Conservatives’ Erin O’Toole hitting turbulence after 6 months as leader
OTTAWA — The fight to win the leadership of his party could be nothing compared to what Conservative Leader Erin O’Toole has ahead: keeping his party together as he tries to win over voters who haven’t voted for it recently.
Caucus morale is buoyed by this week’s House of Commons vote in favour of a motion declaring a genocide against Uighur Muslims in China.
But the Tories remain stuck behind the Liberals in the polls and the Liberal war room is revving up to keep them there.
The Tories’ hawkish view on China stands as a point of demarcation between O’Toole and
Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, so while the Tories lauded the vote Monday as a victory for human rights, it’s also one for them.
That Liberal MPs, but not cabinet, voted with the Tories on the motion underscores the point, O’Toole argued after the vote.
“The fact that Mr. Trudeau did not even show up to be accountable is a terrible sign of leadership,” he said.
That he’d take a strong stance on China was a key promise O’Toole made in his bid for leadership last year.
But how he’s following through on others is emerging as a question as O’Toole marks exactly six months in the post.
Among the issues: a fear he’ll backtrack on a promise dear to the heart of the party, especially in the West: repealing the federal carbon tax.
MPs not authorized to publicly discuss caucus deliberations say many are concerned about O’Toole’s stated support for a Liberal bill aimed at cutting Canada’s net emissions of greenhouse gases to zero by 2050.
Most environment and economics experts say getting there without a carbon tax is possible, but
would cost more because the regulations needed to achieve the goal would ultimately be more expensive.
For a party fixated on the bottom line, which path to take without inflaming the base is a tricky choice.
O’Toole’s spokesperson says he remains committed to scrapping the federal carbon tax, though O’Toole himself no longer includes it in election-style speeches to general audiences, nor would he repeat the commitment to reporters when asked last week.
Another marquee promise, to defund the CBC, is also in the wind.
Spokesperson Chelsea Tucker didn’t directly answer this week when asked if he would still do that if the Conservatives win power.
All outlets need a fair playing field, she said in an email.
“Conservatives are committed to ensuring the best path forward for Canada’s news sector.”
The promises on the carbon tax and on defunding the CBC were key planks for O’Toole’s leadership campaign because he needed the Tory base on side to win.
But as he seeks now to broaden the appeal of the party, many in caucus are expressing frustration with his approach.
Recent meetings have been laced with tension and demands for change, several told The Canadian Press.
Underpinning the grumbling: how kicking controversial MP Derek Sloan out of caucus played out, the appearance of a demotion from the important finance-critic post for wildly popular MP Pierre Poilievre, and frustration over the Conservatives’ overarching pitch to the public.
In some instances, MPs have issued their own statements when official lines out of O’Toole’s office didn’t jibe with their own points of view.
MPs Rachael Harder and
Jeremy Patzer publicly lashed out over new Liberal measures
restricting travel to fight the COVID-19 pandemic, calling them draconian and an overreach, while O’Toole’s office stuck with a call for compassion.
Meanwhile, some MPs see focusing on anything but vaccines against COVID-19 a waste of political energy, including the recent vote on China. Others argue that O’Toole’s stated focus on jobs — it was the reason Poilievre has a new title as jobs and industry critic, O’Toole says — means little without ideas to advance.
O’Toole’s team has partially blamed lacklustre polling on an inability to get out in front of people during the pandemic, and have tried to counter it with ad blitzes.
Those efforts are also aimed at defining O’Toole before the Liberals come up with a narrative of their own.
The two clashed Wednesday. As O’Toole marked six months as leader with a new ad portraying him as a serious worker, the Liberals jumped on a clip from his leadership race where he suggests he wants to put the prime minister in a portable toilet.
O’Toole’s office discounted the tactic as another effort by the Liberals to distract from their record, calling on them to focus instead on vaccines.
There are other signs of a disconnect emerging between O’Toole and at least some of his caucus.
One is over an upcoming vote in the House of Commons on a ban on conversion therapy. O’Toole says he is against the practice of forcing those questioning their gender or sexual identities into therapy but it’s a free vote for his MPs.
The members of his caucus who oppose the ban are organizing their own strategy sessions to frame their planned votes, work that includes O’Toole’s deputy chief of staff.
And the well-organized socialconservative wing of the party is gearing up for the Tories’ March policy convention.
The effort includes snapping up delegate spots so rapidly that some party stalwarts didn’t get one, raising fears the social conservatives will be mighty enough to get controversial policies passed.
Competition for spaces is a healthy sign, said party spokesman Cory Hann.
“We have had more people interested in our convention than at any time in history, so of course there’s going to be competitive delegate-selection meetings right across the country, which just shows how much interest there is in our party,” he said.
O’Toole said recently what the polls show today doesn’t matter.
“The Conservatives got Canada through the last global recession, better than any other country, without raising taxes. That is what we will do,” he said.
“And I think the polls will be on election day when Canadians want to choose that strong future.”
As the coronavirus pandemic exploded worldwide last April, global organizations banded together to help ensure that the world’s most vulnerable people would get vaccines amid the rush for shots. The initiative known as COVAX was formed by the World Health Organization, the vaccines alliance GAVI and a coalition for epidemic innovations called CEPI.
COVAX is supposed to make deals to buy vaccines in bulk from drug companies and can also receive donated shots from rich countries. Poorer nations can receive free doses from the initiative — and wealthier ones can also buy from it, as a way of diversifying their supply.
But it has been dogged by shortages of cash and supplies as well as logistical hurdles — all while a handful of rich countries raced ahead with their vaccination campaigns.
Only on Wednesday did the first vaccines bought by COVAX arrive in Ghana. A look at the project so far:
WHY IS COVAX NECESSARY?
Not all countries can afford their own COVID-19 vaccines, and in past pandemics, including the 2009 swine flu pandemic, vaccines were hoarded by rich countries until the outbreak ended. During the HIV crisis, life-saving treatments were made available in Africa only years after they were introduced in the West.
Beyond the moral duty of sharing vaccines broadly, scientists have warned that that allowing the coronavirus to spread freely in any population is a global risk because that could lead to dangerous new variants that could then spread — even in people who had already had the virus or who had been vaccinated against it.
WHAT DID COVAX SET OUT TO DO?
COVAX’s initial goal was to get vaccines to poor countries at roughly the same time shots were being rolled out in rich countries. Although it’s missed that target, it is still hoping to deliver about 2 billion doses to more than 90 countries by the end of the year.
COVAX is only planning to provide enough vaccine to immunize about 20% to 30% of people in poorer countries — a figure that will still leave those nations vulnerable to coronavirus outbreaks. Experts estimate that at least 70% of a population needs to be protected against COVID-19 to prevent future epidemics.
Kate Elder of Doctors Without Borders called COVAX’s first vaccine delivery to Ghana “a very small, late start” to global immunization. The charity suggested postponing
vaccine shipments to rich countries “while the world works to catch up on protecting the most at-risk people living in developing countries.”
WHY HASN’T COVAX MOVED FASTER?
There aren’t enough vaccines. The world’s supply of COVID-19 vaccines is extremely limited — companies are struggling to make more — and experts predict there won’t be enough shots to cover the global population until 2023 or 2024. While middle- and highincome countries have reserved more than 5 billion doses, COVAX has signed deals to obtain more than 1 billion vaccines — but not all of those deals are legally binding.
The initiative has received billions of dollars in funding, but WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus pointed out this week that money is almost meaningless if there are no vaccines to buy. He pleaded with rich countries not to strike further deals to secure additional vaccines since that might jeopardize the deals COVAX already has.
COVAX was also unable to start shipping out any vaccines until they were granted an emergency use approval by WHO. Only two vaccines have received that green light so far, the shots made by Pfizer-BioNTech and AstraZeneca. The AstraZeneca doses make up the bulk of the shots COVAX has deals for and was only authorized last week.
Unlike in past outbreaks, when poorer countries have waited for vaccines to be sent by aid agencies, these delays have led numerous developing countries to strike their own private deals outside of COVAX.
A8
WHAT ARE RICH COUNTRIES DOING
TO HELP?
Although the Group of Seven, a club of major economic powers, promised to ensure equitable access to COVID-19 vaccines and pledged $7.5 billion for COVAX, there have been few details from countries including Britain, Germany and France about when they would be willing to donate any of their excess shots.
While French President Emmanuel Macron promised to donate 5% of vaccines to COVAX, British Foreign Minister James Cleverly said it was “difficult to say with any kind of certainty” when or how much Britain could donate.
Several wealthier countries have come under fire for buying up huge quantities of vaccines — the U.K., for instance, has deals for enough to cover its population more than five times over. The countries have defended themselves by noting that they had to make the agreements before they knew which shots would work — and, often, by promising to donate excess vaccines. But the lack of detail now is worrying, and some experts say countries will be unlikely to donate any shots until they know how long immunity lasts, and against which variants.
Other rich countries, such as Canada, New Zealand and Singapore, have applied to receive vaccines through COVAX even though they have their own supplies. WHO has said those requests will be fulfilled since part of COVAX’s goal was to allow rich countries to buy a wider range of vaccines.