The boost in polling that Democrats have enjoyed since U.S. President Joe Biden dropped out of the race would not be shared by the Liberals if Justin Trudeau were to do the same.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on September 2, 2024.

OTTAWA–The post-Biden bump for the Democrats in the United States has not passed unnoticed in Canada.

One of the first questions asked of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau at the summer cabinet meeting in Halifax last week was just that: Could the Liberals get a similar bump if the prime minister were to step down, and the voters were presented with a different face at the head of the party?

Trudeau sidestepped the question, and continued to insist that his job was to “be there to invest in Canadians.” But his close friend and cabinet colleague Marc Miller did say that robust conversations were taking place within the confines of the caucus, without public disclosure.

Other ministers, including potential leadership candidates Mélanie Joly and Chrystia Freeland, were quick to support the prime minister’s leadership. But the party is roiling, as ministers and Members of Parliament seek their own Canadian bump.

It has been a year since the Conservative lead entered into double-digit territory, and nothing the government does seems to narrow that gap. But the notion of a parallel result if Trudeau were to resign is misdirected.

First of all, the hike for Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris has resulted in an increase of three to four per cent for her party.

Three to four per cent in Canada would not be enough to return to government, as the current polling differential between the Liberals and the Conservatives is much higher.

The United States is essentially a two-party system, so a small shift can make or break a victory. Even an independent with the name recognition of Robert Kennedy Jr. managed only six per cent support at the apex of his campaign. It is doubtful that six per cent would even follow him into an election. Now that he has thrown his support behind Republican candidate Donald Trump, his supporters will probably split between the two main parties.

Also, a two-party system lends itself to a smooth transition. In the U.S. case, the Democrats were able to replace U.S. President Joe Biden with Harris without a full leadership convention because opponents were edged out by the current vice-president.

The fact that she would have replaced Biden in the event of a presidential illness or incapacity made it simpler to rally around her at a national convention less than three months from the election.

In Trudeau’s case, his succession would trigger a full leadership process. Contrary to some media reports, Mark Carney is not a putative leader in waiting. There are several current cabinet ministers who have been quietly setting the stage for their own leadership ambitions.

Pundits would suggest that it is better to have someone from outside the current crop of politicians, and Carney certainly has a polished Canadian and international pedigree. But the Liberal Party’s previous experience with global pedigree has not been positive.

Michael Ignatieff is a brilliant scholar with a renowned global reputation who was supposed to be the party’s saviour. Instead, he was quickly rejected as someone who came back to Canada only to run for office. Carney has declined multiple offers to run for office, and that doesn’t sit well with those working in the trenches.

While the public may be tired of Trudeau, the party’s volunteer base is actively working to explain why his leadership and the current government are worth supporting.

The checklist is long for Liberals. National childcare, dental care, pharmacare and school lunch programs send a message that the party is working for all the people.

But the government has been telling that story for several months, and so far, it seems to be falling on deaf ears. Party members are ready for a leadership change, but also realize that the decision is in the hands of the prime minister.

Meanwhile, from François-Philippe Champagne to Dominic LeBlanc, many are weighing their future chances. Former parliamentarian Frank Baylis, who sold his heart-device business for $1.75-billion in 2021, is also actively assessing a potential campaign for the top job.

Baylis, son of a Barbadian immigrant, served in Trudeau’s government for one term, from 2015 to 2019, as the member of parliament for multicultural Pierrefonds-Dollard in Montreal, Que. If successful, he would be the party’s first non-white leader.

All of the foregoing means Liberals will not follow the American example and force out their leader. Multiple candidates are already planning their own robust campaigns, so there would be no shoo-in for Carney.

No huge bump, and multiple candidates rule out a smooth post-Trudeau transition in Canada.

Vive le Canada.

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

The Republican convention scenario could not have been scripted better if it had been written in Hollywood. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 22, 2024.

OTTAWA—What a difference a day makes. Donald Trump now appears unbeatable.

Even senior Democrats are reported to have quietly conceded the election which has the younger congressional leaders like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez seeing red.

The Republican convention scenario could not have been scripted better if it had been written in Hollywood.

The week leading up to the four-day love-in in Milwaukee, Wisc., was awash with negative news about the mental acuity of U.S. President Joe Biden. Numerous Democrats, including at least 17 members of Congress, came out publicly calling for the president to step aside in time to secure a replacement for the November vote.

Then, there was an attempted assassination attempt on Trump on July 13.

Trump himself said the bullet would have struck, but at the last minute he turned his head to review details of a graph on immigration that had been exhibited as part of his presentation.

That subtle shift saved his life, and the bullet intended for him instead hit and killed a former fire chief. News reports said Corey Comperatore used his own body to shield his wife and family from the attack.

His last words were “Get down,” before Comperatore was struck dead by a bullet intended for the former president.

His wife, who described her husband as a hero, refused to take a call from President Biden after the attack. Instead she said her husband was a lifelong Republican, and he wouldn’t have wanted her to talk to Biden.

Even the previously absent Melania Trump was part of the narrative. Within hours of the attack, she penned a long letter suggesting that it was time for all Americans to rally around the theme of unity.

“A monster who recognized my husband as an inhuman political machine attempted to ring out Donald’s passion—his laughter, ingenuity, love of music and inspiration. … Donald, the generous and caring man I have been with through the best and the worst of times.”

Even Melania sensed this was a historical moment for Trump. Expect to see her at his side soon even though, notwithstanding her penmanship, she has been absent from all his recent trials, travails, and campaign trails.

But she obviously understood the import of the failed assassination attempt.

“The winds of change have arrived. For those of you who cry in support, I thank you. I commend those of you who have reached beyond the political divide—thank you for remembering that every single politician is a man or woman with a loving family.”

While Americans were rallying around Trump, Canadian premiers were gathered for their usual annual whine fest.

This year’s theme was “federal creep.”

According to premiers, they are unhappy with the fact the national government is bypassing them to get municipal housing agreements to kickstart construction in the midst of a housing crisis.

Why would the federal government waste time to partner with the provinces who are largely responsible for the current shortage of available, affordable housing?

They inherited the social housing file with plenty of cash from the federal government in a transfer of responsibility that happened almost 40 years ago.

Since the transfer, social housing momentum has stalled in many provinces. Ontario has received billions of dollars for housing with very little new construction to show for it.

At their annual meeting last week in Halifax, the provinces also attacked national dental care as another infringement on their authority.

They would not dare touch medicare because it is deeply entrenched and valued by Canadians.

But that didn’t stop premiers from also opposing the federal government’s promise to establish a national school food program.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford told a press conference that his province is feeding many more children with fewer dollars than the proposed federal program.

The Council of the Federation meeting was not surprising as every year provincial premiers get together to demand more money with less accountability.

The council was formed on Dec. 5, 2003. In its founding document, it acknowledges that Canada was created in 1867. But beyond that, they don’t even include a Canadian flag in its circular flag logo.

They complain about duplication, but there is no reason why a country with only 39 million people cannot have a school lunch program, dental care, medicare and childcare.

Maybe the premiers need to upload some responsibilities, and get out of the way.

Canadians need and want a national vision for Canada.

Now more than ever.

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

Trudeau’s tenure is brief but he needs to weigh his legacy against the risk of losing it all. Quite a balancing act.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 15, 2024.

Politics is a disease for which there is no vaccination.

How else to explain the reason why politicians have such a hard time retiring?

Most people count down the days until they can stop working. But U.S. President Joe Biden is 81 years old, and still refuses to entertain the idea of getting out.

Ditto for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

Trudeau has accomplished extraordinary things during his decade in power, which have even his enemies damning him with faint praise.

Norman Spector recently tweeted that Trudeau had been “the most consequential prime minister in his lifetime.” He went on to say Trudeau was even more consequential than his father. That praise was tempered by adding “more decades than I have left will have to pass to know whether the massive changes he’s precipitated are making Canada a better country—or destroying it.”

Trudeau put Indigenous issues on the agenda with more investments and legislative change to support reconciliation than any prime minister in history.

He also introduced nationally accessible child care, dental care and pharmacare, permanently hiked seniors’ pensions, and launched a national school lunch program initiative during the quickest economic recovery in the G8.

Quite a record for a decade which included two years of focussed attention on a worldwide once-in-a-century pandemic.

So why don’t either of these accomplished men want to exit with their heads held high?

To paraphrase former Ontario premier Ernie Eves, the worst day in politics is better than the best day on Bay Street.

Outsiders may think it is hubris that keeps politicians going. But they would be wrong.

The capacity for societal change lands squarely in the lap of politicians, and they know how much their work can actually be the agent for change.

Trudeau understands that his vision will not likely be shared by any successor, whether it be from his own party or the Conservatives.

Biden has devoted his life to fighting for the workers, and he wants to continue that work.

It is up to those closest to these leaders to guide them in the right direction.

In Trudeau’s case, following his separation from Sophie Grégoire last summer, he won’t be getting any pillow-talk counsel. He may be hearing from his children, but their youthful wisdom may not parallel advice from close adults.

Biden is obviously getting an earful from his partner Jill Biden, and his adult children. They are pushing him to stay even though his public performances and aging issues have become the dominant theme on the eve of his presidential re-election fight.

Donald Trump is chomping at the bit, hoping to bait Biden into another encounter since the first debate was so damaging to the Democrats.

Senior Democrats are working on the Biden family to convince them that keeping Joe in the job will end up destroying his legacy, not enhancing it.

Senior Liberals are not able to work on family members who can exercise a considerable amount of influence. Instead, they are reaching out to the inner circle of Trudeau’s key advisers.

That group seems to believe that the prime minister’s campaign prowess will carry him through the current travails.

His chief of staff has been working the back rooms of leadership since she was at Queen’s Park with then-Premier Kathleen Wynne. Katie Telford was there in the 2014 election when Wynne was supposed to lose. Instead, she turned it around and Liberals served one more term in provincial government.

Telford’s job also depends on Trudeau staying, so it may be understandable that she sees possible redemption on the campaign trail.

But Wynne’s second try in 2018 was a disaster with the leader announcing her own retirement days before the campaign ended. The party ended up losing status with few seats, and the worst defeat in Ontario political history.

Telford was not responsible for that debacle, as the campaign was run by David Herle, former adviser to prime minister Paul Martin who led Martin back to the wilderness in 2006.

But Telford understands political history.

Every leader cares about the direction in which they take their country. But at some point, even consequential leadership loses its lustre.

The power of political change is inevitable especially in the post-information age.

In Biden’s case, he has admirably served his country for 52 years. He can leave with his head held high.

In comparison, Trudeau’s tenure is brief, but he needs to weigh his legacy against the risk of losing it all.

Quite a balancing act.

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

Justin Trudeau believes his strong campaigning skills will kick into high gear when people finally have a chance to compare and contrast him with Pierre Poilievre, but Poilievre has a head of steam going which gets people excited. The winds of change have not bypassed Canada.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on July 4, 2024.

OTTAWA—The winds of political change are blowing everywhere.

Instead of interpreting that as a renaissance of the right, we have to assume that voter fatigue in multiple countries is fuelling this desire for change.

In the case of the United Kingdom, that wind led to a majority Labour government win on July 4.

British Conservatives have been in power for 14 years.

But unlike Canadian Liberals, the British Tories have motored through five leaders during the same period.

The revolving door on British leadership is prompted by a rule similar to that of Canadian Conservatives. If the majority of caucus votes against the leader, they are dismissed from power.

In the British Parliament, the dumping of leaders by caucus springs from rules written into party constitutions.

In Canada, only the Conservatives can trigger a leadership review. That process stems from a private member’s bill adopted unanimously in the House of Commons on condition that implementation is up to each caucus to be voted on privately at the beginning of a new Parliament.

Because of this rule, even if Pierre Poilievre were to secure a majority government in the next election, if his popularity flagged, he could be quickly replaced.

In the case of the United Kingdom, the revolving door leads to internal party divisions that are hard to heal.

In the dying dies of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak’s campaign, former prime minister Boris Johnson was brought in to rally the troops. He rallied hard, but did little to support his leader.

Instead, he used his time on stage in London’s Chelsea neighbourhood to praise his own initiatives, and trash the left.

He simply ignored Sunak, who was part of the group that dumped him. With such Tory in-fighting, the Labour Party has doubled its lead heading into a vote predicted to be a washout for the governing party.

From France to Canada, from the United Kingdom to the United States, multiple western leaders are suffering from voter fatigue.

Some may also be suffering from personal fatigue.

U.S. President Joe Biden’s performance in the June 27 debate against Donald Trump was palpably painful to watch. He struggled to keep his train of thought, and spoke in a gravelly, weakened voice. There were moments when he appeared to be confused about what the issue was. His wife, Jill, went up to the podium at the end to usher Biden away, as one would do for an elderly relative with balance problems.

All in all, it reinforced the narrative that Biden should not be the Democratic Party’s choice in the next election if they intend to defeat Trump.

Americans are also suffering from price fatigue and inflation, but there does not seem to be the obvious stampede to the right that one witnessed in the first round of the French elections last week.

Instead, the American race is a sparring match between relatively equal political movements, with the two-party system almost split down the middle.

But with the mental and physical feebleness Biden displayed on debate night, his party will be ceding the election to the Trump Republicans unless he is encouraged to step aside.

In the French coalition system with multiple parties, the group led by President Emmanuel Macron is running a poor third in the vote he himself triggered early.

Like the U.K’s Sunak, Macron called a surprise election. Both seem to be facing imminent defeat because of their own bad judgement.

In Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s case, he is hoping that time will heal all wounds. But it may also be that time is running out because the governance agreement with Jagmeet Singh’s New Democrats will expire early next year.

The shocking Liberal loss in Toronto-St. Paul’s, Ont., left the party with a sense of foreboding that will fester when they hear negative feedback on the summer barbecue circuit.

Unlike Sunak, Trudeau cannot simply be dumped by a vote of his caucus.

Like Biden, Trudeau must reflect on whether his presence in the next election will be a plus or a minus.

The prime minister believes his strong campaigning skills will kick into high gear when people finally have a chance to compare and contrast him with Poilievre.

But the prime minister also needs boots on the ground, though with many Liberals both privately and publicly expressing their reservations, the volunteer base of the party will be shrinking.

Poilievre has a head of steam going which gets people excited.

The winds of change have not bypassed Canada.

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

Joe Biden is banking on the fact that Donald Trump’s daily one-liners will be overshadowed by the substance required to sustain a full debate. 

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 20, 2024.

OTTAWA—The next American election doesn’t happen until November.

But the first debate will happen on June 27 on CNN.

This historically early showdown was shaped through a social media exchange.

U.S. President Joe Biden launched the debate challenge in a video on X—formerly Twitter—where he accused Donald Trump of avoiding debates against his Republican challengers.

“Donald Trump lost two debates in 2020. Since then he hasn’t shown up for a debate. Now he is acting like he wants to debate me again,” Biden said.

“Well, make my day, pal. I’ll even do it twice. So let’s pick the dates, Donald—I hear you are free on Wednesdays,” Biden said, in a not so-subtle reference to Trump’s daily criminal court appearances, which don’t happen on Wednesdays.

Trump accepted the challenge on his social media platform, Truth Social, with this response. “I am READY and WILLING to Debate Crooked Joe at the two proposed times in June and September.” Trump also said he is strongly recommending more than two debates.

The president’s decision to launch the challenge is more than unusual.

For the past 37 years, all presidential debates have been managed by a non-partisan Commission on Presidential Debates.

That organization has already announced three debates in September and October, in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Utah.

But voters can actually cast their ballots as of Sept. 6 in some states, and both candidates think the debates should be held earlier.

Two years ago, the Republican National Committee agreed unanimously to boycott the commission’s presidential debates, but Democrats did not follow suit until this week.

There has been disagreement with the commission by the Democrats, who felt the organization broke the rules in allowing Trump and supporters to forego the wearing of masks during a COVID debate in 2020.

Democrats also want a debate without an audience, while Trump is seeking more people in more venues. He even suggested a debate in front of the courthouse where he is currently on trial for allegedly falsifying business records for hush money paid to former porn star Stormy Daniels.

Biden’s decision to call for an early debate is not a total surprise, as Democrats have not been happy with the college-based format.

But the fact that he would launch the challenge on social media is surprising.

It signals the importance of social media in the upcoming election race, and also suggests that Trump’s positive polling numbers are causing concern in presidential circles.

If the president were firmly in the lead, he would be minimizing the attention paid to debates. Democrats are also anxious to keep third-party candidate Robert Kennedy Jr. out of the ring.

They obviously don’t think he can win, but in a tight race, the scion of the Kennedy clan could actually deliver the race to Trump.

The early debate on CNN won’t likely include Kennedy, although that decision has not been finalized. That is one big reason why Biden wants to go early.

A second reason is that, notwithstanding Trump’s judicial challenges, his poll numbers are actually increasing.

Biden is banking on the fact that Trump’s daily one-liners will be overshadowed by the substance required to sustain a full debate.

Whatever happens in the United States, a presidential debate involving Trump will have a spillover effect in Canada.

Trump has been travelling the country bragging about his appointments to the U.S. Supreme Court who have thrown out women’s right to control their own reproduction.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says he won’t touch the abortion issue, but his caucus is rife with those who plan to do just that. He has also promised to use the notwithstanding clause to overturn laws that he doesn’t like.

Trump is also saying that he does not support a national ban on abortion, but says the states should make the decision and, once they do, it should be respected.

Democrats would love to run the election on that issue, because they know that the vast majority of women—especially young women—do not want the clock to be turned back on abortion rights.

Liberals would love to have Canadian voters focused on the same issue.

Poilievre hopes to park the abortion question having promised not to reopen the issue. But more than half his caucus members are actively anti-choice.

Poilievre recently joined them in voting against the provision of free birth control medication as part of the rollout of a modified pharma care program.

The more Trump’s team campaigns against abortion rights, the more Canadians will wonder if that could happen here.

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 August 7, 2023.

OTTAWA—The more charges that former U.S. president Donald Trump faces, the more his path to power is paved.

Trump responded to multiple accusations on Aug. 3 in relation to his attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election of U.S. President Joe Biden.

The image of a former president in court does not seem to have any negative impact on his run for next year’s presidential election. His opponents are dropping off, one by one, as new legal challenges propel Trump to the head of the pack in the Republican nomination race.

Instead of finishing off the former president, allegations of conspiracy to defraud the government and obstruct an official proceeding have energized his campaign. They play into the Trump narrative that the “deep state” is out to get the former president, thus pumping up his support in the Republican Party.

His former vice-president, Mike Pence, said last week what most are thinking. According to the man who served as his running mate, the president was surrounded by “a group of crackpot lawyers who kept telling him what his itching ears wanted to hear.”

Pence also said that “anyone who puts himself over the Constitution should never be president of the United States.”

Trump’s reply was clear: “I feel badly for Mike Pence, who is attracting no crowds, enthusiasm, or loyalty from people who, as a member of the Trump administration, should be loving him.”

Trump does not feel badly. He was encouraging his followers to string up Pence when the vice-president refused to disallow the results of the Biden win. But the former president is known for saying one thing and thinking another.

Legal pleadings show that Pence and others advised Trump that there was no legal path to overturn the election results. Trump’s criminal charges are costing a fortune, but recent press reports say that his registered fundraising vehicle is covering the millions in legal bills.

While charges cost money, they are being paid by supporters, and those same supporters are rallying behind his 2024 bid for the White House.

It seems inconceivable to foreign observers that after all his legal troubles, Trump should still be so popular in his party.

But there is no denying that he is head and shoulders above any opponent in the race. His closest rival, Florida governor Ron DeSantis, is lurching from one problem to another. By banning books and limiting transgender rights, DeSantis has managed to alienate Floridians and drive business away from his state.

As support plummets, his campaign rhetoric seems to be increasing. At a New Hampshire event last week, DeSantis vowed he would start “slitting throats” on his first day in office as part of his battle against the “deep state.”

DeSantis may believe that he will attract supporters by reaching out to angry Americans who stormed their seat of government on Jan. 6, 2021, but Trump seems to have cornered the angry-voter market.

Such is his popularity that Republican nominee rival Nikki Haley, who served as an ambassador under Trump, has already promised to use her presidential powers to pardon him in the event of any conviction.

In Canada, Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s angry fight against government pales in comparison to the deep-state conspiracy theories that motivate Republican voters.

His continuing calls for freedom amid claims that Canada is broken mimic the Trump message about the dangers of the state south of the border. The challenge Poilievre faces may be that Canadians are less skeptical than Americans about the role of government in their lives.

Poilievre has already won his party’s support and his leadership is not under threat. He does not need to appeal to the narrow band of Canadians voters who share the “deep state” mistrust that permeates the American political landscape.

Poilievre needs to reach out more broadly. But unlike the two-party fight down south, he is in a multi-party race, so he does not need to convince the majority of voters to win a majority government. All he needs for victory is about 39 per cent of the electorate evenly distributed across the country.

Last week Prime Minister Justin Trudeau attacked Poilievre, saying “cuts and being angry” are his answers to everything. Poilievre fired back, saying that the prime minister should take responsibility for Canadians’ anger.

Both are banking on the fact that anger could also be a theme in our next federal election.

But chances are, the Canadian vexation quotient is nowhere near what we are witnessing in America.

Trudeau is certainly hoping so.

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

For the moment, Pierre Poilievre does not need to offer any solutions. But simply playing the role of the grumpy old man will not likely attract new supporters to his effort. A winner is always positive.

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

OTTAWA—Groundhog Day for Pierre Poilievre was not a happy one.

After several weeks in a news hole, Poilievre finally decided to come out of his hiding place and held a presser in Vancouver.

Of course, it would not be in Ottawa.

Any journalism student 101 knows that when leaders get off the Hill, questions are softer and more friendly than what they can expect with the national press gallery.

So, there weren’t too many tough questions about why Poilievre went into hiding immediately after securing his leadership in a romp.

But his message seemed strangely like the one which secured him the leadership.

The country is in a mess and only he can fix it.

“It feels like everything is broken in this country right now.”

Poilievre even blamed a “300 per cent increase in opioid use in Vancouver” on the prime minister.

When criticized for lack of media availability, Poilievre became combative. He accused a Radio-Canada journalist of getting his facts wrong when the reporter said Poilievre had not had a press conference in 60 days.

He decried the claim that he did not want to meet with the media and expressed interest in speaking to reporters across the country.

But he had no time for those on Parliament Hill whom he accused of trying to control the message.

It is obvious that Poilievre is not in love with the media. It is also obvious that he thinks by limiting access to reporters in Ottawa, he will be able to shape a more positive message across the country.

But the negative messaging at his first major presser was a bad start.

By assuming everything in Canada is broken, Poilievre will certainly secure the support of those Canadians who helped his rise to power.

He continues to defend the illegal Freedom Convoy and believes that under the current government, nothing in Canada is working very well.

In order to broaden his brand, Poilievre needs to reach out to people who still believe there is something good about the country.

Most Canadians are feeling the pain of inflation. But they also do not live in a vacuum and realize that the inflationary pressures they are experiencing are being felt around the world.

In last week’s American congressional and gubernatorial races, inflation was top of mind with almost all voters, according to exit polls in multiple states.

It even beat out the question of abortion where state referendums resoundingly reaffirmed the right for women to decide whether or not they carry a fetus to term.

But even with the pocketbook issue of inflation dogging almost every state race, the Republicans were not able to make the major gains that had been predicted.

Instead, U.S. President Joe Biden surprised everyone by beating all his predecessors on midterm numbers.

That tells me that voters do not always blame a global problem on a national leader.

The same could hold true for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau in the inflationary situation that the country is facing.

Poilievre is obviously banking on the fact that inflation will be seen as a national problem.

He was the first to raise the issue, even when it appeared to be a temporary problem, and he has even paraphrased Trudeau’s moniker to include Justinflation.

That turn of phrase seeks to link the prime minister and the government with the problem of inflation.

But if it is deemed to be worldwide, and the country’s job numbers continue to flourish, the Liberals may be able to dodge the bullet.

Poilievre doesn’t think so. But he also needs to be careful that his appeal to the negative side of the human spirit may not set him up for the job of prime minister.

Trudeau came into office in 2015 promising sunny ways. Some may rightfully argue that those sunny ways have not fully materialized. In the current economic uncertainty, it looks like the country could soon be raining recession.

Poilievre has decided to paint a grim picture, with the promise that his proposed government cuts will make things better.

However, as he gets closer to the actual election, he will have to clarify what he intends to cut.

With low-cost childcare and accessible dental plans, a cut to either of those programs might not help his electability.

For the moment, he does not need to offer any solutions. But simply playing the role of the grumpy old man will not likely attract new supporters to his effort.

A winner is always positive.

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

The federal decision not to strike a medal was a lost political opportunity. In every riding in the country, there are individuals and organizations who would appreciate receiving recognition by way of a royal honour.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on June 6, 2022.

OTTAWA—The Queen’s Platinum Jubilee should be a time of celebration.

After 70 years as monarch, Queen Elizabeth is much admired and beloved.

She has survived the 21st century with the same warts that mar most families. From Prince Charles’ divorce to the lascivious behaviour of Prince Andrew, her children are not the same role models that she has proved to be.

In-laws appear to be much more beloved by the public than the Royals themselves. And the more the descendants distance themselves from the family, the happier they seem to be.

The decision by Prince Harry and his partner Meghan Markle to detach themselves from monarchical duties is just one example of a changing dynasty.

Couple that with an insider allegation of racism, levelled by the first racialized spouse of a Royal, and you have trouble.

Meghan and Harry seem to have survived their relocation to the United States.

Just last week, media reports claimed that Markle was considering a run for public office in the United States, with a potential eye on future presidential ambitions.

ITV’S Good Morning Britain hosted U.S. President Joe Biden’s sister, Valerie, who predicted that Markle could run on the Democratic ticket as early as 2028.

While the future of some exiled Royals seems bright, the same cannot be said of the institution itself.

The jubilee has offered an opportunity to celebrate the Queen’s longevity, but it also highlights the debate about terminating Canada’s relationship with the Queen’s successor.

Based on media coverage, there has been more interest in getting rid of the institution than in embracing it.

Even Prince Charles’ successful Canadian trip did not get much attention.

At the end of the day, the majority of Canadians are not seized of the issue one way or another.

Even ministers don’t seem to have that much interest in rendezvousing with the Royal family, as evidenced by the paucity of public Canadian Platinum Jubilee activities.

The federal government did not even strike a medal for the seventieth regal anniversary.

Instead, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Nova Scotia have done it on their own. They are seeking permission to include their medals in the order of precedence to be worn along with other commemorative medals in the Canadian Honours System.

Not surprisingly, Quebec did not join those provinces who are striking a medal. But the absence of Ontario was surprising, given the evidence of United Empire Loyalist history throughout the province.

The federal decision not to strike a medal was a lost political opportunity. In every riding in the country, there are individuals and organizations who would appreciate receiving recognition by way of a royal honour.

The decision was likely a political one, with the government not wanting to draw too much attention to what can be a controversial subject. But it was a mistake not to strike a medal, if only to give Members of Parliament a chance to honour active volunteers in communities across the country.

Say what you like, very few people turn their noses down on a personal recognition.

For Members of Parliament, the medal award process is an opportunity to reach out to multiple constituents, with zero political risk.

It is one of the simplest ways of turning a former political enemy into a friend.

Those who dislike the Queen don’t need to be involved or invited, and those who support the monarchy will be forever grateful for the Canadian recognition.

Sometimes a Member of Parliament can actually build personal support by reaching out to Royal Canadian Legions and others in a medal ceremony.

In a sense, the missed medal opportunity is reflective of the country’s ambivalence toward the monarchy in general.

There are some avid supporters of the monarchy, but most Canadians do not feel strongly about the issue. The biggest question is what would happen if the monarchy were to become redundant.

In most instances, the governor general has become a respected representative of the Queen, in carrying out duties on behalf of the royals across the country.

Mary Simon, as Canada’s first Indigenous Governor General, is particularly impressive.

Even those who ruminate about abolition following the passing of Queen Elizabeth, have no idea what to replace her with.

Republicanism does not curry much favour with most Canadians.

Abolition poses more questions than answers, which is why a heated Australian vote rejected it.

It is much easier to support a 1,200-year-old monarchical system than to blow it up.

Canadians may not enjoy a platinum celebration this month. But the monarchy is here to stay.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Tory populists may disagree.

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

The world sees that Russia is engaged in war crimes. U.S. President Joe Biden continues to insist that at this point in time, the accusation cannot be made.

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

OTTAWA—American President Joe Biden is a political survivor. But that comes with its own challenges.

As a member of Congress, he was able to work both sides of the aisle and build bi-partisan legislation.

But in the world of war there are no bi-partisans. And that is the problem he is facing as European leaders push the envelope while Biden keeps trying to find compromise.

The world sees that Russia is engaged in war crimes. Biden continues to insist that at this point in time, the accusation cannot be made.

Perhaps the deadliest political moment was the American offer to Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to flee the Ukrainian capital. His retort will go down in history. “The fight is here; I need anti-tank ammo, not a ride.”

While British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is well-known for bombast, in this instance, bombast works.

A psychopathic bully like Vladimir Putin will only respond to force. The notion that soft words are a path to peace rings hollow.

While the Ukrainian people literally fight for their lives, the American president seems strangely detached.

He still has a chance to turn it around, but it better happen quickly. While Russian bombs are targeting childcare centres and hospitals, it is time for NATO to declare and enforce a no-fly zone over the Ukraine.

Of course, this will be viewed as an act of war by Putin, but he is banking on the fact that his opponents will be afraid to unleash his ire with a direct act inside Ukrainian borders.

But it will push him back and stem the bleeding that is currently happening inside the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

An opportunity to push Putin back will also allow time for international financial sanctions to bite deeper into his pocket and those of his friends and allies.

Only a week ago, the German government said no to offering more weapons and closing down SWIFT to Russian banks.

In a stunning reversal, the Germans are leading the charge in ways to frustrate Putin’s war.

That response was prompted by public horror at what was happening in the Ukraine. And as more pictures of maimed and murdered women and children emerge, the international horror will only mount.

So why doesn’t Biden lead the charge instead of appearing to play follow the European leader?

In the same way that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is a peacemaker by nature, Biden’s first instinct is to find a diplomatic way out.

Putin keeps saying that he is ready for a diplomatic solution, but actions speak louder than words.

In Canada, the war cabinet is looking very strong. With the Ukrainian roots of the deputy prime minister, it is obvious to all that Chrystia Freeland is personally invested in saving her family’s homeland.

As finance minister, she also has the tools to cut off the money supply to the murderers. Freeland has been working incessantly to bring her European partners onside for deeper and stronger financial sanctions.

Defence Minister Anita Anand has also risen to the occasion, appearing composed and knowledgeable on the military deployment and arms procurement process for the effort.

With Foreign Minister Mélanie Joly rounding out the triumvirate, it is the first time in Canadian history that three women have led an international war effort on behalf of our country. These women are also potential successors to the prime minister. Despite that internal competition, they all appear to be working well in tandem.

The huge Ukrainian diaspora in Canada is also politically important for the government.

Canada boasts the largest community of Ukrainians outside the Ukraine. Their high level of political involvement makes them very important to any party that hopes to form government.

In the Greater Toronto Area, Ukrainians can make the difference in several ridings in west Toronto, Mississauga, and Hamilton.

Likewise, Winnipeg and Edmonton have strong Ukrainian ties and the community is not only working to promote government action but many are returning to Ukraine to join the battle for the homeland.

The world of sport is also stepping up to the plate, with international federations cancelling events in Russia and tossing their teams from global competition.

The world is definitely ahead of the NATO politicians.

But that gives Biden the chance to follow his finely honed political instincts and build back some political support.

The more Putin is isolated, the easier it will be for NATO to provide real support to the Ukrainian people.

The no-fly zone is the only way to stop this insanity.

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