Conservative Party

Thursday June 10, 2021

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday June 10, 2021

What happened in London should be a pivot point for Canada — and its politicians

In a speech in 2015, while reflecting on Canada’s treatment of minorities, Justin Trudeau said that the inclusive idea of liberty that typifies the best of Canada “requires Canadian political leadership to be sustained.”

Six years later, the killing of four members of a Muslim family in London, Ontario is a moment of reckoning for Canadians — but also for this country’s political leaders.

If it’s necessary for Canadians to reflect on themselves and their country, it’s equally necessary for politicians to consider what they could have done better in the past and what more they could do in the future.

In 2017, there was Motion 103. Tabled by Liberal MP Iqra Khalid, it asked the House of Commons to condemn Islamophobia and endorse a study of how the federal government could better combat racism and discrimination. It did not pass quietly or easily. Eighty-six Conservative MPs — including current party leader Erin O’Toole — voted against it.

August 25, 2020

O’Toole’s first response to the attack in London this week described it as an “Islamophobic act of terror.” He used the word “Islamophobia” in his remarks to the House of Commons the next day.

Maybe that counts as some small measure of progress, too. But even if O’Toole appeared to turn a page this week, should politicians ever be allowed to move on so quietly?

Does he regret his vote on M-103? How does he feel now about what the previous Conservative government — which he served as a cabinet minister — said and did in regards to the niqab? What about that same government’s talk of “barbaric cultural practices?”

February 16, 2017

In the 2015 election — during which Stephen Harper suggested he would consider extending a ban on the niqab to the public service — was hardly the last word on anti-Muslim prejudice in Canada.

Trudeau put himself ahead of other leaders on the issue of the niqab when he delivered that speech in 2015. Unfortunately, it was possible then to think he had taken a political risk in so loudly criticizing the Harper government’s ban. New Democrats ended up blaming their losses in that year’s election in part on the fact that Tom Mulcair eventually was compelled to condemn the policy.

October 3, 2019

If Trudeau is ahead of his federal counterparts now on the matter of Quebec’s Bill 21, which would ban public servants in the province from wearing religious headwear or symbols, he’s not ahead by much.

O’Toole deferred to Quebec when he was asked about the so-called “secularism” law last September — another thing he might be asked about now. NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has criticized the bill but has stopped short of saying an government led by him would intervene.

Trudeau has criticized the bill but is still alone among federal leaders in saying that the federal government might someday need to participate in a legal challenge against it.

That wasn’t much — but then Trudeau seemed to move backwards this week. Asked by a reporter whether he thought Bill 21 “fosters hatred and … discrimination,” the prime minister responded, “No.” (Continued: CTV) 

 

Friday February 14, 2020

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday February 14, 2020

The Conservative Party’s moderate-centres have disappeared

Alone among the senior party elephants who in the past few days have fled the high veldt of the federal Conservative leadership campaign, former Quebec premier Jean Charest left behind disquieting words as he took the exit road. The party, he observed, has changed a lot since he was last active in it in 1998.

March 24, 2018

You wonder why Conservative strategists and the media have not made more of what he said.

They’ve stated that the party is confused; it has lost its identity, needs to find itself—when, for the most part, the party knows exactly where it is and how it got there. It’s the strategists and media who are living in something that looks a lot like a state of denial.

They’re engaging in a surreal debate about what the party needs to do to fix itself and grow its political message—make symbolic or mild policy nods toward the political centre, have its leaders walk in a pride parade, declare it won’t be re-opening the abortion debate, do something to hobble the party’s “extremist wing.”

Yet the Conservative moderate-centre has all but disappeared. Largely, the so-called Red Tories have left the party and gone elsewhere. There is no “extremist wing”—that’s imaginary. Fundamental changes have shaped the base of the party that reflect differences in outlook, preferences and values from the great majority of Canadians and have little to do with what someone thinks about gay pride parades. As in the U.K. and the U.S., authoritarian or ordered populism has polarized Canada into two incommensurable camps.

Animated!

The Conservative Party that most Canadians have known—the political centre that previously had the ability to find centre terrain on the most divisive issues of the day—has disappeared. What contemporary Conservative strategists and the media seem to have significant difficulty recognizing is that Canadian politics has become much more like American politics—it’s become tribal. And just as two Americas have taken root and blossomed, two Canadas are appearing on this side of the border.

EKOS Research found that four years ago, there was a 10-percentage-point gap between Liberals and Conservatives who selected climate change as the top issue of political concern. That gap is now 46 percentage points.

More than 90 per cent of Canadians who identify with the political centre-left, which is 65 per cent of adult citizens, think that Canada now has a climate emergency (they don’t believe that it’s coming, but that it’s here now.) For people who identify as Conservative or People’s Party supporters, the figure is less than 30 per cent. Four years ago, there was a 20-percentage-point gap between Liberals and Conservatives on trust in science. That exploded to a 40 per cent gap following the last election.

Since 2012, the incidence of Conservative voters who think Canada is admitting “too many” visible minorities as immigrants has swollen from 47 per cent to 70 per cent . Meanwhile, the corresponding incidence of Liberals agreeing there are too many has dropped from 35 to 15 per cent. A modest 12 per cent gap has also expanded to a massive 55 per cent gap. (MacLean’s) 

 

Friday September 1, 2017

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday September 1, 2017

Andrew Scheer unveils full shadow cabinet leaving Kellie Leitch off front bench

May 30, 2017

Conservative Party Leader Andrew Scheer unveiled his full shadow cabinet Wednesday notably leaving fellow leadership candidate Kellie Leitch off his party’s front bench while promoting others to key critic posts in the House of Commons.  

May 19, 2017

Pierre Poilievre, an MP from the Ottawa area, was given the Finance critic role ahead of Quebec MP Maxime Bernier, who finished second in the Conservative race. Bernier, who announced publicly months ago that he wanted the finance role, has been given a senior critic role on the Innovation, Science and Economic Development file as CBC reported Tuesday. 

Leitch’s leadership campaign, which saw her finish sixth in the race, drew criticism and accusations of intolerance for vowing to strengthen the vetting process for new immigrants. The former cabinet minister also pledged to screen all new immigrants for “Canadian values,” drawing widespread criticism, including from some of her fellow leadership candidates.

February 7, 2017

Brad Trost, the Saskatchewan MP who finished fourth in the leadership campaign, was also left off the shadow cabinet list. Trost did not serve as a minister under prime minister Stephen Harper and campaigned on social conservative values that opposed the “gay lifestyle” and abortion.

Another leadership candidate, Deepak Obhrai, was also left out of Scheer’s shadow cabinet. Obhrai served as the parliamentary secretary to the minister of foreign affairs in the Harper government. (Source: CBC News) 

 

SaveSaveSaveSave

SaveSave

Thursday, January 30, 2014

Thursday, January 30, 2014Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday, January 30, 2014

Justin Trudeau removes senators from Liberal caucus

Justin Trudeau has expelled from his caucus every single Liberal member of the upper house and has declared there is no longer any such thing as a Liberal Senator.

The Liberal leader said the former members of the Liberal Senate caucus will sit as Independents, and they will have no formal ties to the Liberal parliamentary machinery apart from through their friendships.

Trudeau’s decision will see some lifelong Liberals and key party operators and fundraisers removed from the party’s caucus and forced outside its inner circles – a foundation-shaking decision in a business where power is derived from membership in a political club and the ability to access its best back rooms.

“The only way to be a part of the Liberal caucus is to be put there by the people of Canada,” Trudeau said.

The move stunned both Liberal senators and senior Liberal Senate staffers, who had not been formally advised of the decision. It also blindsided veteran insiders and political observers who had no inkling about the change.

 

[slideshow_deploy id=’1982’]

 

Trudeau’s surprise move came as all parties held their caucus meetings in Ottawa.

Those meetings typically include both MPs and senators.

But sources told CBC News that Liberal MPs and senators were separated and sent to meet in different rooms.

Trudeau advised senators of his decision just after 9 a.m.

Sources said the senators listened and did not ask many questions.

“The Senate is broken and needs to be fixed,” Trudeau told them.

At a news conference just a few minutes later, Trudeau explained why he had made the decision. (Source: CBC News)

Tuesday August 20, 2013

Tuesday August 20, 2013By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday August 20, 2013

National health care strategy needed for ‘silver tsunami’

Most Canadians think this country needs a national strategy for seniors health care, believing such a plan would help keep seniors in their homes as long as possible, according to a new poll released by the Canadian Medical Association.

The Ipsos Reid poll was released along with the association’s annual report card on health issues. It found that nine out of 10 Canadians feel that the entire health care system could be improved by keeping seniors at home as long as possible, to help lighten the load on hospitals and nursing homes.

It also revealed that only 37 per cent of Canadians have confidence in the ability of the current system to care for our aging population. As well, three-quarters of respondents said they were concerned for themselves about whether they would have access to high-quality health care in their retirement years.

Almost 80 per cent said they were concerned about having access to an acute care system, such as good quality hospital care, while almost an equal number worried about finding home care and long-term care.

Jane Meadus, a lawyer with the Advocacy Centre for the Elderly, says she’s not surprised the poll revealed so few Canadians feel confident about how they will be cared for in their senior years. “It shows there’s an anxiety about what’s happening now and what’s going to happen in the future about the availability and quality of the health care that we’re expecting for our seniors,” she told CTV’s Canada AM Monday.

Meadus says there are a lot of vulnerabilities in the current health care system when it comes to seniors, including a shortage of long-term care beds in most provinces and an insufficient system of home care. (Source: CTV News)