Category: Chairman’s Desk

As their respective war rooms gear up for the final week of the election campaign, Conservatives and Liberals alike will be working overtime to launch one final knock-out blow.

Those hoping such a blow might have come during the leaders’ debates this week are no doubt disappointed. Although these debates do not usually have a meaningful impact on election results, with the Tories and Grits stuck at a dead heat in the polls, there was some hope this round might be different.

Stifled by format and unbearably repetitive rhetoric, I think we can agree this week’s debates did more to frustrate than inspire.

However, while the barbs traded in Gatineau will not determine the outcome of this election, they do serve as a litmus test for the strategies each campaign will deploy over the course of this crucial week ahead.

If the debates confirmed anything, it’s that this campaign is boiling down to one thing: trust. This issue emerged at the get-go of the campaign, and has been perpetuated by continuing attacks on the prime minister with questions about why the election was called.

For Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau, this week was always going to be his chance to rectify the damage from his anticlimactic campaign launch. It’s his last chance to try and convince voters wondering if this election was even worth having — a question he must be asking himself at this stage.

Polling by Discover, our research firm, shows that the number of Canadians who had “a lot or some trust” in the prime minister dropped drastically from 43 per cent prior to the election call to only 31 per cent this week. On the other hand, Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole has managed to make small gains in this area, with 29 per cent now saying they have “a lot or some trust” in him, up from 26 per cent.

This has the Liberals panicked.

Their strategy over the past week has looked to buck this trend and portray O’Toole as a Trojan horse, misleading the progressives and centrists now supportive of his campaign.

The Conservatives’ gun, climate and child-care policies will remain areas of focus for the Liberals. Expect more proclamations that the Conservatives will take Canada “backwards,” from those seeking to damage O’Toole’s trustworthiness among these voters.

While going on the offensive, the Liberals must carefully try to claw back some of the trust that has been lost in Trudeau, particularly in his sincerity and leadership. I’m not convinced this week’s debates did much to convince Canadians now is the time for election, or to tune in for longer than five minutes of the painful two hours.

For the Conservatives, the challenge lies in how they can mitigate Liberal attacks, while continuing to build confidence in their own plan to govern with transparency and accountability.

Releasing the breakdown of their platform costing this week was a shrewd move; while it opened O’Toole up to criticism, particularly on the daycare issue, it was another demonstration that he and the Conservatives are looking to win votes through clarity. Expect their campaign to continue juxtaposing this openness with suspicions about Trudeau’s objectives.

I warned two weeks ago that the biggest threat to O’Toole might be that he peaks too early. In the coming week the Conservatives must continue to find ways to convince voters that they can be trusted by drawing contrasts with the Liberals and exploiting Trudeau’s weakened ability to appear honest.

O’Toole received an unexpected assist in this regard from François Legault. In a surprising move — but not an unusual one for a Quebec premier — he declared his support for a potential Conservative minority government, arguing Trudeau’s intentions could not be trusted.

In one of the most important election battlegrounds, the influential Legault also stated that O’Toole’s approach was good for Quebec’s autonomy and praised the decision to clearly breakdown his platform costing.

So, for all the furor around the leader’s faceoff this week, it will change very little, and leaves everything to play for.

Debate performances don’t get parties into government, strategies do. Playing on mistrust towards Trudeau has been effective thus far; the question now is whether the Conservatives can amplify that theme to bring the campaign home.

In the early days of this campaign, Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole proudly introduced his party’s platform. In doing so, he managed, for a few days at least, to have a conversation with Canadians about — wait for it — policy.

This week, as the Conservatives overtook them in the polls, the Liberals thought they’d give the same trick a try. Attempting to turn the proverbial channel, they launched their own platform with what they spun as a twist: theirs was the only one to be fully costed.

At first glance, aside from a contentious tax on insurers and banks, the Liberal platform appears to be consistent with what Canadians now expect from team Trudeau: more big deficits and significant expansions of social spending. A contrast, to be sure, with the fiscally minded and long-term approach to recovery of O’Toole, but nothing so controversial as to spark a new national divide.

And so, if we are not about to have a big ol’ debate about policy in this election, then a debate on style it will be.

And for Justin Trudeau, the man who mastered modern political performance in this country, the ultimate irony may be that style spells the end of his political career.

Back in 2015, Justin Trudeau excelled at both building and selling his brand. A brand based as much on style as it was on substance, it was perfectly set to drive his promise of “Real Change.”

Back in 2015, as the upstart leader of a third-ranked party, Trudeau succeeded in the monumental task he had before him. He did so in large part due to his ability to strike an astonishingly correct tone, convincing Canadians of his competence but also his humanity, highlighting a capacity for empathy that his opponents lacked.

In that campaign, Trudeau was the warm and compelling candidate, cutting a stark contrast to incumbent Stephen Harper’s snide and dismissive persona. Harper, to be fair, was initially more concerned with former NDP leader Thomas Mulcair than Trudeau. But as the Liberals caught up, Harper’s attempts to paint Trudeau as inexperienced or foolish largely reinforced his own reputation for being cold and out of touch.

The most striking memory of this strategy was that godawful advertisement mocking Trudeau’s “nice hair,” but there were other memorable examples. Throughout the leaders’ debates, Harper belittled Trudeau and scoffed at his policies. To Canadians, Harper seemed petty, while Trudeau’s quiet refusal to get down in the mud came across as dignified and prime ministerial.

Oh, how times have changed.

Over the course of the campaign thus far, O’Toole has managed to flip the script, striking an even tone and an earnest approach to politicking. The Liberals, on the other hand, have committed unforced errors again and again, by attacking the Conservatives in a tone that seems bizarrely insecure for a party that has been in power for six years.

The approach took a turn for the worse when Liberal candidate Chrystia Freeland was slapped with a “manipulated media” warning by Twitter for spreading a misleading video of O’Toole. And there was more. The Liberal campaign machine also waded into the swamp, releasing a video that assigned the Tory leader the Trumpian nickname of “Two-Tier O’Toole,” among other things.

To make matters worse, a recent spate of violent rhetoric and inflammatory protests has derailed some of Trudeau’s campaign stops, and the Liberals have in turn attempted to tie the Conservatives to crowds of whackjob protestors.

But on the whole, it is Justin Trudeau and his acolytes who are turning up the temperature on this campaign. And the more their attacks on Erin O’Toole fall flat, the more bizarre it feels to watching a governing party writhe around for a convincing argument that their opponent is too untrustworthy to succeed them.

Ultimately, it may be that a Conservative candidate speaks out of turn or Trudeau is able to rile up his opponents on the debate stage. For now at least, it’s the opposition party that seems serious about forming government, while the incumbents seems intent on partisan hack jobs.

Even if Trudeau can sell his platform to Canadians, it will take more than substance to turn things around. He will need to rethink the entire style of his campaign — and fast.

After what some observers saw as a slow start, Erin O’Toole is making this election campaign his.

O’Toole understands the difficulty of fighting an election as the new face of a centre-right party. History, after all, is rife with Tory leaders who failed to make their mark or take control of their party early enough. So far, Erin O’Toole has learned from the past and set himself up brilliantly to avoid the same fate.

One lesson comes from former British Conservative prime minister David Cameron’s 2005 party conference speech, when he was still a leadership hopeful. The speech carried him to win the leadership and later came to define his vision for “a modern, compassionate conservatism.”

In order to form government after eight years in opposition, Cameron argued, the Conservatives needed to drastically reimagine their role in political life and become more positive, forward-looking and optimistic about changes in society. “There’s one thing [soon-to-be Labour leader] Gordon Brown fears more than anything else: a Conservative party that has the courage to change. So let’s give him the fright of his life.”

Canada’s Conservatives have been in opposition only six years, and Erin O’Toole is a very different politician from Cameron. But the guiding sentiment of Cameron’s speech outlines exactly what O’Toole needs to win this election: a Conservative party with the courage to change. If he can present his party to Canadians in those terms, it will surely scare the pants off Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau.

And as we enter the crucial third week of the campaign, O’Toole seems to be succeeding at exactly that.

The Tories are now roughly tied with the Liberals in most polls, having closed a gap of nearly seven per cent. O’Toole has done a tremendous job introducing himself to Canadians in just two weeks, and his team executed a political judo move by dropping their platform only two days into the campaign.

But most importantly, along the way, Erin O’Toole has changed the dynamic of this election. He is likeable, adaptable, and day by day, he is bravely charting new territory for a Tory leader, addressing head-on the kinds of issues that often bungle Conservative campaigns.

O’Toole has spoken clearly about his pro-choice views, the significance of climate change and other perennial wedge issues. Earlier this week, he affirmed his commitment to action on reconciliation and even made a splash by forcefully addressing LGBTQ health issues (I, for one, did not have “Tories push to revisit ban on poppers” on my campaign Bingo card).

There will be much ado about this approach, but I applaud O’Toole and his team for their bold strategy thus far. By plunging headfirst into these issues, he is making himself impervious to the usual late-election attacks by the Liberals.

In the past, the Liberal campaign machine has seized on the grey areas of Conservative policy, using them to transform the Tory leader into an election boogeyman. But O’Toole has pulled that strategy out from under them: he’s done all he can to erase any grey areas that may exist and prove he is no monster.

So, do not expect this campaign to play out like past elections — Erin O’Toole has seen this movie before, and he refuses to be cast as the villain.

That is not to say the Liberals won’t try. This week came the ultimate test, as Liberal candidate Chrystia Freeland and others accused O’Toole of attacking the sanctity of universal health care. O’Toole fared well, explaining that he is an advocate for greater choice and that he simply supports provinces across Canada pursuing new methods as they see fit.

The fact is, Erin O’Toole came into this election with very low expectations, and he has already far exceeded them. Now his task is to keep this steady pace and avoid peaking before he is within striking position of Trudeau and the increased scrutiny that brings.

The odds may have been against O’Toole, but today his task remains the same as the one he outlined in his leadership speech one year ago: “to show Canadians [his] vision for a stronger, prosperous and more united Canada.”

What a comfort then, that the more O’Toole shows of himself, the clearer that vision becomes.

Over the past week, as each federal leader has criss-crossed the country, each has tried to use personality and personal charisma to steal the show and run away with the momentum that’s needed to win.

RCAF Dad, a.k.a. Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole, has been meeting Canadians and pitching his platform. Green Leader Annamie Paul has been raising her party’s profile across main street Ontario. And after a slow kickoff with a minor policy announcement, Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau has moved west to inject some energy into B.C. ridings that have all of a sudden become competitive.

But for those following closely, the one to watch this week was NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh, who was eagerly courting voters not in safe, bedrock NDP strongholds, but in ridings with the potential to flip his way, like Burnaby North—Seymour and Edmonton-Griesbach.

A leader’s campaign itinerary speaks volumes about their strategy and, more importantly, their expectations for election day. Singh’s grand early tour of potentially fertile new ground — rather than existing seats — suggests the NDP is confident enough to play offence.

And not without good reason. Polling from Discover, our firm’s research team, suggests that Jagmeet Singh may be the decisive factor in the outcome of this election.

We already know that a slight majority of Canadians want a new governing party. We also know that while the NDP’s national polling is lukewarm, Singh’s personal ratings tell a different story. He is only two points behind Trudeau in national positive impressions and, crucially, he pulls ahead in B.C. and Ontario, both must-win territories for the NDP.

These numbers become even more interesting when you consider whether or not this election is a referendum on Justin Trudeau’s handling of the COVID pandemic.

It is not.

Rather the opposite: our polling shows that only 14 per cent of Canadians intend to vote based on Trudeau’s pandemic performance. Conversely, 43 per cent plan to vote based on each party’s plan for the future, and 38 per cent based on priority issues.

So this is no backward-looking election that seeks to relitigate the past. Rather, Canadians are focused on what’s ahead. And it’s the frame of an aspirational election voters will use.

This public opinion landscape is ripe for Singh’s NDP to reassert themselves. Not only because of the appetite for change, but also because many of his party’s campaign pillars speak directly to Canadians’ concerns for the future. In policy terms, more than one-third of Canadians feel Singh would do better than Trudeau on Indigenous issues. On climate change, 30 per cent of Canadians feel Singh is better suited to the task.

And ultimately, when it comes to “what kind of country do you want to live in?” many Canadians aspire to live in a country that is led by someone like Jagmeet Singh: a young, racialized leader who is tuned into the issues of the day. Especially urban Torontonians and West Coast progressives who have grown more conscious of racial justice and equity issues. It is exactly those voters who will keep Trudeau from a majority, if Singh has his way.

The position of today’s NDP is reminiscent of the modern party’s most successful standard-bearer. Just over 10 years ago, Jack Layton was leading the NDP into his fourth election as leader. Then, as today, the party was in fourth place and buoyed by remarkably positive sentiment toward its dynamic leader. Layton’s NDP swept the country and did the unthinkable, coming within grasp of the levers of power.

To be clear, Layton’s victory was a decade in the making, and relied on much more than his own charisma. But make no mistake — in times of change, when voters yearn for something “else,” personal affinity is hugely important. It can be the difference between someone staying home or trying something new at the ballot box.

Still, it remains to be seen if young voters turn out and whether fears of the unknown will trump the desire for change. But at the very least, Singh has a fighting chance to keep the Liberals from their coveted majority.

Finally, the wait is over.

After months of will-he-or-won’t-he speculation, the prime minister is expected to walk across the lawn today and knock on the door of Rideau Hall.

There he will ask its new occupant, Governor General Mary Simon, to take a few moments away from unpacking moving boxes to sign the writ dissolving Parliament and calling a federal election.

Trudeau will do so confident that now is the right time to dispense with the pesky restrictions of a minority government and secure a majority.

But not so fast.

Party strategists have a habit of getting ahead of their skis and in doing so forget one of the most important axioms of politics: campaigns matter. The road of political dreams is littered with the failed results of those who did not understand that their reach would exceed their grasp.

Now, to be sure, as the candidates come out of the gate Trudeau looks to be in an enviable position. Canadians are generally satisfied with how his government has handled the pandemic, and believe that they are not worse off than they were four years ago. There is not the kind of palpable anger across the land which has seized our southern neighbours. Add to that a rookie opponent on the right and the prospect of a serious public health threat in the coming winter months, and now certainly looks like a good time — or at least the most opportune time — to go.

Who can blame the Liberals for their optimism? Listening to pundits and dinner table conversations, you would think the outcome was preordained — that Trudeau and the Liberals had already tied the whole thing up and stolen away with the 15 additional seats they’ll need to push on undeterred with their spending plans.

But campaigns do matter, and the way things look as the campaign buses take to the roads may be very different when the party faithful gather in hotel rooms to await the results 36 days later.

Think of David Peterson’s snap election in 1990 that cost him his majority government. Driven by an astonishingly positive top-line public opinion environment, Peterson’s Liberals allowed themselves to believe that no campaign could damage their lead.

More recently, think of Stephen Harper’s decision to suspend Parliament for the longest writ period in modern history. Harper no doubt believed the more Canadians could see of Justin Trudeau’s inexperience, the more secure they would feel with Harper’s stern seriousness. Ultimately, it was the latter they grew tired of, while their yearning for the former catapulted the number three party into government.

So, as we find ourselves on the doorstep of yet another campaign, remember the election period will bring with it risk and opportunity for each of the players.

Especially now, when so much else seems uncertain, the campaign could change everything.

What if the fourth wave worsens and Canadians become furious over the gamble Trudeau has taken with their health? What if growing frustration with COVID restrictions boils over into all-out rage? What if Jagmeet Singh and other progressive personalities prove far more magnetic than our time-hardened and world-weary prime minister?

Above all, what if the political state of play is much more complicated than we want to admit? A few important data points from new polling by our firm Navigator suggest a seriously divided electorate.

Canadians were asked, assuming an election is called, whether they want stability in the form of a Liberal majority or the change promised by electing a new government. Over half — 58 per cent — preferred change, while the remaining 42 per cent wanted a Liberal majority. Asked whether they feel the country is on the right track or the wrong one, the split is even tighter at 51 to 49 per cent, respectively.

This data indicates a serious appetite for change, but it also suggests a country very closely divided on how to achieve it.

Anyone who says this campaign is a done deal, is simply dead wrong. While we may not want to admit it, the division in our country runs deep, and the impact of the past two years on our politics remains unclear.

As a result, the outcome of this election may surprise even the closest observer — including those sitting in the PMO, who called it in the first place.