John Ivison Opinion Writer For The National Post Details Why I believe Post Justin Trudeau, Pierre Poilievre Will Help The People’s Party of Canada To Win Seats – January 31, 2024
John Ivison wrote an article titled “John Ivison: Parliament’s carbon tax drama is ripped right out of Poilievre’s script,” and in this well-written article, Ivison writes what I believe is a fair assessment of Pierre Poilievre’s political strategy.
Am I hopeful that Pierre Poilievre is a LIAR and will enact austerity measures under the guise of ending the carbon tax? Sure, but I consider the likelihood of that happening to be closer to ZERO percent than 1%.
John Ivison: Parliament’s carbon tax drama is ripped right out of Poilievre’s script
Poilievre knows policies are irrelevant and that his lead in the polls can be attributed to channelling anger against the prime minister
Unlike Javier Milei, who was voted in by the Argentine people who had enough of BIG GOVERNMENT, Canadians, for the most part, still love BIG GOVERNMENT; in Canada, the assumption amongst “COMMON SENSE” Canadians is that Justin Trudeau is an IDIOT who needs to find something better to do with his time.
The remaining supporters of Justin Trudeau and the NDP, for the most part, are “Never Tories” who want cradle-to-grave welfare; these types have ZERO interest in a market economy, and similar to the Socialists in Argentina, these Left Wing Canadians want to kill the capitalist goose that lays the golden eggs, and they’ll worry about the consequences later.
I’ve been one to DEFEND, current Governor of the Bank of Canada Tiff Macklem on more than one occasion, primarily because Stephen Harper, during the heights of his power, appointed Stephen Poloz, with the INTENT to lower interest rates, so that he could shrink the deficit.
Genius idea, most Conservatives would assume, but PRICE CONTROLS come with consequences, you see the problem Conservatives have always had have been DEBATES about what causes prices to rise.
The assumption by most Conservatives in Canada, is that tinkering with central bank interest rates are not the same as minimum wage hikes or rental controls, this assumption is WRONG.
In the United States, Donald Trump is the perfect example of what happens to a “Conservative” politician, who refuses to allow interest rates to be dictated by the market. Donald Trump while cutting regulations with ARTIFICIALLY low interest rates, ended up enriching his enemies.
If I know interest rates will be low and I have a political agenda, to destroy my opposition, and my opposition is creating an economic environment that allows for fewer regulations, well, then now, I’ve just been subsidized.
Higher interest rates equate to serious economic CONSEQUENCES for bad ideas. Currently Justin Trudeau and Joe Biden’s, FISCAL spending have not only created record levels of debt, they’ve also fueled HIGHER PRICES.
Higher prices are far more effective for creating an environment for the implementation of AUSTERITY MEASURES/CHANGE than a reorganization of the welfare State.
In Argentina, Javier Milei got ahead of the Socialists by PUBLICLY and unapologetically BASHING the Socialists every chance he got. Javier Milei became a fortune teller, predicting financial disasters and making the BOLD claim that Austerity was the ONLY solution.
If you listen to Pierre Poilievre, on the surface, he’s promoting an agenda of RESTRUTURING; as I like to point out, Canada has a lot of PRICE CONTROL MECHANISMS in place that will NOT allow certain prices to retreat without austerity measures.
Pierre Poilievre has to know this, but when I listen to Pierre, what I hear from him is that he will hire a new central banker who will cut interest rates and Poilievre will restructure, not rejecting the Globalist Climate Change Agenda.
Pierre Poilievre, for example, will NOT end supply management; supply management is PRICE FIXING; it’s a price control mechanism, so that segment of the economy will likely NOT see a price deflation under Pierre Poilievre unless he plans on doing some PROPERTY/Wealth redistribution.
With that said, Ivison does mention that it appears that Canadians don’t care about the details, so in actuality, Pierre Poilievre has the opportunity to get rid of the Left Wing Globalist agenda when he gets the chance.
Former Governor of Puerto Rico, Luis Fortuno, laid out the MODERN blueprint on how to deal with Leftists, rip the band-aid off early, weather the storm, and stick to the game plan.
If Pierre Poilievre takes the Donald Trump route, which is to “try to bring everyone together,” he’s going to be faced with the harsh reality that everyone has their own agenda, and the moment you attack that agenda, the people you bring together will not only separate themselves from you, they’ll also seek to destroy you.
The problem, like it or not, is BIG GOVERNMENT; most politicians fail to comprehend this. For example, Joe Biden remains popular in Washington because he’s aligned with all the special interest groups.
Donald Trump, on the flip side, picks and chooses what special interest groups he wants to be aligned with on his own terms. Now, if you’ve been around most people in powerful positions, they’re not used to being personally ATTACKED. These people have egos, and if you attack their self-worth, they’ll set their sights on destroying you.
Obviously, Pierre Poilievre is no Donald Trump, but he’s obviously trying to make friends with SPECIAL INTEREST groups in Canada that have their own agendas.
For example, when I listen to Pierre Poilievre’s housing proposal, I laugh because a lot of CONSERVATIVE don’t want more building permits to be approved in their city or town.
On the flip side, as it relates to rental housing, the problem has little to do with building more housing and more to do with municipal laws. Many people who otherwise would be landlords refuse to be; why? Because of MUNICIPAL laws, I’m curious to see how Pierre Poilievre will change that, and Federal financing to the housing market, under a price-controlled environment, simply means that municipalities will raise prices.
If Pierre Poilievre denies them financing, cities will blame Pierre Poilievre for the housing mess. What I’m getting at with all of this is that it doesn’t appear to me that Pierre Poilievre comprehends that Canada needs a CULTURE shift.
There’s no easy fix anymore; that ship has sailed; in regards to housing, many of us had been calling for the dissolving of the CMHC, which in practice is PRICE FIXING the housing market. But Stephen Harper didn’t see things that way, and Pierre Poilievre appears to have the same type of thinking as Stephen Harper.
It’s a management issue, they’re arguing, well, if that’s how they’re imagining the problem, I suspect the People’s Party of Canada should start building a campaign to start taking market share from the Conservative Party, so after Pierre Poilievre beats Trudeau.
Maxime Bernier is currently in a no-win situation. Canadians’ main goal right now is to get rid of Trudeau, and after Trudeau is gone, I think this is the perfect opportunity for the People’s Party of Canada. During the 2025 election, I will only be watching the PPC numbers. Maxime’s numbers during the last election were scattered all over the country.
What impressed me about the last election is that Erin O’Toole won the popular vote, and the PPC still received a record number of votes. The PPC totaled more votes than the Green Party. Unfortunately, those votes were NOT concentrated in any one area.
If people remember the 1990s, even the Liberals of that era, were forced to promote themselves as FISCALLY responsible, why? Because the Reform Party and the Conservative Party were sill very popular. Brian Mulroney wasn’t popular, because he wasn’t a real Conservative, he broke the hearts of a lot of Conservatives, yet, the Liberals of the 1990s still had to promote themselves as fiscally responsible, think about that.
I don’t see “vote splitting” as a bad thing; currently, the SOCIALIST NDP and Liberals benefited from vote splitting, their far left ideas are all over Canada, you have Canadians arguing about who is more far left than the other, why? Because a lot of Canadians are only FAMILIAR with the far left message.
Getting IDEAS to the public requires repetition, potentially from different sources; if you look at the NDP and Liberals, they’re both aggressively pushing a Left Wing agenda, and so for a lot of Canadians, that’s the only message they’re familiar with.
I think a cultural shift is necessary in Canadian politics that doesn’t revolve around simply winning elections, if Poilievre is going to be common sense conservativism, the PPC needs to fill in the details of what liberty and Freedom is all about.
Interesting times ahead!