Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler
Well, it happened. A little sooner than I expected, but it happened. Andrew Scheer is toast. I am almost the only person I know, who is not particularly happy about that. There may be a few Liberal insiders who are quaking about the effect this could have on Justin Trudeau’s future, but otherwise, most people on both sides of the political spectrum are happy to see him go down. It reminds me of a modern-day version of a public hanging.
My disappointment is not so much that Andrew Scheer is leaving, as it is about the generational culture of the Conservative Party to knife their leaders in the back, at the earliest opportunity. There is also no question, that at least in this latest case, they were aided and abetted by many in the mainstream media who just like to stick it to the Tories. Does anyone believe for one second that there are not serious grumblings in the Liberal ranks about Justin Trudeau given his poor performance and his inability to hold on to a majority government? It is true that they are better at doing their dirty work behind closed doors, but the media always have their sources and it is astonishing that we have seen next to nothing about Liberal dissatisfaction with someone who almost led them to defeat. In contrast, we have seen almost daily headlines and opinion pieces about why Andrew Scheer should go.
When Andrew Scheer won the Conservative leadership two years ago, it was a bit of a surprise but a far better choice than the front runner, Maxime Bernier. No one really knew much about Scheer, except he seemed to be well liked and respected as a cheerful Speaker of the House of Commons. There were lots of Conservatives who supported other leadership candidates and who were grumbling at Scheer’s election. Many of them are still grumbling. The Conservatives under Andrew Scheer won the popular vote, vastly increased their standing in Parliament and very nearly brought Justin Trudeau to his knees. Yet, the hard truth is that Scheer failed to win government and in spite of the fact that most Leaders have received a second chance, that was enough to bring out the long knives.
Andrew Scheer did not resign, as some would have us believe, because of the strategic timing of the revelation that his Party was subsidizing a portion of his children’s education expenses. That information could only have come from an insider, one of those who wanted Scheer out, sooner, rather than later. Those same people would also know that paying expenses of a Party leader that they would not otherwise incur, is standard procedure for all political Parties. Normally this would cover such items as accommodation, clothing, and entertainment responsibilities. Education expenses is likely a new one, but Andrew Scheer is the first Canadian Leader to come to the table with five young children and to top up the difference between tuition fees in Saskatchewan and those in Ottawa is an expense that would not have otherwise occurred. Standard- procedure, authorized by the Party and not by Mr. Scheer.
No, Andrew Scheer resigned solely because he concluded he could not overcome the infighting within his own Party, and he believed six months of back biting and acrimony would hurt Conservatives during a period when Justin Trudeau could trigger an election at any time. That is a distinct possibility as an election during a period of turmoil within the Conservative Party, could be an advantage for the Liberals. Under the circumstances, Scheer was right to call it a day and it is a clear indication of the strength of his character.
So, what now? In my view, the first thing the Conservative Party of Canada needs to do over the next few months is to define who they really are. One thing we do not need is a second Liberal Party in Canada, and I fear that some leadership hopefuls will attempt to move more to the centre left in a belief they can attract more votes in this populist environment. Conversely, there will be those who want to move to the extreme right, isolating the Party on social issues that have long since become acceptable to the majority of Canadians.
It is time for Conservatives at the federal level to clearly stake out their turf. In my view, that is to the right of centre but not the far, alt right. It is certainly not to the left. There are enough of those already! Conservatives believe that fiscal responsibility and debt reduction are key requirements in ensuring the long- term provision of programs that protect the vulnerable. They recognize they cannot be all things to all people and that there is a limit to what government should do. Their priorities must be pollution control, national unity and a respectable standard of living for all Canadians, regardless of their circumstances. And they must have a healthy respect for the rule of law.
So, now that we are in a leadership race, who is out there that can reflect these values and present a real alternative to Canadian voters, without extremism and without catering to populism? Not many in my view, but there are some.
Rona Ambrose is one. She has been out of the fray for a while. She was an effective Interim Leader of the Conservatives before Andrew Scheer. She was the first federal Conservative leader to march in a Gay Pride parade. She has strong conservative values, tempered with genuine compassion for those who struggle in our society.
Another is Erin O’Toole. He finished third in the last leadership race. He too has strong conservative values and he is not an extremist. As a member of Parliament from Ontario, he represents a part of the country where Conservatives badly need more support. He has served as an Officer in the Armed Forces, held a number of key Cabinet posts and has a public profile that would challenge Justin Trudeau.
There will be others of course, including those who have already had their day. But these are the two I would keep my eye on. Politics is seldom dull and the next few months will be no exception.
Perhaps at the end of it, we shall see what the Conservative Party of Canada really stands for.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Hugh, I can’t believe that your top two priorities would be pollution control and national unity. Of course, the climate crisis is number one for every party (unless the less terrifying “pollution control” is intended as a poor substitute.) And national unity? How many billions of dollars have the Fed spent just to satisfy Quebec? And now we have to change the transfer payments program to keep Alberta in Confederation? When they were awash in oil, their main concern was minimizing transfer payments to the have-not provinces. Well now the shoe is on the other foot.
They do have, however, until, probably, 2050 to transition from their carbon-based economy. I feel that the shift should be subsidized by Ottawa (to some extent); separate from the transfer payments. After all, they subsidized Bombardier and Barrack, among others, for many years.
If we lose one or both provinces, Canada will still exist; as a series of two/three archipelagoes. The time for wasting much needed resources on an outdated concept is long past.
Markham , Ontario
Most diverse , inclusive city in Canada.
Diverse, means that Canada’s two official languages
are now foreign languages in their own country?
All I can say John is if this is the new Canada and you have to think all the time about what your true feelings are about any subject because someone might be offended then I’m sure glad I’m old and will not be around long enough to see this great country go to hell with the rest of the world .
P.S. I guess your like the rest of the people who voted liberal and like being in debt up to your shoulders and don’t give a darn about your grandchildren that will have to pay all this money back or let the country go bankrupt
After watching the finance minister deliver his economic update yesterday, it defies logic that any Canadian would support the embarrassment that is Justin Trudeau and the Liberal party. Andrew Scheer would’ve been a far better leader for sure but as you say, the knives were out. The Conservatives now have a chance to retool…or even rebrand. Rona Ambrose would be a great choice as would Michele Remple. Not sure how westerners would fare but I think it’s time for a female leader of the Conservative party.
I am attaching a letter that I sent to Conservative leader Andrew Scheer after his election ” loss ” .
Dear Conservative Andrew Scheer
Blame you party’s election loss on your social conservatism . Blame your loss on ” Andrew Scheer – Not as Advertised ” . Majority of Canadians living in suburban / urban areas hold values that are much more liberal than the ones you perceive to hold when it comes to women’s rights , abortion, and LGBTQ2 issues . How can you represent all Canadians if you refuse to march in Pride parades ? You and your Conservative party will never win another federal election until you modernize your approach to social issues .Remember the largest voting block in Canada is no longer boomers , but millennials . Canada has passed you by.
John Barltrop ( retired educator TDSB )
Markham , Ontario
Most diverse , inclusive city in Canada
” Trudeau is not as advertised “. Then Sheer has to acknowledge his dual citizenship after questioning Michell Jean’s and Dion’s dual citizenship . Hypocrite. Then he padded his resume as an insurance broker. Dumb !!
He also needed to say clearly that every Cdn. has a right to their personal views on gay marriage and abortion , but that they are settled issues in Cdn. law and will not be re-visited by a Conservative government. He should have turned the question to Trudeau and suggested the press ask Justin where he stood on these issues as a Catholic. Time for the party to move on.
The problem seems to me is that a fiscal conservative can get elected anywhere but a social conservative can’t get elected in Ontario, Quebec or BC. Sure a social conservative can run up the score in the Prairies but that will never allow them to garner a majority/ or even a minority
Jamie if you look closely you will see that the Conservatives got more of the popular vote than the Liberals just not as many seats so what does that tell you. It tells me that there is something wrong with our system not with the Conservative party.
I was very moved by Andrew Coyne’s response on election night when it became clear that the Conservatives were not even going to form a minority government which was my expectation. I read Coyne as leaning toward the right but he is policy driven and respectful of facts. I am paraphrasing but it was clear that he was very disappointed that the Conservative party did so poorly yet again. He said that issues about abortion, sexual orientation and a lack of an acknowledgement about the seriousness of climate change, amongst others, had once again limited new voters coming to the Conservative Party. He seemed to me to be saying that they ran an election on policies from the 1990s or earlier and he quite rightly said nothing will change for the Conservative party if they can’t at some point accept modern realities. Watch a movie called “Mississippi Prom’ and witness white high school children laughing with embarassement at the racism of their parents. Watch the righteous indignation of Greta Thunberg and accept that this is how a whole new generation of voters thinks. Take Dick Chaney as your guide about sexual orientation when he loves and accepts his gay daughter for who she is. And please, please try to support women as equal partners in our world opening your eyes to the violence and inequality they endure. For example, one of the options that Planned Parenthood promotes is having the baby and when frightened young single women hear the support that is available if they choose to have their baby they change their minds and opt not to have an abortion. Unexpectedly where funding for Planned Parenthood is reduced or eliminated or reduced the number of abortions goes up. I think Coyne was simply saying Conservatives can do better and must to be elected.
I think maybe you have to look a little harder. It’s because we keep electing the wrong party.
What do any of the parties really stand for?
For 6 weeks every 4 years the people form the government.
Once that government is elected we have a dictatorship.
I really don’t see any difference no matter what the color,
red,blue green or orange.
I for one am very disappointed in the conservative party . I thought Andrew Scheer would have made a great prime minister he came across to me as a man that was honest about what he wanted to do and what his personal views were on things but at no point did I hear him say he would enforce his personal views on anyone or group. Now I have to wait and see just who they decide will be a better leader sure hope they make the right decision .