Conservative Party Platform
My thoughts
I’ve stated in a previous post that I’m no longer voting Conservative. I had been listening to Poilievre. I listened for over a year. But then the time came for Poilievre to step forward and to start speaking about how he would lead. And for over four months, Poilievre failed to put forward a cogent vision for my country. One of the things I was looking for during that time was a platform. Poilievre had ideas. I wanted to know how he was going to implement them and the framework he was going to use.
Platforms are funny things. There’s some guesswork, especially in costing. But ultimately, platforms serve to tell us what the parties value and who they are focusing on. I remember reading the 2021 Liberal platform and thinking “they don’t give a doodie about me!”. I didn’t vote Liberal that year. Well, now we have a platform1. It was released at the last possible moment. And it does nothing to convince me that the Conservatives have something to offer.
Something positive: Change. The guiding principle of this document is change, and it would certainly deliver change. The Poilievre’s are a lovely looking couple… and that’s all I got. It’s really difficult to find positive things to say about a platform that is so shallow on details.
Initial impressions: There are a lot of pictures. If you were to pick up a laminated copy, the lovely Mme. Poilievre is pictured centre frame and would catch your eye immediately on the cover. Because… reasons?2 The second thing that will catch your eye on the cover is “change” - see above. This platform is short. But it is also sophomoric in its content and composition. It reads like a term paper thrown together at midnight and I'm not certain Poilievre didn't write it himself.
Musings on content:
There is a lot of red meat thrown to Poilievre’s base.
Woke ideology will be stopped, p. 24. This has been placed under the Quebec platform for some odd reason.
There’s an anti-trans dog whistle, p. 12. This is under their crime platform.
Stop and reverse gun bans, p.12. Also under the crime platform. To be clear, the guns the Liberals want to remove from Canada are assault weapons. Not hunting rifles. We can talk about how badly Trudeau failed in this initiative later.
Speaking of. The Liberals make frequent boogy-man appearances.
Remove climate initiatives, p. 6. This is under the Unleash Canadian Energy section.
Bring back plastics! p. 5.
The failed - yes failed - American “three strikes” policy punctuates his tough on crime agenda. p.11. A lot of ink has been spilled on why this policy is an abject failure. I’m not expanding on this here. Just know it fails. Every. Time.
And so on.
The Fiscal Common Sense section, p. 5, doesn’t make much sense. Requiring every “new” dollar spent to be matched by a dollar reduced, means that spending is frozen. That’s what this means. It is simple math. If I add 2 and take away 2, then the change in my spending is zero. This means as Canada’s population grows, everyone will have to make do with a smaller piece of our social pie. Because Poilievre math means that you can’t spend more money to expand your service delivery for a larger population. Further, Poilievre’s claim that “for every $1 of new administrative burden, $2 will be removed”, and similarly for regulations, doesn’t math well. If you follow this to its logical extent, Poilievre is suggesting that Canadians will never pay for regulations. Which is good, because his math means there won’t be any regulations.
Remove the GST from new homes under $1.3 million, p. 4 and then p. 9. Not a bad policy, but most of us aren’t going to be able to build a new home. This is mostly going to benefit mid to upper middle class. For a giggle, the platform claims that this initiative will remove up to $100,000 from the cost of a new home and save up to $4500/yr on p. 4, and then claims that it will remove up to $65,000 from the cost of a new home and save up to $3000/yr on p. 9. Probably should have checked those numbers.
There is a tension in how Poilievre intends to tackle homelessness. On p. 10 we have, Return to a "housing first" approach to eliminating homelessness so that individuals experiencing homelessness can have a stable place to live. Great! Let’s help the homeless. How are we going to implement housing first? On p. 11: End tent cities by letting law enforcement break up homeless encampments that are causing nuisance. Ahhh. Then on p. 19 we have Poilievre referring to Drug Dens which when you get to the costing tables, become Liberal Drug Dens and you realize that this means safe supply and safe injection sites. Further, Poilievre wants to force drug users into mandatory treatment … I’m not sure this meets the standards of compassion and creativity required to solve these problems.
“Drill Baby Drill!” Someone had to say it. Under the Unleash Canadian Energy and Resources section, p. 6, Poilievre lays out his vision for our resources. Eleven of fifteen bullet points deal with oil and gas. Seven (7) of those deal with eliminating environmental regulations. Reading this section gives the impression that much like his Alberta cousin, Poilievre is hyper focused on harvesting oil and gas.
It’s all about that oil. When I look at how the Conservatives are going to cost their platform, I lose any confidence that they will form a competent government. The numbers. The numbers are… creative. And they are completely reliant on repealing environmental and climate protections. A quick glance at the revenue table, p. 26, reveals that oil and gas development are how Poilievre plans to drive the Canadian economy. As someone pointed out, “this is Poilievre’s version of budgets balance themselves”. I’ll leave further costing analysis to the major news outlets, but this is what stood out to me.
Conclusion. It’s the cost of living, stupid!: For someone who correctly clocked the affordability crisis before anyone else, Poilievre’s platform reads more like a piecemeal settling of scores than a vision to help everyday Canadians. Interestingly, prices (both singular and plural) are mentioned precisely once. In the introduction. On page 4. They’re high. Groceries are mentioned 4 times. Twice in an introduction and then twice on p 5. - remove a non-existent produce packaging tax and bring back plastic grocery bags. Gas prices aren’t mentioned at all. Rent gets an oblique reference in a military housing line item, after being referenced in the introduction as part of the affordability crisis, p. 10 and again on p. 15. But otherwise, nothing. No plan. It is almost as though the affordability crisis is merely a prop in the Poilievre show.
Ultimately, I think this is a Rorschach test. If you were going to vote Conservative, you think this is great. If you weren’t going to vote conservative… well, you don’t have a reason to change your vote.
Take care and happy voting,
Tara
Link to the platform pdf: https://canada-first-for-a-change.s3.us-west-2.amazonaws.com/20250418_CPCPlatform_8-5x11_EN_R1-pages.pdf
Ok, I’m speculating here. But there has been credible reporting that Poilievre is toxic to women. Mme. Poilievre has been glued to her husband’s side in an effort soften Pierre’s image. Photographic composition matters and it is a choice. What this indicates to me, is that they do not want Poilievre alone on the cover of his own platform because he’s too polarizing.