With the defenestration of Erin O’Toole, we’re already seeing the predictable trickle of columns asserting the type of leader the Conservatives should elect – all from people who have never voted Conservative in their lives.
The 2021 election was useful for conservatives – note the lower case ‘c’ – because it shattered the myth that a moderate leader with a moderate campaign will break through in Quebec and the proverbial ‘vote-rich GTA.’ O’Toole championed a carbon tax, scrapped the few red meat policies he’d previously promised, and adopted Liberal positions on social issues – though this cost his party seats and curried no favour with the media.
What it did was relegate the Conservatives to a role I coined in a throwaway line in one of my newsletters last week.
…the Conservatives have defaulted to the safe comfort of being the Official Auditors of Canada, talking only about inflation and pocketbook issues…
I’ve received a great deal of positive feedback on that designation (much of it from my friend Scott Hayward, admittedly), because it sums up the dispassionate and exceedingly narrow approach many claim is the only way for the Conservatives to be relevant and electable.
In September, Canadian voters were facing a rampant inflation problem and still voted the Liberals back in. Voters are diverse, and not so easily wooed by whichever suite of tax credits the Tories are pushing. It’s not enough to agree with the Liberals on everything non-financial and hope the election will be about the price of milk or gas.
In spite of this, the media is convinced the Conservative Party of Canada’s problem is an excess of conservatism.
A Globe and Mail editorial called for a “progressive” Conservative party, insisting those who ousted O’Toole don’t understand Canadian conservatism.
The Toronto Star said if the conservative base has its way, the Conservatives will be on the “road to oblivion.”
National Post columnist John Ivison tweeted that the Conservative grassroots want to be a “party of principled, eternal opposition.”
The implication in all these assertions is that conservatism cannot win, which is a laughable premise. The last two federal elections have demonstrated that concealing or softening conservatism doesn’t achieve electoral success, so perhaps it’s time to give principles a try.
To appropriate a line from the Marxists, real conservatism hasn’t been tried, at least not recently.
Those claiming conservatism can’t win actually don’t want it to.
A useful way to illustrate this is to look at the sorts of questions asked of Conservative and Liberal leaders at press conferences. Whenever the media is hammering the Liberals, it’s on matters of conduct and competence. When the media is hammering the Conservatives, it’s about beliefs and identity.
Liberals have to answer for their role in things like the WE and SNC-Lavalin scandals, but Conservatives are expected to answer for what they think.
This explains why so many in the establishment want to neuter the essence of the Conservative party – they are seeking a slightly less corrupt Liberal party.
As the culture shifts leftward, I understand the Conservative temptation to shift with it. Instead of lamenting the cultural resistance to conservatism, however, the Conservative Party of Canada should embrace a leader prepared to champion ideas and shape the culture, rather than mindlessly modifying slogans about putting more money in people’s pockets.
Conservative politicians often declare so many hills as not worth fighting on that it’s no wonder they tend to do better in the flatlands.
The freedom convoy parked in front of Parliament Hill right now seemed to be the final straw in turning an already exasperated caucus against its leader. In championing freedom and resisting government overreach, the convoy filled a void that wouldn’t have existed if conservative politicians had been doing their jobs.
Clearly, MPs like Andrew Scheer, Pierre Poilievre, Leslyn Lewis and Candice Bergen – all of whom gave clear and early support of the convoy’s message – decided they weren’t going to wait for leadership from someone unwilling to provide it.
Bergen is now the Conservatives’ interim leader, and Poilievre a top contender for the leadership should he seek it.
The Conservatives have an opportunity to provide real opposition to the encroachments on liberty that have become normalized in Canada at the federal and provincial levels. Whenever the next election comes, and whoever leads them into it, they have the opportunity provide a real contrast to the Liberals and clearly communicate that to Canadians.
Whether they will take this up still remains to be seen, but it’s certainly long overdue.
A big welcome – and ‘honk honk’ – to our new subscribers, and a particular note of thanks to our paid subscribers, whose generous support makes this newsletter viable. If you enjoy these updates, please consider taking out a paid subscription yourself. If you’re not receiving these dispatches directly, be sure to join our mailing list so you don’t miss them.
I'd never thought about it that way before, but your remark about Conservatives' beliefs being questioned is insightful. Outsiders calling for Conservatives to be less conservative make me think of Mark Steyn's observation regarding the "ever-narrowing bounds of public discourse": it's impossible to argue for your policies if you let your opponents frame your principles as bad, and from there it's an easy step to concede that some issues should not even be discussed.