Conservative Party

Tuesday April 22, 2025

As Canadian political parties promise tax cuts without detailing spending cuts, voters face uncertainty about potential austerity measures post-election.

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Tuesday April 22, 2025

Austerity on the Horizon

The absence of costed platforms from major Canadian political parties leaves voters without crucial fiscal insights, posing risks to informed decision-making.

April 18, 2025

As Canada approaches its 45th general election, a familiar narrative unfolds: political parties promising tax cuts while remaining vague about the inevitable spending cuts required to balance the books. With platforms that hint at financial prudence but fail to provide detailed roadmaps, both the Liberal and Conservative parties leave voters facing an uncertain fiscal future.

Historically, election platforms have served as a blueprint for governance, offering voters insight into a party’s priorities and fiscal strategies. However, recent campaigns have witnessed a shift towards platforms filled with undefined savings and broad commitments rather than specific financial plans. The Conservatives, for example, have been open about reducing foreign aid and defunding the CBC as part of their cost-cutting measures. Yet, these areas alone cannot compensate for the extensive tax cuts promised, leaving a substantial gap that must be filled by other, undisclosed means.

News: Poilievre pledges platform ‘soon’ after Liberals, NDP release costed campaign plans

Mark Carney leverages his dual role as Liberal leader and Prime Minister to address economic challenges and political dynamics, including a significant gender gap, in Canada's federal election.

April 12, 2025

Similarly, the Liberals tout fiscal prudence, suggesting efficiency improvements in government spending. However, the absence of specifics raises questions about which programs or services might face the axe. Both parties are accused of strategic obfuscation, delaying the release of fully costed platforms to minimize scrutiny and maximize voter support during early voting periods.

With Canada’s economy already grappling with significant debt and high deficits, the promise of tax cuts seems at odds with fiscal sustainability. The looming threat of trade tariffs from the Trump administration adds another layer of complexity, demanding financial commitments to bolster the economy against external shocks. In this context, austerity measures—whether acknowledged or not—appear inevitable.

April 9, 2012

Austerity often translates into spending cuts in essential services like healthcare, education, and infrastructure. While these are rarely highlighted in campaign rhetoric, history shows that governments frequently turn to these areas when seeking to balance budgets. The lack of transparency in detailing these potential cuts leaves voters in the dark, reminiscent of past political strategies where campaign promises diverged significantly from post-election actions.

The current election cycle’s lack of detailed financial planning risks voter disillusionment. As seen in the UK, where the Labour Party’s campaign promises did not align with subsequent austerity measures, Canadian voters may find themselves facing unexpected fiscal policies once the dust of the election settles. This disconnect underscores the need for greater transparency and accountability in political platforms.

Pierre Poilievre faces challenges adapting his strategy against the fresh leadership of Mark Carney, as Canada's political dynamics shift from opposition to unity.

March 15, 2025

It is essential for parties to provide clear, realistic financial plans that outline how tax cuts will be funded and what spending adjustments are anticipated. Without such transparency, platforms become mere wish lists rather than actionable blueprints for governance.

As Canadians head to the polls, they do so with a sense of uncertainty about the fiscal path ahead. Whether led by the Liberals or the Conservatives, the next government will likely face the challenge of implementing austerity measures to reconcile campaign promises with economic realities. Voters deserve more than vague assurances; they need concrete plans that address both the opportunities and sacrifices required to achieve fiscal stability. Only then can they make informed decisions about the future direction of their country.

Austerity is Coming La La La, not listening!

In the current political climate, spending cuts are often whispered in hushed tones, especially when addressing crowds outside partisan strongholds. Politicians tend to focus on tax cuts, painting them as the ultimate relief for voters. However, those in partisan circles, like Pierre Poilievre, openly discuss defunding initiatives that irk their base, such as the CBC and foreign aid. The Liberals, on the other hand, remain vague about their intentions, hiding behind terms like “Spending Reviews” and “Program Adjustments” without revealing what might face the chopping block.

The truth is, Canadians should brace themselves for significant cuts in the near future, a reality that’s becoming increasingly apparent on the global stage. In the United States, Trump, through Elon Musk, is aggressively slashing spending across federal departments. Meanwhile, in the UK, even the left-leaning Labour Party under Keir Starmer is undertaking deep cuts, surpassing anything the Conservatives dared to implement during their long tenure.

Austerity is looming over Canada, and now is the time to demand transparency from our leaders. While Conservatives are relatively candid about the fiscal austerity they plan to introduce, the Liberals are more elusive. Yet, if the polls are accurate and they secure another term, the mystery will quickly unravel.

It’s crucial for Canadians to seek clarity and accountability from their political leaders. Austerity is on the horizon, and understanding its implications is vital to navigate the challenges ahead.

– The Graeme Gallery

Read on Substack

Wednesday March 19, 2025

Wednesday March 19, 2025

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Wednesday March 19, 2025

Pierre Poilievre’s Plan to Undo Carbon Pricing: A Step Backward for Canada’s Climate Commitment

The escalating impacts of climate change, symbolized by metaphorical "Four Horsemen" including extreme heat gripping continents from North America to Asia, underscore the urgent need for global action to mitigate rising temperatures and their profound consequences on human health, infrastructure, and ecosystems.

June 20, 2024

As the climate crisis intensifies, countries around the world are working hard to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and meet international targets. Many progressive industrial nations have adopted carbon pricing as a crucial part of their strategy to combat climate change. However, Pierre Poilievre’s plan to eliminate carbon pricing in Canada risks reversing the progress we’ve made and could harm our reputation on the global stage.

Carbon pricing is an important tool that encourages businesses to cut emissions by making it cost-effective to invest in cleaner technologies. By putting a price on carbon emissions, we motivate companies to adopt greener practices, ultimately benefiting both the environment and the economy. Poilievre’s opposition to this approach shows a reluctance to embrace the necessary steps for a sustainable future for Canadians.

News: Net zero by 2050 ‘impossible’ for UK, says Badenoch

July 21, 2022

A worrying trend among conservative leaders is emerging globally, as highlighted by Kemi Badenoch’s recent comments in the UK. Badenoch, leader of the Conservative Party, stated that achieving the UK’s net zero target by 2050 is “impossible” without harming living standards or bankrupting the country. This marks a significant departure from the previous political agreement on the importance of addressing climate change. By aligning with such views, Poilievre risks placing Canada among those countries that are stepping back from their environmental responsibilities.

It’s also worth noting that Canadian conservatives once had a more forward-thinking approach. Under Erin O’Toole’s leadership, the Conservative Party supported carbon pricing as part of a broader climate strategy. O’Toole recognized the need for a carbon pricing system to drive innovation and reduce emissions. However, with Poilievre now leading the party, it has shifted back to outright opposition to carbon pricing, which is a significant step backwards.

August 13, 2021

If Canada rolls back carbon pricing, we could find ourselves among the nations failing to meet their climate commitments. This move would significantly hinder our ability to achieve the net-zero emissions target by 2050, which is essential for tackling climate change. Without a solid pricing mechanism, businesses may lack the motivation to innovate or shift to lower-carbon options.

Moreover, eliminating carbon pricing would damage public trust in Canada’s commitment to international agreements like the Paris Accord. As other countries advance their climate policies, Canada risks being seen as disengaged from the global effort to address climate change. This perception could hurt our international relationships and competitiveness in a world that increasingly values sustainability.

The revenue generated from carbon pricing is also crucial for funding green projects, public transportation, and renewable energy initiatives. Poilievre’s plan to scrap this revenue would rob Canada of essential funding needed to transition to a low-carbon economy, jeopardizing job creation in the green sector.

News: Poilievre says he would repeal federal carbon pricing for industrial emissions

June 2, 2017

In contrast to Poilievre’s vision, maintaining and strengthening carbon pricing would show leadership in climate action. It would send a clear message that Canada is serious about its environmental responsibilities and is committed to a sustainable future.

Pierre Poilievre’s plan to undo carbon pricing is a step backward that could undermine our climate commitments and hinder our ability to meet global targets. It aligns with a troubling trend among conservative leaders who prioritize economic concerns over environmental protection, as seen in the UK with Badenoch’s remarks. It also represents a retreat from the more progressive stance taken by former Conservative leader Erin O’Toole, who understood the importance of carbon pricing. Canada must remain a leader in the fight against climate change, embracing policies that promote innovation and accountability. The time has come to stand firm in our commitment to a sustainable future and reject proposals that seek to undermine our progress. The future of our planet depends on it.

Make Canada a Climate Laggard Again

If there’s one thing we can say about Justin Trudeau’s legacy, it’s that he put a price on carbon—something that had been debated and denied for years, especially under Stephen Harper’s government. Choosing not to commit to carbon pricing put Canada on the global map of climate laggards, alongside countries that talk a big game about caring for the planet but never actually take meaningful action. It was a pretty embarrassing time for us, especially when we were aligning ourselves with the “drill baby drill” mentality of climate deniers in the U.S.

Now, it feels like we’re sliding back into that old mindset with our own Conservative Party. Just when Canada is trying to set itself apart from the U.S. and connect with progressive partners who genuinely care about climate action, Pierre Poilievre pushed hard to axe the consumer carbon tax, got what he wanted just last week when the new PM Mark Carney did that very thing. Now, Poilievre is calling for the elimination of the industrial carbon tax as well. It’s got people questioning: if there’s no price on carbon, what real action does the Conservative Party plan to take on climate change? This stance could very well make them unelectable come 2025.

– The Graeme Gallery

Read on Substack

 

Friday June 14, 2024

Pierre Poilievre’s refusal to access a classified national security report on foreign interference demonstrates a concerning lack of leadership and responsibility.

By Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Friday June 14, 2024

*Animated making-of-clip, with hi-fi sound here.

Pierre Poilievre’s Wilful Ignorance is a Betrayal of Leadership

Canadians have the right to know the identities of the MPs allegedly collaborating with foreign governments to ensure accountability and protect the integrity of our democracy.

June 7, 2024

Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, has refused to access a classified national security and intelligence report on foreign interference, making him the sole federal leader to do so. This decision is not just baffling; it is a dereliction of duty. Leadership is about confronting uncomfortable truths and making informed decisions for the nation’s welfare. Poilievre’s choice to remain in the dark is a display of wilful ignorance that raises serious concerns about his suitability to lead the country.

Perhaps Poilievre is scared of finding out? If members of his party are involved in foreign interference, he would be expected to act decisively. By avoiding the briefing, Poilievre can continue his blissful ignorance and place all the blame on the Liberals. Indeed, the Liberals have much to answer for, having been slow to address foreign interference, but this does not absolve Poilievre from his responsibilities. As the Official Loyal Opposition, it is his job to scrutinize and act upon such crucial matters. His refusal to do so is a failure in his role, raising questions about whether he would similarly decline to see national security reports if he became Prime Minister.

Analysis: A ‘cloud of suspicion’ hangs over Parliament — and no one knows what to do about it

May 5, 2023

Poilievre’s actions demonstrate an unwillingness to genuinely understand the issues at hand. The Conservatives have multiple members on the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) that reviewed the intelligence and wrote the report. If his party is implicated, it is up to him to confront this head-on and take necessary actions. Instead, he chooses to criticize the Liberals without taking proactive steps to address potential threats within his own ranks.

Running for Prime Minister of Canada means dealing with classified information. Access to such reports has not prevented other leaders from advocating for truth and accountability. Canada’s allies in the Five Eyes intelligence alliance routinely manage to balance secrecy with public accountability. Poilievre should follow their example, showing that he can handle sensitive information responsibly while still taking decisive action.

March 17, 2023

For the sake of our country, this is an opportunity for Poilievre to lead where Trudeau has failed. Poilievre could go on camera and declare, “If anyone in the party is helping a foreign power, it will be dealt with decisively. I will not allow it on my watch.” This would demonstrate real leadership and reassure Canadians that he prioritizes national security over partisan politics. Yet, his refusal to engage with the classified report suggests he prefers plausible deniability, especially considering the report includes information on two Conservative leadership races, one of which he won. This behaviour suggests he fears what he might find.

Poilievre’s actions reveal a preference for obfuscation and partisan attacks rather than responsible governance. This is a matter of national security with hints of possible treason. As a citizen and taxpayer, I want to know who is responsible, regardless of their party affiliation. Poilievre should want to know that too if he genuinely aspires to lead the country.

Video: Poilievre ‘deeply irresponsible’ for not reading foreign interference report: NDP leader  

The chummy relationship between Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre and extremists at an anti-carbon tax protest raises serious concerns about his judgment and the implications of normalizing extremist affiliations in Canadian politics.

April 26, 2024

It is stunning that a leader of the opposition, and a likely next governing party leader, would refuse to view highly sensitive documents crucial to national security. By doing so, Poilievre fails to show the leadership required during times of geopolitical upheaval. Elizabeth May, despite leading a party with only two seats, has shown more seriousness and responsibility on this issue than Poilievre.

While he slams Trudeau for being soft on foreign interference, he refuses to take the opportunity to show what responsible leadership looks like. This was his moment to rise above partisan politics and he chose to stay in the shadows. Canadians deserve leaders who are willing to face the truth and act decisively for the good of the country. Poilievre’s refusal to engage with the classified report is not just disappointing; it is a dangerous abdication of responsibility. In times of national security threats, Canadians need leaders who will confront the issues head-on, not hide from them. Poilievre’s wilful ignorance is a betrayal of the leadership he aspires to. (AI)

Thursday March 24, 2022

March 24, 2022

Editorial Cartoon by Graeme MacKay, The Hamilton Spectator – Thursday March 24, 2022

Patrick Brown and Jean Charest have a deal that could make one of them the next Conservative leader

November 28, 2017

Brampton Mayor Patrick Brown — who is expected to announce his bid Sunday — and former Quebec premier Jean Charest — who launches his candidacy Thursday — have forged a pact, sources familiar with the strategy tell the Star. Opinion by althiaraj

Brampton’s mayor and the former Quebec premier have forged a pact in the federal Conservative leadership race, sources say.

Brown and Charest — who launches his candidacy Thursday — have forged a pact, sources familiar with the strategy tell the Star. Could it lead the party to elect a more moderate leader?The men have been friends for more than 25 years. Brown credits his involvement with the Conservatives to Charest, whom he met as a teenager while visiting his aunt, Charest’s next-door neighbour in North Hatley, Que.

The two have spoken at length about the leadership race. I’m told to expect neither will say a bad word about the other — a non-aggression pact, if you will — and that they will “publicly” help one another.Their goals are similarly aligned: a united but more inclusive party that represents the country. Each anticipates the other’s supporters will mark him as their second choice on the party’s ranked ballots, and they may make that expectation clear when members start receiving their ballots this summer.

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)