The Liberal Party, consistent with its tendency in government to waste taxpayers’ money on useless or preposterous initiatives, also spends its donors’ money in ways that make little sense. The Liberals recently set up a website, pierresrecord.ca, that attempts to denigrate Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre’s record as a member of Parliament. In fact, it provides numerous reasons why Canadians should support Poilievre instead of them.

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.

Matthew Lau: Liberals’ anti-Poilievre website highlights his policy strengths Back to video

We apologize, but this video has failed to load.

Try refreshing your browser, or
tap here to see other videos from our team.

Play Video

At the top of the website’s list is that in 2012 the Harper government of which Poilievre was a part reformed Old Age Security to increase the age of eligibility to 67 by 2029. Given lengthening life expectancies, the policy was perfectly sensible. It was also in line with other developed countries. “Of the 22 high-income OECD countries apart from Canada,” a Fraser Institute bulletin in 2022 noted, “16 have either already increased the age of eligibility for public retirement programs to above age 65 or are in the process of doing so.” But the Liberals cancelled this reform when they came to power, a decision that by 2030 will have cost taxpayers over $10 billion more than the policy Poilievre supported, so on this key issue Poilievre’s record is much better than the Liberals’.

The Liberal website then highlights that in 2013 Poilievre supported right-to-work laws that would prevent unions from collecting union dues from workers who do not wish to be members of the union. The Liberals also cite an article describing how in 2016 Poilievre fought against legislation that would deny workers a secret ballot vote in order to certify a union to represent them. Both are sensible positions, and it is to be hoped Poilievre still holds them today. If so, that would be a strong reason Canadians should vote for him and not the Liberals.

The Liberals’ website also brings up some of Poilievre’s statements on social policy, including in 2005 that the term “marriage” should be preserved to refer to a union between one man and woman and in 2023 that governments should give parents back the control over what is taught to their children and “Justin Trudeau does not have the right to impose his radical gender ideology on our kids and our schools.” What Poilievre meant by “radical gender ideology” is not specified, but his statement was made months after Trudeau denounced the New Brunswick government for its policy of requiring parental consent before schoolchildren under the age of 16 can officially change their pronouns or names. Here again, Poilievre’s position is more sensible than Trudeau’s.

Unfortunately, some of the Liberals’ descriptions of Poilievre’s record are incorrect or irrelevant. It is not true, for example, that Poilievre “supported illegal convoy blockades” — a claim for which the Liberals provide no evidence, producing only a short clip in which Poilievre voiced support for truck drivers who participated in protests. In reality, Poilievre said he supported peaceful protests and condemned “any individual who broke laws, behaved badly or blockaded critical infrastructure,” so supporting illegal convoy blockades is not part of Poilievre’s record.

In the “irrelevant” category is that in 2009 Poilievre used the term “tar baby” when talking about then-Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff distancing himself from predecessor Stéphane Dion’s carbon tax. The Liberals claim the phrase has racial overtones; in fact, Poilievre’s use of the term is consistent with Merriam-Webster’s definition, “something from which it is nearly impossible to extricate oneself.”

The Liberals note that Poilievre voted against their socialization of Canada’s child care, dental care and pharma care sectors. And how are those Liberal experiments going? The Trudeau government’s takeover of child care is costing taxpayers billions annually and has resulted in widespread shortages, the destruction of private child care services and deterioration in child care quality. The Liberals’ socialization of dental care and pharma care are in earlier stages than their child care takeover, but are on track to produce the same disastrous results: a bureaucratic mess, higher taxes and a deterioration in access and quality for Canadians.

In sum, while containing some bad information, the Liberals’ website on Poilievre’s record is useful in reminding Canadians that he has supported more fiscally responsible and demographically sensible retirement programs and that he now opposes the Liberals’ socialization of vital industries. Those are helpful reminders, but why the Liberals are spending their donors’ money to remind Canadians that Poilievre has been and would be a better steward of taxpayers’ money than they are, I don’t know.

Financial Post

Bookmark our website and support our journalism: Don’t miss the business news you need to know — add financialpost.com to your bookmarks and sign up for our newsletters financialpost.com.