Poilievre’s reckless pandemic politics
The pandemic has exposed our democracy to a brand of politics many hoped Canada could avoid. We must prevent its spread.
Like many families, the past two years have been challenging for my own. We have managed because so many of our fellow Canadians shared the responsibility of staying safe — getting vaccinated, wearing masks, respecting science and supporting each other. This commitment to civic responsibility is heartening.
Then the so-called freedom convoy rolled into Ottawa.
Infused with dark money, supported by the far right, and aided through foreign disinformation, this small contingent of Canadians accepts conspiracies instead of evidence and personal convenience over concern for others.
No one has cultivated their support more than Pierre Poilievre, and that effort is now fuelling his run for the Conservative party leadership.
In his media statements, at public rallies and on his Twitter feed, Poilievre has demanded an end to all public health protections including mask mandates and vaccine passports, calling them “malicious.” Never mind nearly 40,000 Canadians have died from this airborne disease, Poilievre frames his opposition to public health protections as a defence of “freedom.”
He has defended people “refusing to put something in their own bodies,” and promised to stand up for “their personal health choices.” Sophistry aside, his policy prescriptions — shared to varying degrees by some provincial governments — are wrong and already proving harmful.
Mask and vaccination mandates have greatly mitigated the impacts of the pandemic, from infection to vaccine uptake to prevention of serious illness and death. They have helped keep my family, and millions of other families, safe. Canadian and international studies prove this.
It is not only the scientific literature Poilievre overlooks; he is failing to acknowledge ongoing suffering: the hospitalized loved one, the bullied child, the worried parent, the friend on a surgical wait-list, the patient requiring a diagnosis, the harassed health-care worker.
In this regard, Poilievre’s campaign echoes organized efforts in other countries to politicize the pandemic.
The significant threat of consequences of infection are becoming more apparent every day, from various long-COVID disabilities to measurable changes in brain function to increased risks of cardiovascular and other diseases. There are specific and concerning risks to children who become infected with the virus. Vaccines, as effective as they are, provide only partial protection against longCOVID. The elderly and immunocompromised persons remain at heightened risk.
With anywhere from 10 to 30 per cent of infected persons thought to have some form of long-COVID, an extraordinary number of Canadians will be, impacted with enormous implications for our health-care system and economy.
Consider how Poilievre’s pandemic politics would inform his wider policy agenda. Might a skeptical attitude toward harm reduction hamper the country’s ability to address climate change or the opioid epidemic? Could such an expansive view of personal liberty put settled issues like gun control or universal health care at risk? Will support for anti-government convoy protesters lead to hardline stances on immigration or minority rights?
As we have witnessed elsewhere, politicians who ascend to power on righteous defence of self-interest, a transactional relationship with facts, and an unconvincing concern for suffering end up being damaging for democracy.
The pandemic has taken enough of a toll. I want to protect my family from a deadly virus. I want to protect my country from destructive politics. The time to sound the alarm on Poilievre’s campaign is now.