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.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

But that swing also alienates the majority of mainstream voters.

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

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

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

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

Poilievre is definitely ahead.

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

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

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

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.

Doug Ford is banking on the fact that as the threat wanes, so will the political power of the vaccine question and he wants anti-vaxxers on his side in next June’s provincial election.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on November 8, 2021.

OTTAWA—Erin O’Toole has friends in high places.

And now, Ontario and Quebec provincial governments have taken a page from the O’Toole playbook. They claim to support the need to vaccinate all Ontarians, but have exempted those who work in health-care settings from mandatory vaccinations.

Notwithstanding the sage advice of his former leader that all Conservative MPs should be vaccinated, O’Toole won’t even tell us how many members of his caucus refuse to follow his vaccination advice.

If he can’t convince caucus members to get the jab, how can he convince the country?

Apparently, Quebec and Ontario leaders believe that an individual anti-vaccination right is more important than keeping hospital and extended care patients safe.

Ontario Liberal Leader Steven Del Duca accused Ontario Premier Doug Ford of putting anti-vaxers ahead of cancer patients. He was right.

How else to explain the spineless decisions to exempt health-care workers from vaccinations in work settings where they are supposed to be taking care of the most vulnerable people?

Quebec even had a date for implementation of the mandatory rule, extended it, and then cancelled it.

The Ontario premier defended his decision by saying that he was “not prepared to jeopardize the delivery of care to millions of Ontarians.”

Ford even went so far as to claim that once British Columbia required a mandatory vaccine, some surgeries were cancelled because of a shortage of workers. He didn’t mention how many have already been cancelled because of COVID outbreaks.

The premier also claimed tens of thousands of health-care workers could potentially leave if the province mandated vaccines.

In Quebec’s case, the government has approved a two-tier workforce, with all new entrants into the health-care field facing mandatory vaccines while current employees are exempt. Exempt employees are required to be tested thrice weekly, and according to the Quebec Health ministry, some 5,000 of unvaccinated workers are in direct ongoing contact with patients.

So, in both Ontario and Quebec, the politicians have ignored advice from public health officials to promote mandatory vaccinations in settings dealing with vulnerable, hospitalized people.

These political decisions had zero support in the scientific community. The Ontario Science Advisory Table argued that mandatory vaccinations would increase safety and reduce the risk of staffing disruptions.

The Ontario Medical Association also called on the government to mandate vaccinations in the health-care field. The physicians’ call for mandatory vaccinations was joined by the voice of the Registered Nurses Association of Ontario, which said the vast majority of health-care workers want a mandated vaccine to protect themselves and their patients.

Last week’s dual decisions on vaccinations will ultimately put more patients at risk.

One-hundred and twenty of Ontario’s 141 hospitals signed an Ontario Hospital Association letter calling on the government to mandate vaccines.

The vast majority of medical advice provided to both premiers claimed that the risk from unvaccinated workers far outweighs that of anti-vaxxer labour shortages.

Most patients have already been hit with cancelled surgeries and delayed tests. My requisitioned cancer test was delayed for one year because of the health-care stresses brought on by COVID. When the premier says he is worried about cancellations, why doesn’t he use all the tools at his disposal to prevent another wave of COVID hitting the province.

Listening to the health experts would be a good place to start. It was positively embarrassing to watch his health minister struggle to explain the reasons behind this crazy decision when the premier himself simply provided Ontarians with a written statement.

The look on Christine Elliott’s face made it clear that this was a plan coming from the premier’s office.

At the end of the day, the vast majority of Ontarians are in favour of mandatory vaccinations. But Ford probably believes that the squeaky wheel that got his grease will be more motivated to political action on the matter.

Ford, like Erin O’Toole, is also leading a right-wing party that considers mandatory vaccines a violation of individual freedoms.

O’Toole won’t even convince his own caucus members to get the jab, so he can hardly be expected to force health-care workers to do likewise.

In the end, O’Toole’s refusal to promote vaccine mandates was a major factor in the national Liberal victory.

Ford is banking on the fact that as the threat wanes, so will the political power of the vaccine question.

The premier wants anti-vaxxers on his side in next June’s provincial election.

Ford may be dead wrong, with the emphasis on dead.

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