Navigator logo

Month: September 2023

Poilievre’s momentum is a result of strong leadership, not sinister ideology

Posted on by

If you asked those delegates in attendance, last weekend’s Conservative Party convention in Quebec City felt like a unifying — some would say crowning — moment for a party that has often struggled with unity.

Ask some other observers, and the event was a typical right-wing carnival defined by anti-woke vitriol and socially conservative undercurrents.

Much of the opposition and media chatter coming out of the convention has revolved around the resolutions the delegates passed, some touching on controversial matters such as trans issues, leading Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre’s critics to surmise that his “common sense” agenda is really a smokescreen for more sinister right-wing ideologies.

Yet Poilievre’s behaviour and comments at the convention, as well as his response to these motions, paint a different picture. When asked to comment, Poilievre replied he isn’t bound to implement any convention resolutions but merely take them under consideration.

And his rousing leader’s speech revealed far more about his priorities and what messages he thinks will win.

Tellingly, it didn’t mention woke, or trans — not even once.

And why would he? With the CPC enjoying its largest polling lead over the Liberals in a long time, this convention cemented the feeling that Poilievre has built a big tent movement by addressing the cost-of-living crisis middle- and working-class Canadians face everyday.

And if you wonder about the effectiveness of all of this, you need look no further than the reaction of the governing party. A wolf in sheep’s clothing, cried the Liberals. Poilievre’s “common sense” message is nothing more than a warmed-over version of Mike Harris’ “common sense revolution,” they warned.

Really? That’s all they’ve got? A reference to a government led by former premier Mike Harris? A successful, transformative two-term government from almost 30 years ago?

But while Poilievre and Harris differ greatly in many respects, coming out of last weekend I see many similarities, between Poilievre and Harris but not those voiced by the critics.

Just as Harris ousted a government that had grown out of touch with its electorate by promising to cut taxes, make sense of the welfare system and end unfair hiring quotas, so too is Poilievre leading a serious movement by taking a back-to-basics approach. Poilievre’s speech was all about improving lives for all Canadians including newcomers, lowering taxes, food prices, energy, and trade.

This leads to the second, somewhat subtle, similarity I see emerging: Poilievre’s acute sense of how far certain issues can be pushed and when best to push them.

Poilievre’s ability to acknowledge and respect the views of others, but not fully mire himself in the polarizing topics and intolerant debates of the so-called “culture war” is surely a result of his experience seeing other Conservative leaders knocked aside by such issues.

Poilievre is demonstrating an understanding that true leadership means sticking to what matters most to everyday Canadians.

As his speech demonstrated, he is clear-eyed about what that is. And it’s not the messy debates Liberals would love to drag him into. As the reaction and enthusiasm of Conservative members showed, despite the resolutions they overwhelmingly passed, they are just fine with the direction Poilievre is leading the party because for the first time in a long time, they have a real shot at both a majority government and the leader to deliver it.

Down the road, Poilievre will have to define more clearly what he truly believes to be “common sense” on the sticky topics and social issues clearly important to large parts of his base.

Still, for now, all he needs to do is reiterate that his economic plan centred on tackling the housing and affordability crisis towers over the tired policies of this tired government.

Funny, it seems that common sense may just equal electoral success after all.

All roads lead to this country’s dire need for affordable housing

Posted on by

It was as cold and brazen an act of violence as there is. To call it a heartbreaking and unspeakable tragedy is to descend into cliché and begin to normalize what happened.

The only appropriate response cannot be words but must be, for us as a city, to wake the hell up.

Early this summer, Karolina Huebner-Makurat, while walking in broad daylight, was murdered by a stray bullet from an exchange of gunfire after a fight between three men on Queen Street East near Carlaw Avenue.

This tragedy played out steps from the South Riverdale Community Health Centre. An employee of the centre was subsequently charged in connection with the shooting.

For many residents of this city, this tragedy was a clear sign that something was fundamentally wrong. And they are right. For people across Canada who live in close proximity to these sites, this event was part of an alarming pattern putting their children in harm’s way and their safety at risk, a pattern they’ve been sounding the alarm for years about to absolutely no avail.

Enough. It’s time for us to listen.

To be clear, supervised consumption sites save lives. They are integral to reducing the spread of infectious diseases. They provide users a safe space. They lower rates of death due to overdoses. And in a caring and compassionate society such as ours, they provide a crucial link to those among us that are not only neglected but forgotten.

But none of this means we can’t have a reasonable debate about how these sites operate, what fail-safes must be in place and, most importantly, where they belong.

When the fentanyl crisis first emerged in Canada, I wrote that stigma kills. I underlined that the absence of public sympathy for, and negative judgement of, fentanyl users bore a haunting resemblance to the atmosphere of fear, paranoia and callous neglect that characterized the early years of the HIV/AIDS epidemic. An atmosphere that carries deadly consequences.

Today, that stigma persists. And it undoubtedly applies to all those caught in the grip of a wider drug epidemic that has swept across our country.

But stigma cuts many different ways. Yes, we’ve seen dangerous beliefs that stigmatize drug users. But so too have we seen concerning attempts to stigmatize and stifle rational debate.

In this conversation, we must acknowledge that absolutely legitimate concerns raised by parents about needles strewn across sidewalks and open drug use near where their children play have been dismissed as mere expressions of privilege and blanketed by accusations of prejudice. Not only is this simply wrong, it is profoundly unhelpful in forming durable solutions to these problems that keep people safe.

The strongest proponents of supervised consumption sites love to emphasize that truly “community-centric” approaches are required to address this issue. I agree. But there can be no such thing if the voices of some community members are summarily dismissed.

And here is where the debate needs to go. At their best, these sites serve as points of referral to other aspects of the health-care system — a new front door — that help put users on the road to recovery. As Dr. Ahmed Bayoumi, a physician at St. Michael’s Hospital in Toronto, recently pointed out, they connect people with social and health services, along with stable employment and housing.

Ah, there it is again: housing. Almost unanimously, experts tell us drug users can’t recover without a stable roof over their heads.

So yes: all roads lead to Rome, and in this case, to this country’s dire need for affordable housing. A need our governments aren’t even coming close to meeting. Anyone who denies this is wilfully ignorant about the wide-scale, complex, nature of this problem. And, when it comes to trying to help and protect those living with drug addiction across this country, anything less than concrete action to address this need can only be described in one way: running in circles.