Why Canadians will eventually reject Poilievre as our next PM

Seriously speaking, I’m beginning to wonder whether reporters of any stripe actually “cover” the news, much less their columnists try to interpret political results through the lens of yesterday. Take, for instance, the two by-elections held last Monday, one in Winnipeg and the other in Montreal. In the Montreal riding of Lasalle-Emard-Verdun, less than 600 votes separated the top three “finishers”, with Bloc Quebecois candidate Louis-Philippe Sauve defeating Liberal Laura Palestini, with the NDP’s Craig Sauve finishing third, while in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood-Transcona, the NDP’s Leila Dance prevailed over Conservative Colin Reynolds. 

To the pundits who think they have the inside track on everything that is “political”, the Montreal loss by the Liberals was that final sign from Heaven that Liberal leader Justin Trudeau should just go away, while the Conservatives’ “resurgence” in Winnipeg simply meant that NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh should be seriously worried as to the picture Pierre Poilievre paints of him, as Ms. Dance “only” received 48.1% of the votes cast.

Based upon such results, I am starting to feel better, because to me all they are telling me is that not everyone is listening to Mr. Poilievre anymore and maybe, just maybe, his Party might now want to caution that with him sounding more and more like Donald Trump, a victory in the next federal election may not be as “in the bag” as most Conservative followers believe.

NO, folks, I don’t do drugs save for the medications my doctor has prescribed for my “getting old” symptoms of illness, nor am I totally 100 per cent ‘in sync” with everything the NDP, whether provincial or federal, formulate as policy; however, I’m also not suggesting that these two election results suggest that Son of Pierre is about to initiate a “comeback” such as he encountered in 2015 when Tom Mulcair had already put the count of 10 on outgoing PM Stephen Harper. However, our main man Justin didn’t look particularly “concerned” as to the probability of losing in Montreal; bouncing around with reporters before going home for the weekend, he not only restated to anyone listening that he “wasn’t going anywhere”, but that if Mr. Poilievre was constrained to believe that Canadians wanted to fight an early election over the carbon tax, he would give the Opposition parties their own “day” this coming Tuesday, and that the Conservative leader would be more than welcome to introduce a non-confidence motion to the floor of Parliament.

Readers may recall that in last Saturday’s column I indicated that it was more than just the NDP supporting the Liberals, even though Poilievre has continuously challenged NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh to pull out from the Party’s “Supply-and-Confidence” agreement with the Liberals – which is what he’s already done, in return for consideration and passage of dental care and pharmaceutical supply programs, Dentalcare and Pharmacare, ideas that have been staples in their electoral policy releases for the past 20 years, and are now to the point of being implemented.

There’s only one point missing here, that being that the Pharmacare legislation has yet to become law, so if the NDP decides to support the Conservative non-confidence motion, the process would have to start all over again, and in effect destroy whatever concessions the NDP may have extracted from the Liberals – a result that’s well keeping in tune with American MAGA Republicans desire for President Biden’s attempts to lower its nation’s pharmaceutical costs, now the highest on Earth. 

Poilievre has increasingly preferred to utilize the NDP’s Jagmeet Singh as the principal target of his “beating stick” in the NDP’s role of honouring their Agreement with the Liberals, whether by bedding him down in the programs released by the co-operating parties that the Conservative leader believes are unpopular with Canadians (mostly Covid-related mandates or the alleged “loss of freedoms” mentioned in passing by the thugs leading the Carbon Convoy), However, his taunting of Singh by maintaining that the current length of this Parliamentary term has been extended so that the NDP Leader could qualify for his parliamentary pension is beginning to wear thin with most observers, especially given that when Poilievre retires his annual stipend from Treasury will be just over 250 per cent that of Singh’s, but that he will have no career to return to (Singh is a lawyer) to supplement his income due to him having become nothing more than a “career politician”.

In the meantime, the Bloc Quebecois, while perhaps not exactly “pro” in their Canadian perspective, have never run short of intellectual leaders, and Yves-Francois Blanchet is no exception – and no “fan” of Poilievre. Even before the blasé motion sent to the Opposition parties as to the wording of their tentative non-confidence motion had been read by MP’s, the Bloc had already told any reporter listening that they’ be voting “No” to its reading – thus saving Mr. Singh the need to respond to Poilievre’s taunts.

It’s no big secret that the NDP’s dental and pharmaceutical legislation is met with great favour in Quebec, and the Bloc Quebecois just want to shake a few cookie crumbs from the napkins of Liberal Party parliamentary diners, then soak them in maple syrup to give these programs a special “Made in Quebec” pretentiousness. 

Currently, the Conservative’s principal political weapon consists only of their ability to mobilize public opinion to see Justin Trudeau “gone” as PM; however, their willingness to set off such an explosion to become the winner in our next federal election has at the moment only one consequence, that being to curry favour with American interests in the petroleum, pharmaceutical and insurance industries, while simultaneously unleashing seriously draconian economic measures used to wrest a budget bloated by pandemic measures taken to restrain the ravages of the Covid virus.

Just like Donald Trump…

Isn’t it about time that the Conservative Party upgrade its Constitution to enhance our Canadian identity instead of us being portrayed as “wannabe” Americans?

More on this thought in next Saturday’s column…

-Advertisement-