Discussions

Nearly 24 years after leaving federal politics, Jean Charest will launch his campaign to become leader of the Conservative Party of Canada.  
 
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/jean-charest-to-launch-conservative-leadership-bid-in-calgary-1.5813452  
 
This could be interesting to see. I am not for or against this former Quebec leader. To be seen. Comments?  
 
Edited by No Comment, 2022-03-10 22:42:45

I'm against jean charest. He wasnt good back then and wont be now. He's more of a liberal than a conservative.  
 
I will support Pierre Poilievre as the next conserative leader and our next prime minister. We need Trudeau gone and Pierre is our best shot!

is a vote for Justin. The drive to the right in the Conservative party is alienating many eastern fiscal conservatives who voted for Joe Clark or Mulroney. Same impact as splitting the right - the Liberals will benefit. Jean Charest is a great choice. Canadians don't want someone at the far right, just right of where the Liberals are. Pierre as leader is the best possible news for the Liberal party. Remember - no one votes directly for PM in Canada.

I do not like Pierre. He is too far right too divisive potentially and I fear will take this country the way of the Republican party in the US. So I will wait to see what the other candidates have to offer.

is who the Conservatives need if they ever want to win seats in Ontario and Quebec. Skippy aka Pierre is just another Reformer politician who has no real world experience outside of politics. Moving further to the right and closer to trump like politics is not what the rest of Canada wants.  
 
While it's still highly unlikely I would vote Conservative if Charest was leader, I might at least think about it.

Less punditry, more education.  
 
That's all.

Yes Charest was the premier of Quebec from 2003-2012 and not for the Conservative Party he was “ Liberal Premier “ .  
Prior to 2003 he was Conservative.  
 
So my vote at this time is with Pierre at this time.  
 
Edited by Mac72, 2022-03-11 09:06:37

They aren’t the same. Though they all seem to do the same things in the end.  
 
What I look for is someone with maturity and some modicum of integrity, an ability to lead and to be able to balance their own political agenda with the needs of the country.  
 
So far Pierre comes across as a self righteous know it all who supported the trucker convoy. Too far right for me

Just because Pierre's career has been heavily in politics I find him to be (atleast) appear very in tune with Canadian history, Canadian values (hard work, community and patriotism).  
 
Jean Charest's experience outside of politics, as per Wikipedia "After politics, Charest worked as a consultant, including for Huawei on the Meng Wanzhou case and for its 5G network plans in Canada". - Yeah no thanks, that's a hard no for me.  
 
We don't need another leader that forgets their fiduciary duty to Canadians on the global stage. Skippy as you call him, has proven his sharp thinking and confidence while serving Canadians as an Opposition critic (he's not supposed to bow down to liberals demand... he's in the opposition).

You are making the mistake of assuming that Pierre stands for the values of all Canadians, which as we can see in this thread is not the case.  
 
I'm with Spades on this one. Supporting the Trucker Convoy was not in line with my values as a Canadian. I believe in supporting science and public health, not the multi-week long temper tantrum held by a bunch of adults who can't see the big picture.

If you check out Pierre's youtube channel, it appears his platform is going to focus more on creating jobs, expanding GDP. He appears to be very patriotic in the sense of everyone coming together to support fellow Canadians to succeed together.  
 
These are the values I was looking at. If you want to keep digging up past MSM narratives, I'd be curious to know if you hold Trudeau's black face history to the same standard. Or in more recent times Trudeau's surfing vacation on Canada's 1st National Day for Truth and Reconciliation. It's pretty easy to critique political leaders on their public support of events on both sides of the spectrum.  
 
I'll stand by what I said previously, I find Charest's consultant work with Huawei recently quite concerning. Especially when the dilemma involved falsely imprisoning 2 Canadian fathers for a great length of time.  
 
Edited by Brandon,Brandon, 2022-03-11 11:03:35

The fact of Canadian politics is that the party that appeals to the most Canadians wins. That means carrying a lot of seats in Ontario and Quebec. The current Conservative party is trending further right than many voters like. O'Toole had the right idea in trying to bring the party more mainstream and got roasted for it. A right version of the Liberal Party (Charest) is a lot more electable than a reboot of the Reform Parrty. Popularity in the Prairie provinces means bupkis.

However, when you say "than many voters like" , I'm assuming you are specifically talking about the GTA and southern Ontario. I fail to see how the Conservative party specifically is trending to the right as O'Toole's policies were very similar to Trudeau's on the majority of progressive issues like gun bans, abortion, Carbon tax, etc.  
 
I say this region specifically because that was the liberal party's main strong hold in achieving their minority government with only 33% of the votes... which saw only 62% of voters turn out to vote. That being said, looking at the voter turn out in Ontario, there are quite a few ridings (specifically Brampton area) where the liberals won with a voter turn out closer to 50%.  
 
The real questions is why these area's did not go out to vote? It could be potentially that they just didn't like the leaders/MP's presented. I wouldn't say that repeating O'Toole's red tory strategy as being the sure fire way to win the upcoming election. It will be interesting to see which way the next election may fall...... still lots of time for either party to win over absent voters.  
 
Edited by Brandon,Brandon, 2022-03-11 12:19:48

the chances of Charest winning is pretty slim in what is essentially the Reform Party. He was the Leader of the old Progressive Conservatives, which is dead since the takeover of the Canadian Alliance and the Reform Party (CRAP). They should of stayed with that acronym.  
 
But in order for the Conservatives to win seats in Ontario and Quebec they need to find someone and a platform those voters will vote for. And until they do or Ontario and Quebec grow tired of the Liberals they will likely continue to vote Liberal. If Ontario born blue collar family man O'Toole can't succeed in Ontario.  
 
The CPC also has to keep voters who might also vote for PPC or Maverick. So it's either keep voters from going to other further right parties or attract voters on Ontario and Quebec. Have a leader that will appeal to the PPC voters or one appeal to ON/QB?  
 
Then again the CPC removed O'Toole because he wasn't right-wing enough for their liking.  
 
Edited by Trevor B, 2022-03-11 18:50:25

A black female who is an immigrant from Jamaica is also running for the Conservative leadership. How come no one is interested in the fact she is running?

I think she has a lot to offer and am interested in what she has to say.  
 
I hope all those people saying they will vote for Pierre keep an open mind for all the candidates. Listen to what they all have to offer

If/when Michael Chong joins the race, he'll have my support. Until then Charest is my guy.  
 
It's funny, as little as 8 weeks ago if you asked me about Poilievre I would have been quite content with him as the CPC leader. His complete support of the convoy removed any belief of mine that he was a capable leader.  
 
Regarding Lewis, while it's great that she is the first black female immigrant to run for the CPC leadership, she can't win on that alone. She still needs a platform. And assuming she runs on a similar platform to 2020, for me it's a fairly un-electable platform.

Pierre thinks he's the second coming of Christ!! Catering to the Christian voters.

I just read that Chong has decided to not run for the leadership of the Conservative party. I guess you are stuck with Jean Charest.

In case your unaware… christians are celebrating lent leading up to easter in a fews of weeks. This ad is likely just Pierre acknowledging the christian holiday. Quit being a grifter.

That is pretty bold for Pierre to plaster his face and name under such a title. It speaks to his ego and aggressive nature. There are much better ways to reach out to Christians.

“He has risen” is a very common christian easter phrase. Comparable to say “lest we forget” and remembrance day. The fact the people ate getting bent out of shape because it i:ncludes his picture instead or just name or didn’t just say happy easter is ridiculous. If you don’t like it, don’t vote for him. Quit trying not o publicly chastise someone over your own misinterpretation.  
 
Society has become incredibly thin skinned. What many people fail to realize, is how fast and far the line of political correctness moves. There’ll always be someone offended by the smallest detail. Everyday we get closer to orwellian times.

Stop using that to justify apathy for far right politics. PP is aggressive in his views, he feeds the far right and may indeed be too far right to be allowed as leader of a federal party. There is a reason Erin O Toole moved PP to a smaller portfolio. He is too divisive!

He's in public office, I will chastise, mock, call him out, all I want!! If conservatives can do it to Liberal politicians, I can do the same to Conservative politicians. I have no intention to vote for Skippy or the Conservatives anyways.

You’ve made up your mind since your Friday morning post in this thread? Fair enough.

up my mind long ago about the conservatives, I do not support the crap and lies they are spewing. It still means I can have an opinion about their leadership race.  
 
Edited by Trevor B, 2022-03-13 17:36:18

Skippy has an Elections Canada ethics violation against him and had to sign a Compliance Agreement.  
 
https://www.cef-cce.ca/content.asp?section=agr&dir=ca&document=jul0417&lang=e  
 
COMMISSIONER OF CANADA ELECTIONS  
CANADA ELECTIONS ACT  
 
Compliance agreement  
 
This notice is published by the Commissioner of Canada Elections, pursuant to section 521 of the Canada Elections Act, S.C. 2000, c. 9.  
 
On July 4, 2017, the Commissioner of Canada Elections entered into a compliance agreement with Mr. Pierre Poilievre, pursuant to section 517 of the Canada Elections Act. The text of the compliance agreement is set out in full below.  
 
July 4, 2017  
 
Yves Côté, QC  
Commissioner of Canada Elections  
 
 
COMPLIANCE AGREEMENT  
Pursuant to section 517 of the Canada Elections Act (the Act), the Commissioner of Canada Elections (the Commissioner) and Mr. Pierre Poilievre (the Contracting Party) enter into this agreement aimed at ensuring compliance with the Act.  
 
The relevant provisions of the Act are paragraphs 368(1)(a) and 497(2)(e), which make it an offence to knowingly circumvent the prohibition on contributions to a registered party by ineligible contributors set out in subsection 363(1) of the Act.  
 
Statements by the Contracting Party  
For the purpose of this compliance agreement, the Contracting Party acknowledges the following:  
 
In July 2015, the Contracting Party was the federal Minister of Employment and Social Development Canada (ESDC) and Minister of State for Democratic Reform and was the prospective Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) candidate for the electoral district of Carleton for the 42nd federal general election. In accordance with the Act, polling day for that general election was to be held on October 19, 2015. The writs were issued on August 2, 2015, to provide for a general election on that date.  
On July 20, 2015, the Contracting Party formally announced, on behalf of the Government of Canada, the initiation of retroactive lump sum Universal Child Care Benefit (UCCB) payments at funding announcements in Halifax and Truro, Nova Scotia. The UCCB benefits to be disbursed totalled approximately $3 billion and were directed to some 3.8 million families. In an accompanying news release, ESDC described these payments as "the biggest single one-time payout in history." On Twitter and Facebook, the Contracting Party described the payments as "Christmas in July" for Canadian parents.  
The Contracting Party's two announcements at Halifax and Truro were made in his capacity as the Minister responsible for ESDC and hence as the spokesperson for the Government of Canada. The events were organized by federal public servants, who are expected to fulfill their responsibilities in a non-partisan fashion, and whose salaries are paid with public funds from the ESDC departmental budget. The travel, logistical and other expenses related to these events were also paid using public funds from the ESDC departmental budget.  
Ministers were at the time (and still are) prohibited from using public funds from their departmental budgets for partisan purposes. The Treasury Board Secretariat (TBS) document Policies for Ministers' Offices, which took effect on January 17, 2011, and which remains in effect, draws an express distinction between a Minister's expenses incurred in connection with departmental business and those incurred in connection with parliamentary business. The policies require that Ministers differentiate between activities and expenses conducted in the discharge of their ministerial duties and in the conduct of other government business, and those conducted in the course of acting as Members of Parliament and members of a political party. It was at the time (and still is) a permissible and required function of the Government of Canada to communicate governmental policies and initiatives to the public at funding announcements by Ministers, as spokespersons on behalf of the Government of Canada. However, these communications must be made in a non-partisan fashion.  
The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner issued reports on April 29, 2010, concerning the use of ceremonial cheques bearing the CPC logo at federal funding announcements. In both reports, she noted that "...government funding is not a partisan activity, so it is not appropriate to brand federal funding announcements with partisan or personal identifiers." In the course of the Ethics Commissioner's investigation, the former Prime Minister, the Right Honourable Stephen Harper, P.C., in response to a question from the Leader of the Opposition in the House of Commons on October 20, 2009, stated:  
 
Mr. Speaker, I said clearly last week and the government said very clearly, when we heard of this abuse, that the use of a partisan logo on a government announcement was not correct.  
According to the Hansard Official Report of the House of Commons Debates for that date, the Contracting Party was in attendance in the House when the Prime Minister made the remarks.  
At the July 20, 2015, Halifax and Truro funding announcements, the Contracting Party wore a blue golf shirt bearing a CPC party logo. During the media availability that immediately followed the Halifax funding announcement, the Contracting Party stated to the media, in reference to the UCCB payments, that these "tangible benefits" were from "our Conservative government," adding that "if the Liberals and NDP were to take office they would take the benefits away and raise taxes." Journalists from some major national and regional media outlets reported on both the funding announcements and the Contracting Party's subsequent statements.  
In making this positive association between the CPC and the UCCB program, the Contracting Party intended to create favourable publicity in order to gain partisan advantage and improve the CPC's electoral prospects in the upcoming election and to thereby provide a benefit to his political party through the branding of the government event by together doing the following:  
The wearing of clothing bearing the CPC party logo at two significant funding announcements (both in terms of the amount of money to be spent and the number of beneficiaries, many of whom would be eligible electors); along with  
The making of an election campaign style statement during the media availability portion of the Halifax announcement.  
Shortly before the Halifax announcement, a Minister's Office staff member questioned the Contracting Party on whether he should wear the golf shirt with the party logo. The Contracting Party confirmed that he wanted to wear that shirt.  
The Contracting Party's intention in wearing clothing bearing the CPC party logo during the government funding announcement was to link the UCCB benefit to the party and the Conservative government and to provoke the media to cover CPC involvement in the funding. The Contracting Party subsequently acknowledged that, in retrospect, he would have worn a suit.  
As the Minister for ESDC, and consequently the spokesperson for the UCCB program, the Contracting Party converted two Government of Canada funding announcements into partisan events promoting the CPC, at no cost to the party. This caused the expenses related to the funding announcements to become a de facto non-monetary contribution to the CPC. This had the effect of circumventing the rule, in subsection 363(1) of the Act, that only a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident of Canada may legally make a contribution to a federal political party. The Government of Canada is not eligible to make such a contribution to the party.  
In response to a question from an Ottawa Citizen reporter on July 21, 2015, regarding the Halifax and Truro announcements, a spokesperson for the Conflicts of Interest and Ethics Commissioner confirmed that "while it may be seen as inappropriate", neither the Conflict of Interest Act or the Conflict of Interest Code for MPs forbids MPs — or Ministers — from wearing party-branded apparel at a government funding event. That said, pursuant to subsection 2(1) of the Act, the commercial value of a service provided to a political party, other than volunteer labour, constitutes a "non-monetary contribution" to that party. The known quantifiable costs associated with the planning and holding of the government funding announcements were calculated to have a commercial value of approximately $4,800.  
The Contracting Party understands that acknowledgement of non-compliance does not constitute an admission of guilt in the criminal sense and that no record of conviction is created as a result of admitting responsibility for acts that could constitute an offence.  
The Contracting Party acknowledges that the Commissioner has advised him of his right to be represented by counsel and has given him an opportunity to obtain counsel.  
Factors considered by the Commissioner  
In entering into this compliance agreement, the Commissioner took into account the factors set out in paragraph 32 of the Compliance and Enforcement Policy of the Commissioner of Canada Elections, which is available on the Commissioner's website, including the fact that  
 
Before entering into this compliance agreement, the Contracting Party prepared a notice, in both official languages, for the purpose of publication as directed by the terms herein, the contents of which were approved by the Commissioner.  
Undertaking and agreement  
The Contracting Party undertakes to display a link to the notice described above on the "News and Headlines" page of his personal website (http://pierremp.ca) for a minimum period of 30 days from the publication of the compliance agreement on the Office of the Commissioner of Canada Elections website, and to transmit a link to the Contracting Party's web page via his official Facebook and Twitter accounts. This transmission shall occur on the day the notice is first displayed, between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.  
 
The Contracting Party further undertakes to provide evidence to the Commissioner in writing that this undertaking has been complied with as soon as practicable.  
 
The Contracting Party undertakes to distribute the contents of the notice, referred to in the preceding paragraphs, in the form of a bilingual news release to the national news media as soon as practicable after the Commissioner has signed the compliance agreement, once the Commissioner has approved the contents of the release. The Contracting Party must provide a copy of the release to the Commissioner as evidence of compliance with this undertaking.  
 
The Contracting Party agrees to comply with the relevant provisions of the Act in the future.  
 
The Contracting Party consents to the publication of this agreement in the Canada Gazette and on the Commissioner's website.  
 
The Commissioner agrees that the fulfillment by the Contracting Party of the undertakings in this agreement will constitute compliance with the agreement.  
 
Under subsection 517(5), the compliance agreement and the statements it contains are not admissible in evidence against the Contracting Party in any civil or criminal proceedings.  
 
Pursuant to subsection 517(8) of the Act, the Commissioner and the Contracting Party recognize that once this agreement is entered into, the Commissioner will be prevented from referring this matter for prosecution to the Director of Public Prosecutions unless there is non-compliance with an undertaking of the compliance agreement, and in any event, the Director of Public Prosecutions cannot institute such a prosecution unless non-compliance with the agreement's undertakings has been established.  
 
 
Signed by the Contracting Party in the City of Ottawa, in the province of Ontario this 30th day of June 2017.  
 
Hon. Pierre Poilievre, P.C., M.P.  
 
Signed by the Commissioner of Canada Elections, in the City of Gatineau, in the province of Quebec, this 4th day of July 2017.  
 
Yves Côté, QC  
Commissioner of Canada Elections

 
 
Edited by Bass-ic, 2022-03-13 21:42:37

While I share some of your disappointment in the current Conservative party and agree that leadership candidates are lacking in credibility I’m afraid that the poor language and aggression that you apply in your post is completely unacceptable on a forum accessible to the public.

Is the ones running for leadership are all rich. They have to be to pay the fees associated with the process. And yes PP is rich and likely richer than Trudeau. So how can they understand the struggles of everyone else. The rich have tax loopholes that wont be closed anytime soon.  
Then there are the promises. Yeah right! They all promise promise promise then do what they want when elected.  
Then there are the outright lies and manipulation of the facts to support their political agendas. Political posturing is all about pointing fingers at the other guy and jumping on the bandwagon of disgruntled voters to get votes.  
 
There has to be a better way.