'Publicly hired and publicly fired': Some former MPs struggle to deal with life after Parliament
'I was told that I was toxic,' he said during an emotional speech to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee. 'The Conservatives hated me. No organization would hire me. My marriage failed. My space with my children was not in a good place and most particularly my passion — the thing I believed so ardently in … the purpose of my life — was in ashes at my feet.'
Article content
Holland returned to the House of Commons in 2015, and later served as minister of health before deciding not to run in this most recent election.
Article content
But his is not the only tale of caution. And it's not just federal politicians who face post-election challenges.
Article content
Article content
Lorenzo Berardinetti, a former Toronto city councillor and Ontario MPP with a 30-year career in politics, faced a series of challenges in the immediate years after losing in the 2018 provincial election: difficulty finding work, a divorce, a brain seizure and the rising cost of housing.
Article content
By 2023, he was living in a homeless shelter in Ajax, Ont., where he stayed for more than a year. 'I never thought this would have happened to me,' he was quoted as saying earlier this year, 'but it happened.'
Article content
Article content
Thanks to a former political staffer at Toronto City Hall and Queen's Park who started an online fundraising campaign, Berardinetti found shelter.
Article content
Not all former MPs, of course, face the severe challenges faced by Holland or Berardinetti. LeBlanc said it's impossible to quantify the number struggling with serious problems but warns that it's a 'significant minority.'
Article content
Michael Browning, an Ottawa psychotherapist who has treated MPs in the past, said losing an election is similar to any other major professional setback, except it's often more severe emotionally because of the huge sacrifices involved. Another important factor, he added, is that unlike many other professional defeats, such as losing a bid for promotion, there's no existing job to fall back on.
Article content
'There's no consolation prize,' said Browning, the director of The Whitestone Clinic.
Article content
Alain Therrien, the MP for the Quebec riding of La Prairie-Atateken for more than five years until last week, said it's a bit easier to deal with an election loss when you've been through it before.
Article content
Article content
'It's tough, that's for sure,' he said. 'But for me, it's my fourth time, so I'm starting to get used to it.'
Article content
Therrien, the Bloc Quebecois' House Leader in the most recent parliament, said elected officials must try to remember that the jobs are always temporary.
Article content
'(The voters) have the right to say 'we would like to have someone other than you.' We must accept it.'
Article content
Therrien said he isn't sure what he'll do next, but he hasn't ruled out a return to teaching. Another run for public office is also possible.
Article content
Wilfert, the former Toronto-area MP, has been busy since leaving Parliament but he understands the grief. Former MPs, he said, have to transition from somebody whose time and attention are in high demand to possibly struggling to find work. Many find themselves struggling emotionally after the shock of a loss, with alcohol problems often entering the picture.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Vancouver Sun
2 days ago
- Vancouver Sun
Electoral flashback: B.C. MLAs mull proportional representation despite voters saying no three times
VICTORIA — A B.C. legislature committee recently spent two weeks on a trip down memory lane, revisiting the debate over proportional representation that dominated three referendums over the past 20 years. The committee on democratic and electoral reform — four New Democrats, two Conservatives and one Green — was appointed to review a range of issues after the last provincial election. But in two weeks of public hearings earlier this month, most of the witnesses focused on the committee's specific mandate to examine 'models for electing members of the legislature, including proportional representation.' A daily roundup of Opinion pieces from the Sun and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder. The next issue of Informed Opinion will soon be in your inbox. Please try again Interested in more newsletters? Browse here. The switch to a form of proportional representation, or PR, was an option in a referendum during the 2009 provincial election and another in a ballot-by-mail in 2018. Both times voters endorsed the existing first-past-the-post system by a decisive 61 per cent. PR got 58 per cent support in a 2005 referendum but fell short of the 60 per cent threshold set by the then B.C. Liberal government. Yet it is back on the agenda this year at the behest of the Greens. The B.C. party could have won as many as eight seats under PR in the last provincial election as opposed to the two it did win under first-past-the-post. The prospect drew a scornful submission from Bill Tieleman, political consultant, one-time press secretary to NDP Premier Glen Clark, and a leader of the successful fight against PR in the earlier referendums. 'The public has clearly spoken,' said Tieleman. 'Yet here we are again. I regret that the provincial legislature is once more examining an issue that B.C. voters have democratically, decisively, and not once but twice strongly rejected. 'The reason is clear. The B.C. Green party insisted on this committee examining proportional representation as a condition for supporting the B.C. NDP government. I get it. It's political reality. 'But this committee should not be examining electoral systems for the fourth time. It's kind of ridiculous after 20 years, when B.C. voters have heard all the arguments and voted against proportional representation with what should be finality.' Tieleman offered a shorthand take on why voters prefer the status quo to PR. 'The reason why voters strongly supported our current first-past-the-post system is that it is simple, stable and successful,' he argued. 'By comparison, proportional representation is complicated and confusing, and it removes local, accountable elected officials. It is a foreign voting system that has chronic problems where it's used.' Most of those who made submissions — electoral reform advocates, university professors, Green party members and others — disagreed. Many of their arguments for proportional representation were similar to ones mounted in the past two referendums. But I was struck by how some PR advocates have turned against the whole idea of referendums after losing two in a row. Leading the way on that score was the first speaker in the lineup, Adriane Carr, a former Vancouver city councillor and a former leader of the Greens. Referendums are too time consuming, she argued. 'Timeliness is important, so no referendum beforehand,' she argued. Rather, Carr says the government should impose proportional representation by a vote of the legislature before the next election. Then, after a term or two of governments elected under PR, it would submit the system to referendum after the fact. Fair Voting B.C. went further, declaring that 'voting reform is a civil rights issue, and referendums are not an appropriate way to settle such questions.' Rejecting the notion of bypassing referendums was Bob Plecas, a Tieleman ally in the fight against PR and a deputy minister under former Social Credit and NDP governments. 'The legislature should not unilaterally end this relationship with the voters who today directly elect their MLA, especially after 61 per cent of them have just recently rejected the idea of pro rep,' said Plecas. 'If it proceeds, it would be essential to go to a referendum including a supermajority in both vote and constituency.' The committee wrapped up hearings last week and closed the door on written submissions Friday. The members will then get to work crafting recommendations to the legislature. Their final report is due Nov. 26. If the MLAs felt bound by the majority of submissions on electoral reform, they would recommend a shift to proportional representation. But I doubt that will happen. Since dodging the PR bullet in 2018, the B.C. NDP has won back-to-back majorities under first-past-the-post. The party's provincial director, Tania Jarzabek, did propose some electoral reforms in a submission to the committee. Pointedly, she did not take a stand on PR, one way or the other. Nor can I see the Conservatives supporting an electoral system that could empower further splits in their already fractious caucus. Besides, just this past week, Research Co. reported an opinion poll on electoral reform. While respondents showed some interest in other systems for electing governments, 65 per cent said they were satisfied with the existing first-past-the-post system. I expect committee members, apart from the one Green MLA, will reach a similar conclusion in favour of the status quo and avoid a call for proportional representation, with or without a referendum. vpalmer@
CTV News
3 days ago
- CTV News
Federal health minister non-committal on signing more pharmacare deals
OTTAWA — Federal Health Minister Marjorie Michel is not committing to sign pharmacare funding deals with all provinces and territories. The first phase of the pharmacare law that was passed by the Trudeau Liberals last fall calls on Ottawa to cover the cost of contraceptives and diabetes medications for patients. The previous government signed deals with P.E.I., B.C., Manitoba and Yukon to do just that before the spring election. The Liberals promised during the election campaign to protect the pharmacare program, along with other social programs. At a press conference in New Brunswick this week, when asked why talks weren't progressing with the remaining provinces, Michel said that this is a new government in a new context. A spokesperson for the minister says the government will protect the four deals that have been signed but did not say whether the Liberals plan to sign new agreements. 'Our new government will be there to discuss with our provincial and territorial partners how we can support them for better health outcomes for Canadians,' said Emilie Gauduchon-Campbell in an email. The Canadian Health Coalition pointed out that $1.5 billion was set aside to fund the agreements in the last federal budget, and the Liberals pledged to keep the program during the election. 'I don't think anybody voted for cuts to health care, including pharmacare,' said Steven Staples, the group's national director of policy and advocacy. The NDP, which pushed for the creation of the pharmacare program through its supply-and-confidence deal with the Trudeau Liberals last year, accused the government of breaking a campaign promise. 'We call on (Prime Minister) Mark Carney immediately to get back on track and honour the law we passed last Parliament,' said NDP interim leader Don Davies in a statement. 'We call on him to finalize Pharmacare agreements with all remaining provinces and territories and allocate the funding Liberals promised so that no Canadian has to choose between life-saving medicine and putting food on the table.' Michel's comments were first reported by the Telegraph-Journal, which cited an interview with New Brunswick Premier Susan Holt, who said her government had not heard from Ottawa since the election. Holt's provincial Liberals ran in an election campaign last year on a promise to cover the cost of contraceptives. New Brunswick has not signed a pharmacare deal. Former health minister Mark Holland suggested last winter that he wouldn't have enough time to negotiate the deals before the election, which most polls at the time predicted the Conservatives would win handily. Holland and the NDP warned that the Conservatives would cut the program. 'There's no room for politics in this. It's just logic. It's the thing we must do for this country,' Holland said as he announced the first deal with Manitoba, worth $219 million, in late February. Carney's government, though, has warned that spending cuts are coming as it refocuses its energy on the economy and national defence. Premiers at the Council of the Federation meetings this week in Ontario said health care is a priority, but it got only a brief mention in their final statement on Wednesday. The premiers said they're exploring avenues to improve access to medications but did not mention pharmacare specifically. At a closing press conference, P.E.I. Premier Rob Lantz, the incoming chair of the Council of the Federation, spoke about the group's history as 'a venue to lobby for more health transfers.' Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew said the country's universal health care system is a point of national pride. 'If we want to say that we're standing up to (U.S. President) Donald Trump and we're never going to be the 51st state, let's make sure that our universal health system is strong and supports Canadians in every region of the country. And I think we have a good partner in the prime minister right now to advance that project,' Kinew said. The premiers told reporters the group did not talk about health care with Carney on Tuesday, when he joined their meetings to talk about the trade war with the U.S. Sarah Ritchie, The Canadian Press
Global News
3 days ago
- Global News
Trump signs bill that cuts US$9B in foreign aid and public media funding
U.S. President Donald Trump signed a bill Thursday canceling about $9 billion that had been approved for public broadcasting and foreign aid as Republicans look to lock in cuts to programs targeted by the White House's Department of Government Efficiency. The bulk of the spending being clawed back is for foreign assistance programs. About $1.1 billion was destined for the Corporation for Public Broadcasting, which finances NPR and PBS, though most of that money is distributed to more than 1,500 local public radio and television stations around the country. The White House had billed the legislation as a test case for Congress and said more such rescission packages would be on the way. Some Republicans were uncomfortable with the cuts, yet supported them anyway, wary of crossing Trump or upsetting his agenda. Democrats unanimously rejected the cuts but were powerless to stop them. Story continues below advertisement The White House says the public media system is politically biased and an unnecessary expense. Conservatives particularly directed their ire at NPR and PBS. Lawmakers with large rural constituencies voiced grave concern about what the cuts to public broadcasting could mean for some local public stations in their state. Some stations will have to close, they warned. 2:05 Trump signs executive order to halt federal funding to NPR, PBS Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, said the stations are 'not just your news — it is your tsunami alert, it is your landslide alert, it is your volcano alert.' Get breaking National news For news impacting Canada and around the world, sign up for breaking news alerts delivered directly to you when they happen. Sign up for breaking National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy On the foreign aid cuts, the White House argued that they would incentivize other nations to step up and do more to respond to humanitarian crises and that the rescissions best served the American taxpayer. Democrats argued that the Republican administration's animus toward foreign aid programs would hurt America's standing in the world and create a vacuum for China to fill. They also expressed concerns that the cuts would have deadly consequences for many of the world's most impoverished people. Story continues below advertisement 'With these cuts, we will cause death, spread disease and deepen starvation across the planet,' said Sen. Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii.
