The version of this column that went out to nearly 7,000 people quoted Christy Clark to the effect that she thinks Charest would make a fantastic "premier." Of course she said "prime minister " I can't pull the original out of everyone's inbox but I've fixed it above. The perils of filing from airports.
I had to go look up “Triple Hair,” because I thought, “There’s no way these guys got a hair replacement company as a sponsor for their conference and then put the thank-you-to-our-sponsors sign directly behind the panel of speakers,” and, as it turns out, yeah. “Revolutionary Hair Growth Therapies.” Maybe that’s what “LET’S GROW” was referencing.
The Conservative Party is in a tough spot. Moderate conservative Canadians would like to hold power but need the support of very conservative Canadians to get enough votes — yet it’s the latter group’s presence that allows other parties to scaremonger voters into keeping the Conservatives out of power. I don’t know how you solve a problem like that — the people you need to get you elected are the ones who keep you from getting elected.
Anyway, I expect Paul is right that most of these folks will line up behind a Polievre campaign and eventual government. I seriously doubt a party split is coming — enough folks in the room must understand that having two Canadian conservative parties guarantees Liberal governments in perpetuity. So it’s interesting to ponder the purpose of the group and this conference. Maybe it’s about visibly manifesting a strong moderate-conservative bloc to influence party policy, a safe distance from the hard core that will form around the next leader? That seems like not a bad idea.
I hate to be "that guy", but I wonder if anyone's willing to raise the big question-namely, just what's pushed so many people to support the likes of Trump and Poilievre in the first place. The anger and resentment were building well before the pandemic-workers who couldn't see any hope of bettering themselves, rising inequality that even the likes of the World Bank was expressing worry about, young people having trouble finding housing?
Could it be that maybe, just maybe, the neoliberal/"free trade" playbook we've been following for the last 35-odd years has something to do with it? The one that everybody from Mel Hurtig to Peter Lougheed to John Ralston Saul was warning about years ago?
Could that be one reason Trump and Poilievre have found such eager audiences? It can't all be about racism, not when Trump actually increased his share of the Black and Latino votes in 2020 over his 2016 numbers...
The Center Ice gathering to discuss current political issues is noble enough, but seems to be a reactionary venture intended to strike a death blow into the Poilievre leadership campaign.
Fair enough, but let’s not kid ourselves here. Most of the marquee participants as speakers or panelists are all on the record as horrified that Pierre Poilievre will win the leadership but be unelectable in the next election. Panels on economics and health care is a handy smokescreen.
A point is often made that “hard right” Conservatives are too rigid in ideology and uncompromising to be able to attract swing voters. In the current political malaise, I think it’s the Center Ice types who are trapped in ideological silos and refusing to see the shifting sands on the ground. Polling information shows that there is a substantial number of young voters who are indicating that they will vote Conservative. What is attracting their attention? Why is the support from unionized blue collar workers starting to drift toward Conservatives?
All of the CPC leadership candidates have been working hard to attract new members and voters. Good for them, but if anyone has their political antenna tuned into the grassroots needs and anxieties of ordinary Canadians, it’s Pierre Poilievre. He is reaching out to them to build a big tent movement, and maybe the Center Ice types need to reassess their view of the situation and be prepared to roll their sleeves up and help elect a Conservative Government that can salvage our public institutions before they collapse.
A lot of centrist Liberals go along with Trudeau's leftward shift because he won, won again and again. If Poilievre wins then I imagine people in his party will do what the Cubans recommend and simply relax and cooperate.
At the end of the day, Poilievre's policy vagueness is about as opaque as Justin Trudeau's and I doubt the only thing that would really change is the rhetoric attached to the status quo.
"I plan to travel more frequently, and more ambitiously, to cover other stories. You know what comes next, don’t you." World-wide Wells?
Crowley: “There’s got to be something wrong with our politics when politicians are afraid of a cheap-food policy.” Precisely what does he mean by 'wrong'?
"This is because Coyne says real stuff out loud and with panache, a double rarity." When will Coyne be bringing his panache to Substack?
The use of the term "Centrism" has rather lost its meaning - seems to me that the currently defined Centre Ice line is about 6 inches to the right of the Left blue line....
It is all very well to talk about economic growth as Coyne does, but unless the terms of the debate change (climate change, equity, diversity and the ever widening grasp of the regulatory state), I don't see how this will lead to change, and how it differs from liberal policies in general. As per your post last week, a Conservative government led by Charest (just for the sake of argument, not going to happen) might ditch the more stupid policies but the overall drift will continue.
Poilievre is trying - probably in vain - to shake that discussion up. You are right to pick up on his hypocrisy about agricultural supply side management - I assume he trying to avoid Bernier's mistake and not piss off the farmers in Ontario and Quebec, but he may be fatally damaging his own policy arguments thereby.
As for the raging right wing mobs, not much here to interest them...
I am curious as to why this latest attempt to create a middle ground in Canadian Politics must pre-suppose that it can only be accomplished from the centre right, requiring a CPC split. This immediate assumption then leads to a debate over whether this is wise, possible and likely to have a successful outcome.
Founding personnel aside, a vibrant, new moderate movement should understand the reality that many, many Liberal voters do so reluctantly at best and would welcome an option that provided competent leadership, sane fiscal management, innovative and courageous policy options driven by a compassionate and progressive (yes!) social outlook without the worst of the woke-ist, virtue signaling. I am watching this movement with great interest (and hope) but IMO the tent is not yet big enough.
I wonder if centrism is an absolute fixed point on the spectrum or if it the relative mid-point between far left and far right. The US Republicans have shifted further right while the Democrats have remained stable (https://voteview.com/articles/party_polarization), so a relative center would be pushed further right by default.
Introduce a Poilievre as leader of the right, and and a relative centrism becomes what the Progressive Conservatives used to be.
This I can truly get behind. "“Procurement should be about procurement,” i.e. about buying useful kit at good prices, rather than using such purchases to launder regional-development subsidies."
I was at the Conference. I had to fly from Vancouver and take a room in a hotel. I’m not overly political (by most standards). I was certainly “out of my league”. But it was worth every penny and the time it took me to go. I learned so much and so much of my thinking was ‘shifted’ by the conversations. Mr. Peterson (who; full disclosure - I worked at the same firm with years ago and was a great help to me), is a passionate Canadian. I am so thankful he has both the courage and tenacity to launch this initiative. It was excellent. Heck I even bought the hat (and I don’t wear hats)!
The version of this column that went out to nearly 7,000 people quoted Christy Clark to the effect that she thinks Charest would make a fantastic "premier." Of course she said "prime minister " I can't pull the original out of everyone's inbox but I've fixed it above. The perils of filing from airports.
The phrase “anteroom to apostasy” made my day.
I had to go look up “Triple Hair,” because I thought, “There’s no way these guys got a hair replacement company as a sponsor for their conference and then put the thank-you-to-our-sponsors sign directly behind the panel of speakers,” and, as it turns out, yeah. “Revolutionary Hair Growth Therapies.” Maybe that’s what “LET’S GROW” was referencing.
The Conservative Party is in a tough spot. Moderate conservative Canadians would like to hold power but need the support of very conservative Canadians to get enough votes — yet it’s the latter group’s presence that allows other parties to scaremonger voters into keeping the Conservatives out of power. I don’t know how you solve a problem like that — the people you need to get you elected are the ones who keep you from getting elected.
Anyway, I expect Paul is right that most of these folks will line up behind a Polievre campaign and eventual government. I seriously doubt a party split is coming — enough folks in the room must understand that having two Canadian conservative parties guarantees Liberal governments in perpetuity. So it’s interesting to ponder the purpose of the group and this conference. Maybe it’s about visibly manifesting a strong moderate-conservative bloc to influence party policy, a safe distance from the hard core that will form around the next leader? That seems like not a bad idea.
I’m glad you don’t have an editor anymore. Fascinating column
I hate to be "that guy", but I wonder if anyone's willing to raise the big question-namely, just what's pushed so many people to support the likes of Trump and Poilievre in the first place. The anger and resentment were building well before the pandemic-workers who couldn't see any hope of bettering themselves, rising inequality that even the likes of the World Bank was expressing worry about, young people having trouble finding housing?
Could it be that maybe, just maybe, the neoliberal/"free trade" playbook we've been following for the last 35-odd years has something to do with it? The one that everybody from Mel Hurtig to Peter Lougheed to John Ralston Saul was warning about years ago?
Could that be one reason Trump and Poilievre have found such eager audiences? It can't all be about racism, not when Trump actually increased his share of the Black and Latino votes in 2020 over his 2016 numbers...
The Center Ice gathering to discuss current political issues is noble enough, but seems to be a reactionary venture intended to strike a death blow into the Poilievre leadership campaign.
Fair enough, but let’s not kid ourselves here. Most of the marquee participants as speakers or panelists are all on the record as horrified that Pierre Poilievre will win the leadership but be unelectable in the next election. Panels on economics and health care is a handy smokescreen.
A point is often made that “hard right” Conservatives are too rigid in ideology and uncompromising to be able to attract swing voters. In the current political malaise, I think it’s the Center Ice types who are trapped in ideological silos and refusing to see the shifting sands on the ground. Polling information shows that there is a substantial number of young voters who are indicating that they will vote Conservative. What is attracting their attention? Why is the support from unionized blue collar workers starting to drift toward Conservatives?
All of the CPC leadership candidates have been working hard to attract new members and voters. Good for them, but if anyone has their political antenna tuned into the grassroots needs and anxieties of ordinary Canadians, it’s Pierre Poilievre. He is reaching out to them to build a big tent movement, and maybe the Center Ice types need to reassess their view of the situation and be prepared to roll their sleeves up and help elect a Conservative Government that can salvage our public institutions before they collapse.
A lot of centrist Liberals go along with Trudeau's leftward shift because he won, won again and again. If Poilievre wins then I imagine people in his party will do what the Cubans recommend and simply relax and cooperate.
At the end of the day, Poilievre's policy vagueness is about as opaque as Justin Trudeau's and I doubt the only thing that would really change is the rhetoric attached to the status quo.
Apart from the serious stuff, some great zingers in here. That's just as important - I think we're going to need all the humour we can get.
Follow up questions:
"I plan to travel more frequently, and more ambitiously, to cover other stories. You know what comes next, don’t you." World-wide Wells?
Crowley: “There’s got to be something wrong with our politics when politicians are afraid of a cheap-food policy.” Precisely what does he mean by 'wrong'?
"This is because Coyne says real stuff out loud and with panache, a double rarity." When will Coyne be bringing his panache to Substack?
The use of the term "Centrism" has rather lost its meaning - seems to me that the currently defined Centre Ice line is about 6 inches to the right of the Left blue line....
It is all very well to talk about economic growth as Coyne does, but unless the terms of the debate change (climate change, equity, diversity and the ever widening grasp of the regulatory state), I don't see how this will lead to change, and how it differs from liberal policies in general. As per your post last week, a Conservative government led by Charest (just for the sake of argument, not going to happen) might ditch the more stupid policies but the overall drift will continue.
Poilievre is trying - probably in vain - to shake that discussion up. You are right to pick up on his hypocrisy about agricultural supply side management - I assume he trying to avoid Bernier's mistake and not piss off the farmers in Ontario and Quebec, but he may be fatally damaging his own policy arguments thereby.
As for the raging right wing mobs, not much here to interest them...
I am curious as to why this latest attempt to create a middle ground in Canadian Politics must pre-suppose that it can only be accomplished from the centre right, requiring a CPC split. This immediate assumption then leads to a debate over whether this is wise, possible and likely to have a successful outcome.
Founding personnel aside, a vibrant, new moderate movement should understand the reality that many, many Liberal voters do so reluctantly at best and would welcome an option that provided competent leadership, sane fiscal management, innovative and courageous policy options driven by a compassionate and progressive (yes!) social outlook without the worst of the woke-ist, virtue signaling. I am watching this movement with great interest (and hope) but IMO the tent is not yet big enough.
I must go and intend to return later. Louise D.
I'm happy to have learned about this. Time to start polishing my resume for the Coyne Campaign.
I wonder if centrism is an absolute fixed point on the spectrum or if it the relative mid-point between far left and far right. The US Republicans have shifted further right while the Democrats have remained stable (https://voteview.com/articles/party_polarization), so a relative center would be pushed further right by default.
Introduce a Poilievre as leader of the right, and and a relative centrism becomes what the Progressive Conservatives used to be.
This I can truly get behind. "“Procurement should be about procurement,” i.e. about buying useful kit at good prices, rather than using such purchases to launder regional-development subsidies."
I was at the Conference. I had to fly from Vancouver and take a room in a hotel. I’m not overly political (by most standards). I was certainly “out of my league”. But it was worth every penny and the time it took me to go. I learned so much and so much of my thinking was ‘shifted’ by the conversations. Mr. Peterson (who; full disclosure - I worked at the same firm with years ago and was a great help to me), is a passionate Canadian. I am so thankful he has both the courage and tenacity to launch this initiative. It was excellent. Heck I even bought the hat (and I don’t wear hats)!