Category: Chairman’s Desk

A deeply revealing moment occurred just minutes after Doug Ford was declared the next premier of Ontario, having led the PC party to a large majority government after years in the political wilderness.

Traditionally, the political party leaders speak in order of their placement. With Kathleen Wynne and the Liberals placing a distant third, it was expected that Wynne would speak first, followed by new opposition leader Andrea Horwath, before premier-designate Ford took his turn on stage.

But the outgoing premier’s speech was delayed for so long that networks threatened to cut coverage at 11, potentially depriving the new premier of a critical opportunity to address the province.

So, Ford‘s team made the decision not to wait. And as it happened, the new premier spoke at the exact moment the former one did. The result? Networks cut to Premier-designate Ford.

What was truly revealing about the moment was not the actions of Ford‘s team, but of the reaction from the media after it happened.

Ford was castigated for stepping on Wynne‘s moment; for stealing her last public statement. Instead of addressing in any meaningful way the substance of Ford‘s comments themselves, media quizzed pundits about the decision to speak at that time. Had Ford done it on purpose? Was this yet another graceless act from a man the media had long-ago deemed déclassé?

The problem is, voters don’t care.

There are a few reasons for that. Many would understand that the chaos of election night makes for an imperfect evening. Others think of it as inside baseball, with no effect on their lives. And still others are so done with the Liberals that the slight was not a slight at all.

It was hardly the first situation when the media got a Ford story fundamentally wrong.

There exists a divide in the Ontario of today.

On one side, an elite class built of media types, professionals and businesspeople, and academics who control many of the levers of communication. This class exists largely in urban centres, such as Ottawa and Toronto, and agrees on a governing ideology that is fundamentally liberal in character.

But the rest of Ontario looks dramatically different.

It is a group that is far more blue-collar than the elite class imagines. Their appetite for liberal politics is spotty and their tolerance of political correctness barely exists.

And those Ontarians simply do not see themselves reflected in the media landscape.

They did, however, see themselves reflected in Ford and the PC party.

This campaign was particularly revealing in just how wide that schism runs. There was no shortage of articles written puzzling over the dislike of Wynne, with speculation that it was based in homophobia or misogyny.

The media was also not hesitant to let its disdain for Ford seep into its coverage. Reports on Ford emphasized his perceived boorishness or his lack of knowledge of policy, rather than the connection he was building with Ontarians.

And that pattern looks set to continue.

The election night coverage was not exactly an acknowledgement of a significant and decisive change in direction. Instead, it portrayed a province that was hurtling into a terrifying unknown.

It is a tenor of coverage that will no doubt continue once the PC government has been established.

We have seen in the past a disconnect between what media have deemed the important issues and with what voters have decided are the actual issues.

This will be a government where the media and the elite fixate on issues they believe demonstrate Ford‘s unfitness for office.

But much like with his brother, it will do little but cement a base for his supporters.

Ontario elected the PC Party to fundamentally change the way the province is run. And every time an outcry goes up about an issue that average Ontarians deem unimportant, it will highlight to them that the government is doing the exact job it was sent to do.

There have always been two Ontarios. But Thursday’s election saw the side without a megaphone take the reins of power – and it will only deepen its resolve to change the way the province is run.

Here we go again. Yet another article penned on the generation that’s most fascinated with itself: millennials.

A source of endless interest for a media transfixed by this new generation that has vastly different interests and expectations than the generations before them.

Some, no, many, would argue that more ink has been spilled on the interests of this group than is reasonable. Think piece after think piece has been churned out by magazines. Hour after hour of electronic media time has been devoted to their interest in artisanal coffee and their constant need for validation.

But what’s unavoidable is that the generation has, in many ways, been responsible for reshaping the world we live in: forcing more flexible work hours, shifting our definitions of a family units and dooming golf courses and fast-food restaurants, just to name a few.

Pundits have predicted for years that politics would be reshaped by millennials in much the same manner.

Polling tells us millennials tend to be far more progressive than older generations and, accordingly, their political preferences lie overwhelmingly with the Liberals and New Democrats.

The thinking has been that these millennials will create a strong leftward shift in Canada’s political system as they engage with it.

But so far, political parties have only been able to rely on one thing: millennials are unreliable.

While these millennials are informed, research shows that they are far more likely to engage and get involved with issue-based organizations or advocacy rather than participate in their parents’ formal political processes.

Fickle supporters who are have shown themselves to be unlikely to turn out to the polls even once their minds are made up, millennials are an unstable bloc of voters. In fact, their participation has been middling in nearly every election so far.

It almost seems trite to say, but political parties are, fundamentally, based on voting coalitions. That’s how they amass enough supporters to win a significant chunk of the vote. And when a significant chunk of potential voters chooses to opt out of the system, political parties opt out of appealing to them.

That’s not to say they have never made a mark. The last federal election saw the first meaningful engagement of millennials in the electoral system. And it made a difference in the results.

Turnout in the last federal election surged nine points to nearly 70 per cent from 61 per cent in 2011, largely on the back of millennial dislike of both Stephen Harper and his Conservative government.

And it cost Harper his job.

We saw a similar phenomenon in Barack Obama‘s elections in 2008 and 2012. Youth turnout exploded to bring the dream of a transformative presidency to life – only to see millennial engagement plummet during the mid-terms, handing Obama a Congress fully controlled by the Republicans.

We know that, historically, as voters have grown older, their engagement in the democratic process has grown as well. And in this provincial election, millennials, in their own way, may prove this point.

Andrea Horwath and the NDP should hope that millennials, who now outnumber baby boomers and are themselves growing older, will choose to vote this time out for the first time. Polling tells us that Horwath’s path to victory is paved with millennial support.

With promises of rent control, public daycare and the conversion of student loans to grants, Horwath has demonstrated her commitment to driving that turnout.

Her hope is that these signals will not only generate enthusiasm among millennial voters but will get them to the polls.

The Progressive Conservatives, conversely, have little to gain from millennials. That’s why they have chosen to campaign on tax cuts, lower gas prices and relief on hydro pricing.

The two strategies reflect who the parties believe they need to appeal to.

Horwath’s path, as shown by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau‘s large majority in 2015, can be one of high reward.

But as all too many politicians can tell you, basing a campaign on millennial support is far from a sure bet.

As the Ontario provincial election race careens into its final weeks, there is already one clear winner: Toronto Mayor John Tory.

After decades in and around political arenas at the national and provincial level, Tory has hit his stride as the leader of the fourth-largest city in North America. After decades as a partisan politician, Tory’s clout now transcends that past.

Over time, his experience as a Conservative party leader, candidate and counsellor has been transformed into a power that is rooted in a collaborative, ecumenical approach. An approach that allows him to win trust and forge alliances that go well beyond traditional party lines. It ensures whatever the outcome of the bitter provincial contest, his influence – and his agenda for Toronto – will not be diminished.

As provincial election drama has ebbed and flowed, Tory’s strategy has, from the outset, been as simple as it is straightforward. Regardless of his past affiliations, he has consistently supported the parties and candidates with initiatives that benefit Toronto and challenged those who might do otherwise. That measured approach will serve him well in the municipal election coming this October.

While Tory has declared he is running for a second term, he’s made it clear he will not seek a third. That transparency has contributed to a (for now, at least) muted response from rival candidates.

Furthermore, since he registered as a mayoral candidate, Tory has remained low key. Foregoing splashy campaign launch events, he is instead pushing ahead the approval for a transit plan – one that faces some headwinds – before city council breaks at the end of July. Throughout a turbulent provincial race, Tory has remained disciplined.

As the leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative party from 2004 and 2009, he learned how to work with a provincial caucus that is known for being difficult to manage. Specifically, he learned how to lobby various factions, seek common ground and build agreement wherever possible.

He also learned how to manage a politically disparate city council. Over the last four years, Tory has cobbled together unlikely voting coalitions to make progress on previously toxic issues, such as the ongoing Scarborough subway saga, regulating ride sharing companies, such as Uber, and his key election promise – SmartTrack.

As mayor, Tory is known for engaging with MPs, MPPs and councillors of all stripes. He attends their functions, supports their causes and walks the high road.

For example, despite the frequent criticism of Adam Vaughan, Liberal MP for Spadina-Fort York, Tory tweeted his congratulations on Vaughan’s recent remarriage. He has worked successfully with Premier Kathleen Wynne, who defeated him in his Don Valley West riding in 2007. He and Jim Flaherty, whom he defeated in the race for the Ontario PC leadership in 2004, worked together to provide counsel to former mayor, the late Rob Ford. Tory defeated Doug Ford, Rob’s brother, in the 2014 mayoral election, but is well-positioned to work with him in future.

That ability to play nicely with all others has paid off, contributing to his ability to extract $9 billion from both the provincial Liberals under Premier Wynne and the federal Conservatives under former prime minister Stephen Harper for transit and housing projects.

That’s not to say he doesn’t face the potential of challengers in the months ahead. The results of the provincial election could well shake loose erstwhile hopefuls who no longer have plum ministerial roles waiting for them at Queen’s Park, or one of the mayor’s biggest critics, Councillor Josh Matlow, could still throw his hat in the ring.

Even so, Tory has clearly played his cards right. He remains a political juggernaut. Should potential rivals choose to bide their time, as all signs indicate they will, he’ll turn his sights to local council races, and to leveraging his considerable political capital to squeeze more promises – and funding – out of the incoming premier.

In the aftermath of June 7, Tory’s collaborative arts and his ability to reach across the aisle may well be more important than ever.