rural British Columbia by promoting the link between jobs and energy.

The New Democrats, if they are ever to form the government, need to square that circle. But with the Greens nipping at their environmental heels, the path to government is less clear.

Much has been written about the majority three-peat of prime minister Jean Chrétien,

As part of his team, I would like to think that the combination of good government and financial management had a lot to do with his success. Chrétien also know when to step into an issue and when to merely brush it off with a casual quip. Who can forget the pepper-spray malapropism?

But another element that played in favour of the federal Liberals was the split on the left between the Bloc Québécois and the New Democratic Party.

Until last week, such a split did not exist in British Columbia. Indeed, similar to the swing between the left and the right in France, British Columbia voters always managed to choose either extreme in any given election.

The arrival of the Green Party will change that scenario. Depending on the skill of leader Andrew Weaver, last week’s Green breakthrough could either be a flash in the pan or a game changer.

Federal counterpart Elisabeth May was publicly encouraging her provincial counterparts to make common cause with the NDP.

That is a great strategy for the Greens, as it provides a possible wedge into the block of environmental supporters that have historically voted for the New Dems. But it provides a huge risk to the traditional NDP base, because if the Greens look good, they garner support at the expense of the other party on the left.

Greens will argue, rightly so, that their platform is not left-leaning, but rather based on the conservative values of not consuming more than you can reasonable produce without damage to Mother Earth.

Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland was in Alaska last week, meeting with other members of the Arctic Council on the thorny issue of global warming.

If anyone needs a keen example of what happens to water levels when ice caps melt, they only have to review the recent havoc wreaked on eastern Canadian water levels.

But when the waters recede, and the insurance haggling commences, most Canadians vote with their pocketbook. And the party that can present the most reasonable prospect of economic growth will carry the day.

Clark’s resource development agenda will undoubtedly have to be reworked, given the makeup of the legislature.

But she is also sitting with an important advantage. In a hung parliament, the government gets to return to the people.

And with a growing split on the left, and the chance for the Greens to grow in numbers in their newfound role as kingmaker, Clark is probably already planning her next move.

Politics is where Clark shines. Her mid-campaign call to block transport of American coal likely carried her over the top.

The next year will be a harrowing game of political chess for all three parties. At the moment, the newfound strength of the Greens could actually set the stage for an environmental showdown and another election in the near term.

That scenario is a winning one for the Libs and the Greens.

New Democrats are left wondering how to unite the left.

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