John Ivison: Conservatives used a meat grinder on the Liberals. They needed a wooden stake
Article content
But the ideas that formed the basis for the Liberal platform are mostly taken from Carney's book Value(s), which had input from Butts and policy advisor, Tim Krupa.
Article content
As the prospect of a trade war with the United States crystallized, Butts began crafting the narrative that became 'Trump wants to break us so he can own us.'
Article content
But the central concept of the Liberals' 'Canada Strong' slogan— that the country has to build a single market and explore trading opportunities elsewhere as a means of increasing leverage for a trade negotiation with Trump — is all Carney.
Article content
It was Butts's job to turn that into a campaign narrative. He said he attended dozens of focus groups where voters rejected Poilievre, not because he was too like Trump, but because he was too inexperienced.
Article content
That formed the basis for the ballot question the Liberals pushed: 'Is Pierre Poilievre the person you want sitting across the table from Donald Trump?'
Article content
People who were motivated by their anxieties about a trade war invariably answered in the negative.
Article content
But the Conservative agenda, as represented by its anti-establishment, pro-worker 'boots not suits' policy, resonated with people who were unhappy with the status quo and the prospect of a fourth Liberal term.
Article content
Article content
They saw Poilievre as someone who would disrupt a system that wasn't working for them. The resilience of the Conservative vote on election night, particularly in blue-collar towns that hadn't voted Conservative in years like Sudbury and Stoney Creek in Ontario, suggests that the strategy wasn't entirely wrong.
Article content
But even senior Conservatives concede that you can't build a winning coalition if you alienate women, boomers and university-educated voters.
Article content
The Liberals succeeded in neutralizing many Conservative initiatives by adopting similar positions when it came to income tax cuts or promising more timely approvals for energy projects.
Article content
By the time the campaigns hit Montreal for the leaders' debates, the election had settled into an uneasy stalemate. The Conservatives began to whittle away at the Liberal lead in steady increments, but one pollster estimated that at that rate, it would take until May 8th before they would catch up, well after election day.
Article content
Article content
Poilievre needed an incendiary moment to blow up the Liberal trajectory and it looked as if he had one with Carney's platform, which promised $129 billion in new measures and deficits as far as the eye could see.
Article content
Poilievre's problem was that he had yet to release his own platform, and when he did, it was almost as profligate, with $109 billion in new measures.
The only other occasion that threatened to derail the Carney Express was the horrific car-ramming attack in Vancouver. The incident opened the door for the Conservatives to talk about their safe-streets policies, but all sides were aware that politicizing the tragedy would result in a backlash.
Article content
In the event, Caley, the campaign co-director, and former Vancouver mayor, Gregor Robertson, now a Liberal MP, were able to arrange for Carney to visit the site, alongside community members and B.C. Premier David Eby.
The Liberal campaign ended in Victoria, B.C., on Sunday night, three minutes before the election day cut-off.
Article content
The result has proven to be much closer than the Liberals thought it would be. Internal projections were in the range of high-180, mid-190-seat range. It now looks like the Liberals have fallen short of 172 seat majority status, though recounts may take them above the current count of 169.
Article content
There were Liberal reversals in places where the received wisdom suggested there would be successes because of the collapse of the NDP vote.
Article content
In the Niagara region, for example, when Carney visited at the start of the final week, there were hopes the party would pick up an additional seat in Niagara Falls. On the night, they failed to win that seat from the Conservatives and lost Vance Badawey's seat of Niagara South to the Conservatives. This was the type of border community that 'should' have voted Liberal.
Article content
The Liberals gained 2.8 million new voters in this election, while the Conservatives added 2.2 million.
Article content
The national turnout was nearly five percentage points higher than the last election, adding two million voters from 2021.
Article content
But one of the stories of the night was the demise of the smaller parties. The NDP lost 1.8 million voters, the Greens lost 158,000 and the People's Party a whopping 702,000, compared to 2021.
Article content
Voters, it turns out, have minds of their own and a large number of former NDP supporters appear to have switched to the Conservatives.
Article content
The collapse of all the minor opposition parties, bar the Bloc Québécois, will have serious implications for future elections, particularly for the one party that needs smaller, progressive parties to draw votes from the Liberals.
Article content
Poilievre and his team ran a disciplined and well-oiled campaign. But voters ultimately rejected the Conservative leader (literally, in the case of his former constituents in Carleton), while buying Carney's pitch for stability with moderate change.
Article content
But in large part, the 45th general election was over before it started, with the demolition of Trudeau and Singh.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Globe and Mail
32 minutes ago
- Globe and Mail
2 No-Brainer Vanguard ETFs to Buy With $1,000 Right Now
Investing doesn't have to involve hours of research, reading company financial statements, or being glued to finance shows. In some situations, doing those things can be beneficial, but it's far from needed for the average investor. One way to simplify investing while still being in a position to receive great value is by using exchange-traded funds (ETFs). ETFs allow you to invest in multiple companies at once, instantly diversifying your portfolio and reducing risk. Where to invest $1,000 right now? Our analyst team just revealed what they believe are the 10 best stocks to buy right now. Learn More » If you have $1,000 available to invest (or any amount, really), the following two Vanguard ETFs are great options. One gives you exposure to the U.S. economy, and the other gives you exposure to international companies. 1. Vanguard S&P 500 ETF The S&P 500 (SNPINDEX: ^GSPC) is an index that tracks the largest 500 American companies on the market. Although there are over 30 million American businesses, these companies account for a lot of the country's economic output, so the S&P 500 is seen as a relatively fair representation of the U.S. economy. Investing in the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (NYSEMKT: VOO) is essentially betting on the long-term growth of the U.S. economy. Nobody can predict the future, but that's historically been one of the better bets any investor could make. The S&P 500 has averaged around 10% annual returns over the long run, which is enough to build a sufficient nest egg over time. Data by YCharts. The rate of return isn't guaranteed. As the saying goes, past performance is no guarantee of future success. However, if this index does match its past performance, investing $500 monthly in this ETF and averaging 10% annual returns for 20 years will generate over $340,000 in returns from $120,000 in investments over that time. And that's after taking into account the ETF's 0.03% expense ratio. Famed investor Warren Buffett once said, "For most people, the best thing to do is to own the S&P 500 index fund." If you're wondering why, it's because some of the world's best companies are top holdings in the fund. Here are this ETF's top 10 holdings (accounting for about 34% of the fund): Rank/Stock % Share of ETF Rank/Stock % Share of ETF 1. Apple 6.75% 6. Berkshire Hathaway (Class B) 2.07% 2. Microsoft 6.22% 7. Alphabet (Class A) 1.96% 3. Nvidia 5.64% 8. Broadcom 1.91% 4. Amazon 3.68% 9. Tesla 1.67% 5. Meta Platforms 2.54% 10. Alphabet (Class C) 1.61% Data source: Vanguard. Percentages as of April 30, 2025. The top holdings (and S&P 500 in general) will shift as companies reach different market caps, but many of these companies have been staples in the S&P 500 for a while and will likely continue to be for the foreseeable future. 2. Vanguard Total International Stock ETF While betting on the U.S. economy makes a lot of sense, it's never a bad idea to have diversification in your portfolio. The Vanguard Total International Stock ETF (NASDAQ: VXUS) provides that, exposing investors to over 8,500 companies in both developed and emerging markets. Developed markets are generally more stable (mature economies, good infrastructure, etc.), but the upside can be limited compared to faster-growing economies. Emerging markets generally come with more risks (currency devaluation, political instability, etc.), but the upside is high as the economy develops and grows. Investing in companies in both markets is a good balance of stability and growth. Here is how the ETF is broken down by region: Region Percentage of the ETF Europe 40.3% Emerging markets 26.4% Pacific 25.3% North America 7.5% Middle East 0.5% Data source: Vanguard. Percentages as of April 30. Although this ETF has historically underperformed the S&P 500, it can be a great hedge during times when the U.S. economy is facing trouble and uncertainty (like now). For context, consider this ETF's 15% gains in 2025 through June 6, compared to the S&P 500's 2%. Even if this ETF's recent momentum slows, investors can rely on its above-average dividend yield. Its current yield is around 2.9%, which is in line with its average for the past decade. Data by YCharts. I wouldn't have a large amount of my portfolio in international stocks, but a small percentage is worth having. I keep around 10% of my stock portfolio in international stocks, so if I were investing $1,000 into these two ETFs, I'd dedicate $100 to this one specifically. Should you invest $1,000 in Vanguard S&P 500 ETF right now? Before you buy stock in Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $669,517!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $868,615!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor 's total average return is792% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to173%for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of June 9, 2025 John Mackey, former CEO of Whole Foods Market, an Amazon subsidiary, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Suzanne Frey, an executive at Alphabet, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Randi Zuckerberg, a former director of market development and spokeswoman for Facebook and sister to Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg, is a member of The Motley Fool's board of directors. Stefon Walters has positions in Apple, Microsoft, Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Berkshire Hathaway, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Nvidia, Tesla, Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, and Vanguard Total International Stock ETF. The Motley Fool recommends Broadcom and recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
National Observer
40 minutes ago
- National Observer
‘Harper's dreams coming true': MPs slam Carney's fast-tracking plan
Prime Minister Mark Carney's new bill to fast-track major projects will have to rely on Conservative votes to pass, with all other parties expressing major reservations. The legislation would allow the federal government to conditionally approve projects it deems 'in the national interest' before an environmental or impact assessment or other regulatory processes take place. Both the NDP and Greens have spoken out against it, while Patrick Bonin, Bloc Québécois environment and climate change critic, called Carney's plan to fast-track major projects 'highly problematic' at a French-language press conference on Monday. The federal government is seeking to give itself 'superpowers' to accelerate projects and weaken environmental protections, Bonin said. Some of the factors used to evaluate whether a project is in the national interest are vague, and there's no obligation for the government to adhere to it, he added. Then, there is the question of sovereignty and whether provinces can say no to projects in their jurisdiction. Last week, Carney said projects need consensus from provinces to move forward, but the legislation doesn't spell that out, leaving room for potential overreach on provincial jurisdiction, Bonin said. The Building Canada Act is part of an omnibus bill that also includes action to remove federal barriers to interprovincial trade, which is less controversial than the changes to major project approvals. On Monday, the Bloc Québécois called on the federal government to split the omnibus bill into two separate bills so the issues can be studied in the relevant federal committees. The federal Conservatives have not confirmed whether they will support the bill — Leader Pierre Poilievre said caucus will discuss it on Wednesday. For the Conservatives, the question is not whether legislation is perfect, but whether it is better than the way things are, Poilievre said on Friday. 'That's what we'll be looking at as we study this newly-introduced bill over the next few days.' 'We would vote in favour of accelerating even one project,' Poilievre said, indicating that he wants to see new pipelines in particular. 'Once a project is on that list, it's not a question of if it's going to move forward, but how,' Alexandre Boulerice, NDP critic for environment and climate change, said. 'It's like Stephen Harper's dreams coming true." Last week, BC Premier David Eby said he will not support Alberta Premier Danielle Smith's vision of building a new oil pipeline to BC's north coast. Poilievre made it clear he doesn't think provinces should get veto power over nationally important projects. 'We need a pipeline to the Pacific, and if the prime minister says he's going to wait till everyone agrees, then nothing will get done, which is what has been happening for the last decade,' Poilievre said at a press conference at Parliament Hill on Monday. If the Conservatives support Bill C-5, the Liberals will have the votes they need to get it through the House of Commons. The NDP says its members will vote against the bill, with one MP calling the major projects section 'really dangerous.' 'Once a project is on that list, it's not a question of if it's going to move forward, but how,' Alexandre Boulerice, NDP critic for environment and climate change, said in a phone interview with Canada's National Observer. 'It's like Stephen Harper's dreams coming true.' He said the NDP is currently exploring possible options to block the bill, but any action would likely require cooperation with the Bloc Québécois. Either way, Boulerice doesn't see how the federal government can rush the bill through by July 1, given that there are less than two weeks left before the House rises for the summer. 'It's a really capitalist logic that what we need to do is to provide certainty to investors and companies,' Boulerice said. Green Party Leader Elizabeth May also criticized the proposed legislation in a June 9 press release. 'Bill C-5 gives the federal Cabinet sweeping discretion to fast-track projects while weakening Indigenous rights and environmental protections,' May's statement reads. 'This is the first time in 40 years that Canadian environmental assessment law has been written to serve political deals first and environmental responsibility second.' Factors for determining national interest 'carefully worded' The bill lists some factors the government may consider when deciding whether a project will be listed for fast-tracking, one of which is whether it will 'contribute to clean growth and to meeting Canada's objectives with respect to climate change.' Another factor is whether it will 'advance the interests of Indigenous peoples.' Boulerice said these are nothing more than broad slogans. Mark Winfield, a professor of environmental governance at York University, was of the same mind. 'These are attempts to cover off points of potential vulnerability,' he said in a phone interview with C anada's National Observer. The bill does not have a clear definition of 'clean growth,' he said, which creates huge loopholes for approving projects or employing technologies that many Canadians wouldn't consider 'clean.' 'The government has been very liberal in its definition of 'clean' to include things like CCUS [carbon capture, utilisation and storage], critical minerals, [and] nuclear,' Winfield said. The bill raises serious questions about how the federal government will reconcile Canada's climate change obligations with all the talk of potential pipeline and fossil fuel export projects at the same time as northern Saskatchewan, Manitoba and Ontario are going up in smoke, he added. 'Everybody thinks that it's an open door for pipelines, in fact, for oil and gas,' Boulerice said. 'It's not about solving the housing crisis with a big project of building millions of homes. It's about energy.' Carney has made repeated references to both clean and conventional energy, the latter of which refers to fossil fuels like oil and gas. Carney has referenced 'decarbonized' oil and used the Pathways Alliance's proposed multi-billion dollar carbon capture project as an example of projects that could be considered for fast-tracking. 'Oil is carbon. There's no such thing as decarbonized oil,' Angela Carter, an associate professor of political science at Memorial University of Newfoundland, said in a phone interview. 'We need to be very, very careful about this definition of clean growth. If it's a project that contributes to sustaining and growing oil production, well, that's not clean growth. It's very, very, very simple.' Bloc Québécois House Leader Christine Normandin said it's too early to say whether her party will support the bill. First, they want the government to respond to their request to split the bill into two parts, one for interprovincial trade and one for major projects. 'In a sense, this is taking what Stephen Harper tried to do with C-38 and putting it on steroids … The problem with trying to take shortcuts is it has a tendency to backfire and to make the underlying conflicts worse than ever,' Winfield said. 'Look what happened: Northern Gateway died, Energy East went nowhere, it took extraordinary steps to get Trans Mountain done.' The biggest challenge for Carney's government will likely be navigating Indigenous opposition and constitutional rights, said Michael Wernick, former clerk of the Privy Council. Indigenous Peoples have the most 'legal ability' to slow things down, he said, adding that it is not unsolvable for the Carney government but will be a key hurdle. Assembly of First Nations National Chief Cindy Woodhouse Nepinak voiced her concerns with the bill on Friday and called an emergency meeting on it this week. Onlookers and experts who care about climate are looking on with 'considerable uncertainty' because the bill could allow for massive progress to be made on an east-west electricity grid or fast-tracking renewable energy infrastructure, but that may not be the case, James Rowe, an associate professor of environmental studies at the University of Victoria, said. 'Given the political economy of Canada as the fourth largest oil producer in the world … it's more likely those real powerful forces are going to get their way — and projects that might otherwise have been stopped by regulatory processes and consultations … are going to get fast-tracked,' he said.
Ottawa Citizen
2 hours ago
- Ottawa Citizen
Raises, retention bonuses promised for Canadian Forces personnel
Article content Pay increases for military personnel as well as retention bonuses and increased training allowances for particular Canadian Forces members are to be part of the government's spending boost for defence. Article content In addition, it is expected that around 1,400 new staff will be hired at the Department of National Defence. Article content Article content The initiatives were outlined Monday during a technical briefing that followed Prime Minister Mark Carney's announcement that defence spending was being significantly increased. The Liberal government noted that it was pumping in more funding so Canada will meet the NATO spending target of two per cent of GDP by the end of this fiscal year. Article content Article content Carney repeated his election promises to purchase new submarines and other equipment as well as improve military housing and benefits. Article content 'Members of our armed forces will get a well deserved salary increase, which will contribute to better recruitment and retention of personnel,' said Carney. Article content But defence officials at the technical briefing had few answers. Article content They did point out that not only will there be pay increases but in some cases boosts in training allowances and retention bonuses for key military personnel. They did not have information on what specific Canadian Forces jobs or trades would be eligible for bonuses. Article content More health-care workers will be hired for the Canadian Forces and the civilian workforce will be expanded so military personnel can focus on operations, government officials said at the technical briefing. Under government-imposed rules, the officials who provided the briefing cannot be identified. Article content Article content In January, the Ottawa Citizen reported that military staff were recommending retention bonuses to keep key personnel from leaving the ranks. But there were questions at the time about whether the government would fund such a plan. Article content Article content Although the Canadian Forces doesn't currently have retention bonuses, the military does offer various extra pay or allowances for those in particular jobs or handling specific duties, the Department of National Defence has noted. In addition, the military does provide extra payment to recruit individuals with particular skills. Article content Various western militaries, facing personnel shortages, have been using retention bonuses to entice individuals to continue to stay in the ranks. Article content On Nov. 22, 2024, the British government announced bonuses equivalent to $54,000 for aircraft engineers who sign up for an additional three years of military service. Privates and lance corporals who have already served four years would be eligible for a new retention bonus, which is the equivalent of $14,000.
