Category: Chairman’s Desk

If the June byelections are a precursor to the real showdown, the Conservative leader cannot afford to take this tune-up lightly.

Pierre Poilievre is about to face his greatest test. How he performs could determine not just his future but, just possibly, the country’s.

His first time up at the plate — in a Mississauga-Lakeshore byelection late last year—many concluded Poilievre struck out. That’s one way to see it. But I look at it differently: Poilievre refused to swing the bat—fully aware his efforts would be futile in a Liberal stronghold.

But for the upcoming by-elections in June, that approach just won’t cut it. Indeed, to show he’s not just a capable rhetorician, but an electoral strategist who can succeed where federal Conservatives have recently fallen short, Poilievre must swing for the fences. Question is: is the count in his favour?

Four by-elections, two in Manitoba, one in Ontario, and one in Quebec, all represent unique challenges. And just to set expectations straight, he doesn’t need to win them all just as he is unlikely to.

Rather, Poilievre has a critical opportunity to show he can channel the groundswell of support he achieved in his leadership campaign into a larger movement. Show that he stands for his own distinct vision of Canada, not just opposition to Trudeau and the Liberals.

Some say he needs to bring forward his industrial policy. Others his stand on climate. And, of course, still others want to hear how he plans to address the perennial problems in our health care system.

He has answers to all of these policy matters — and others. But here is where it gets tricky, very tricky, because this is where the communication priorities become difficult for him.

It is clear that Poilievre has found a way to connect with hundreds of thousands, likely now millions, of Canadians on the very issues that matter most to them — food inflation, gas prices, and the staggering cost of everyday life.

Pierre Poilievre is about to face his greatest test. How he performs could determine not just his future but, just possibly, the country’s.

His first time up at the plate — in a Mississauga-Lakeshore byelection late last year—many concluded Poilievre struck out. That’s one way to see it. But I look at it differently: Poilievre refused to swing the bat—fully aware his efforts would be futile in a Liberal stronghold.

But for the upcoming by-elections in June, that approach just won’t cut it. Indeed, to show he’s not just a capable rhetorician, but an electoral strategist who can succeed where federal Conservatives have recently fallen short, Poilievre must swing for the fences. Question is: is the count in his favour?

Four by-elections, two in Manitoba, one in Ontario, and one in Quebec, all represent unique challenges. And just to set expectations straight, he doesn’t need to win them all just as he is unlikely to.

Rather, Poilievre has a critical opportunity to show he can channel the groundswell of support he achieved in his leadership campaign into a larger movement. Show that he stands for his own distinct vision of Canada, not just opposition to Trudeau and the Liberals.

Some say he needs to bring forward his industrial policy. Others his stand on climate. And, of course, still others want to hear how he plans to address the perennial problems in our health care system.

He has answers to all of these policy matters — and others. But here is where it gets tricky, very tricky, because this is where the communication priorities become difficult for him.

It is clear that Poilievre has found a way to connect with hundreds of thousands, likely now millions, of Canadians on the very issues that matter most to them — food inflation, gas prices, and the staggering cost of everyday life.

And in doing so, I am not sure it matters if he connects with those people who are raising the issues they think a responsible politician should be responding to.

But he needs these by-elections because he needs to show he can win across the country. And so, in each, this time he will have to swing for the fences.

In Ontario, he confronts unexpected defiance. Conservative MP Dave MacKenzie, who is stepping down, publicly endorsed a candidate for the Liberal nomination. Although the seat is expected to be a safe hold, this is an unhelpful nuance.

In Quebec, pollsters give the Conservatives a shot at only a few seats. The outgoing Marc Garneau’s riding is not one of them. Although likely unattainable, it’s the effort, the approach, that matters. Gaining even an inch in Quebec always requires a tailored strategy — not merely speaking French.,

If not carefully devised, that strategy can also be a minefield that impedes success elsewhere, as illustrated by the ramping up of anti-immigration rhetoric in the province’s political discourse.

Manitoba bears its own peculiar challenges. Here, Poilievre faces a more extreme faction of firebrand politics with Maxime Bernier running for the PPC. Mercifully, without vaccine mandates to rally around, Bernier’s brand is inching closer to extinction. Forget evolution.

Poilievre should be able to face Bernier down with relative ease. His challenge will be balancing his hardline support in Winnipeg South Centre with the more moderate stance that riding expects.

All things considered, so far Poilievre’s 2023 has been a good one.

A lead in the national polls? Check. Even better, in many, he’s opened up more than a five-point lead.

A healthy and growing war chest? You bet. This year, his Conservatives have raised $8.3 million.

But tangible electoral results? That’s … pending.

So while favourable predictions are nice, and money’s even better, in politics, performance on election day is all that matters.

If these byelections actually are a precursor to the real showdown, Poilievre simply cannot afford to take this tune-up lightly. A lot of things need to go right to hit a home run. But, as Pierre well knows, it starts by swinging hard.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on May 22, 2023.

Move over affordable housing, public safety, and the absolute disaster that is Toronto’s finances. Make space—a lot—for two issues that will define this upcoming Mayoral race: traffic congestion and public transportation.

Sadly, on this score, candidates have spent a great deal of time acting like Captain Obvious. We already know that congestion in this city is nothing short of nightmarish, that Toronto traffic is — in fact — some of the worst in the entire world. That it is horrific for our economy, dreadful for the environment, a disaster for families and a danger to every soul brave enough to venture, well, anywhere in this city.

While they profess platitudes, purporting to share our frustration, they are woefully thin on (forgive the expression) concrete solutions.

So, what’s needed?

For my tax dollar, the answer lies in turning our minds, painful as it is, to the failures of two of the largest and most controversial public transportation projects of late: the plagued, mislaid (literally) Eglinton crosstown LRT and the long-delayed Union Station redevelopment.

Back in 2010, the city cancelled David Miller’s Transit City. Why? Rob Ford made good on his campaign pledge to scrap the project and redirect funds for a Scarborough subway.

Despite their personal animosity, then Premier Dalton McGuinty and Mayor Rob Ford, out of political necessity, temporarily laid down their swords and agreed to a new funding plan. Ontario would pick up 100 per cent of the cost of the new Eglinton Crosstown line, conveniently serving a swath of ridings held by the provincial Liberals. In return, Toronto would pick up 100 per cent of the tab to rejuvenate and expand the most critical transit hub in the country, Union Station.

As everyone who lives, works and commiserates knows, both projects were eye-wateringly over budget and hopelessly over time. Though Union Station is now finally transformed, the new 17 km Eglinton Crosstown line is full of recriminations and threatened suits and countersuits — full of everything but transit riders.

We don’t need to get any further into the history of these sagas, as most Ontarians are already maddeningly familiar, to understand that political imperatives have delayed our vital infrastructure.

Today, due to short-term, narrowly partisan decision-making, our city finds itself in a perilous situation and yet the solution is crystal clear: we simply must remove politics from the equation. And the best way to do that is to appoint a traffic and critical transportation infrastructure czar.

If this proposal sounds familiar, it’s because we already have a lightweight version of this in the City’s Transit Expansion office led by Derrick Toigo. Never heard of him? That’s no surprise. Although his mandate is to accelerate transit projects, minimizing overall disruption is not. In other words, the role is full of talk about ‘working across’ levels of government and ‘breaking down’ silos but has achieved minimal results — as the city’s insane congestion plainly testifies.

So what’s needed is something far stronger, an office with unique powers to develop a long-term transportation strategy focused not only on getting projects built, but keeping the city moving amidst the necessary disruption that accompanies their construction. And its North Star should be reducing gridlock, not winning votes.

To work, this position must be a long-term appointment, and the appointee should also be blessed by all three levels of government who provide the necessary funding.

The bottom line is that Toronto’s traffic and transit problems will not be solved without pain in the short-term. Torontonians get that. But what we cannot and should not abide is pain that is all for naught, pain created by political opportunism.

So, when asked by mayoral candidates for my two cents, here’s my answer: we need a dedicated traffic/transportation czar who can cut through the politics, keep their eye on the big picture and keep our city moving.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on May 15, 2023.

Despite sinking into further disrepute since his departure from the White House, remarkably or perhaps unremarkably, Donald Trump has firmly established his position as the front-runner for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

At first glance, it is easy to attribute Trump’s success simply to the increased radicalization and division apparent in the “land of liberty.” But I see it differently.

For me, the cowardly retreat of Republican moderates has not received sufficient blame for the marginalization of American conservatism. Their opposition to Trump, despite increased opportunity for it to be effective, has been both pitiful and pathetic.

After the underwhelming Republican performance in the 2022 midterms, for which Trump was resoundingly culpable, one would have hoped to see the emergence of a nominee with the potential to restore respectability to the GOP’s leadership. After all, the chance was staring them in the face.

Yet, no viable moderate competitor has emerged. While some will argue that the party is so lost that, at this point, the situation is hopeless, how do we know that to be true if no one has tried?

As a result, the Trump virus has continued to fester and spread. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, considered the most likely contender to take on Trump, is just Trump without the amusement. He’s just as determined to push dogmatic agendas, be it on guns, LGBT rights, or abortion. He is just less funny. Quite a bit.

Trump’s presidency was characterized by the binary choice he created: you were either with him or against him. This polarizing force instilled fear in those who dared to defy him. However, in the current nomination context, there’s no excuse for moderate Republicans to cower. Gone should be their fear of alienating Trump’s voting base because that base has left them. After all, it is a base that despises them as much as they despise that base. Instead, they should be jumping at the chance to confront him.

But this cowardice is baked in, starting at the top. Party leaders, like Mitch McConnell and Kevin McCarthy, have often been reluctant to criticize Trump, fearing jeopardy to their political careers. Ronna McDaniel’s election as chair of The Republican National Committee is another signal. She is widely seen as having been picked because she is best positioned to prevent Trump from forming a splinter movement, should he lose the nomination.

Their support sends a message to rank-and-file Republicans that dissent from Trumpism is not welcome.

So, if the GOP is truly lost to the MAGA movement, why haven’t we seen more defections to the Democrats or an appetite for an alternative movement? The Lincoln Project, a political action committee formed by moderate Republicans, is the closest thing but its efforts alone aren’t enough.

Asa Hutchinson, former two-term Arkansas governor, is running as a “non-Trump” candidate, vowing to champion “common sense, consistent conservatism.” While commendable, Hutchinson is polling with less than 1 per cent support, unable to build any momentum largely thanks to the absence of figures like Mitt Romney, which highlights the apathy and fear that has become pervasive among moderate Republicans.

One must wonder what happened to the conviction and performance of these moderates in the face of Trump’s antics. Where is Jeb Bush, who was last reported to be attempting to buy and sell Israeli spyware through his private equity firm? And even if they are quiet now, at least Bush and Romney previously tried to take Trump on. Where are the many others who never even bothered? They carry far more of the blame.

Spineless refusals to confront Trump are directly responsible for his continued popularity. History will not judge well those moderates who abandoned a difficult fight because they thought it was a hopeless fight. Those who flew the white flag and surrendered their party to the MAGA pirates will be seen for what they are: cowards.

This article first appeared in the Toronto Star on May 7, 2023.

The numbers are in.