Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre's path to power may be by prosecuting Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's past eight years in government, but his road to victory is painted NDP orange.
Appealing to working-class voters in rural and northern ridings — like those held by New Democrats across British Columbia and Liberals in northern Ontario — is part of what Poilievre sees as a winning formula.
That offensive was on full display recently as he traversed NDP turf on Vancouver Island, rallying supporters in Nanaimo and snapping photos with mill workers in Port Alberni. He also stopped at a steel plant and port in B.C.'s Lower Mainland as part of his tour to rub shoulders with workers, images of which lit up his social media.
"We're seeing Pierre Poilievre, the leader of the Conservative party, on the floor of shops and factories," said Allie Blades, a strategist who worked on his 2022 leadership campaign in B.C.
Blades, who works for Mash Strategy, which produces the party's slick digital videos, cited a recent speech to the Greater Vancouver Board of Trade — an invitation it took Poilievre 18 months to accept.
It was his first appearance before a corporate crowd since becoming leader in 2022, not out of spite — "it's nothing to do with my view on business; I love business," he said — but because "utterly useless" corporate lobbyists in Ottawa are too focused on currying favour with elected officials.
Instead, the Conservative plan is a "bottom-up, free enterprise agenda," he said, vowing to end the days of self-interested CEOs and politicians working together solely to advance their own self-interests.
"When I'm prime minister, if you want any of your policy agenda pushed forward, you're going to have to convince not just me, but the people of Canada that it is good for them."
Blades said it's a populist approach that so far has served Poilievre well.
"It's a switch that the Conservatives, I think, have done very rightly and strategically," she said. "We're seeing the floor versus the stage."
The shop floor, of course, is traditional New Democrat territory — home to a critical voting bloc the NDP is not about to surrender without a fight.
"You've never seen him on a picket line," said Anne McGrath, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh's principal secretary and formerly the party's national director.
"You can go to shop floors and look at things on a shop floor, but when push comes to shove and workers need support from their political leaders, we've never seen him there."
Poilievre has clearly struck a nerve by tapping into legitimate public anxiety around affordability, McGrath acknowledged, but his message is "simplistic." So too is the choice facing voters, she said.
"They've got the big, loud megaphone voice of the Conservatives and Pierre Poilievre, or they've got the constructive, positive proposals and actions that they can expect from the NDP."
Selling that will take "a lot of hard work and (a) clear message," not to mention outreach to voters, she added. The NDP has already begun to ratchet up its attacks on the Conservatives and flood traditionally friendly territory with mailers.
Their battle looks like an uphill one — not only is Poilievre's message crisp and resonant, but the Conservatives are flush with cash, said Melanie Richer, a former communications director for Singh.
Poilievre's populist approach has helped the Conservatives smash fundraising records — funds vital to the leader's aggressive public schedule and outreach to new voters, like those who typically vote NDP.
So far, he's held 16 rallies and other meet-and-greets this year, six of them in ridings held by the NDP, compared to eight Liberal ones. Throughout 2023, his first full year as leader, the ratio was 12 NDP, 19 Liberal.
Blades said she believes Poilievre's success with typical NDP voters in places like B.C. is a result of "down-to-earth messaging" that Singh, she argues, "could never authentically achieve."
It is a province that is also deeply affected by the housing crisis as well as the opioid epidemic, both of which Poilievre blames squarely on two factors: the federal Liberal government and its B.C. NDP counterpart.
While critics pan his crusade against the consumer carbon price as an exercise in sloganeering and misinformation, supporters see it as an optimistic message, Blades said — even in B.C., where a provincial carbon price has been in place for years.
It also can't hurt Conservative fortunes that the NDP is bleeding caucus members. Six MPs have already left or said they won't run again, including three just last week — one of whom was Charlie Angus, a 20-year fixture for the party in northern Ontario.
It's time for New Democrats to reflect on the party's relationship with working-class voters, said Richer, many of whom have been drifting away from the party since the death of Jack Layton in 2011.
"We're just not connecting with them," she said.
Richer urged the party to be more vocal about the role it played in securing Liberal commitments on national pharmacare and dental care plans through its supply-and-confidence agreement with the government. So far, efforts to do just that have borne little fruit.
She pointed to Manitoba, where NDP Premier Wab Kinew secured a historic election win last year by confronting public anger "and gave people hope instead."
Poilievre's office did not respond to a request for comment about whether a Conservative government would maintain a federal dental care plan. He's also been non-committal on pharmacare.
"I do think that we need to start having a more aggressive, hopeful message," agreed Kathleen Monk, a campaign strategist and Layton's former communications director.
"Things can get better … we have a vision to do so."
At the same time, she added, New Democrats have to convince Canadians not to believe Poilievre's claims that he is "fighting for little people."
Union leaders say the Conservative frontman borrows the language of the working class, but in fact poses a threat to organized labour, citing his frequent support for back-to-work legislation over 20 years in Parliament.
The party has been working hard to rehabilitate its image with unions, with its MPs backing a Liberal bill — spurred by the NDP — to ban replacement workers during lockouts and strikes in federally regulated workplaces.
Renze Nauta, a former Conservative staffer who is now program director for work and economics at Cardus, suggests politicians must also be aware that Canada's working class has changed.
While unionized, blue-collar trade workers still make up a portion of the working class, he says there has been a decline in unionization rates.
Nauta said the working class has shifted to include more service jobs, including those done by women and new immigrants, and now includes people who work as Amazon delivery drivers or hairstylists.
Many in working-class jobs have a post-secondary education, he added.
"These are the quintessential people who … as the politicians say, who did everything that they were supposed to, and still can't get ahead."
The next federal election must take place on or before Oct. 20, 2025.
This report by The Canadian Press was first published April 7, 2024.
With files from Mickey Djuric in Ottawa
Comments
The best NDPers can be relied on to keep Conservatives our of power.
"Best" isn't as important as "most" at this point though. It sounds like there's some splitting of NDP ranks going on right now between, as usual, the purist/tribal members who by definition are more "cultist" and therefore less likely to "read the room" and/or ADAPT to the new political reality, and the more utilitarian, progressive members.
At their party convention the former seemed rather restive, wanting to scuttle the agreement with the Liberals despite the significant accomplishments from that supposedly having been on their party's agenda for decades now, and the fact that child care has long been a Liberal initiative because they're also essentially progressive. And Singh's popularity as leader also receded somewhat, possibly for the same reason.
So if a split is starting, and it's evident in the leadership contest here in Alberta as well, someone needs to take the initiative again to cut the party's losses and go full-on progressive with the Liberals so we can keep the cons out, which should be job number one for any progressive party that wants to be taken seriously.
The idea that uniting with the Liberals is the definition of an "unholy alliance" that would compromise long-standing "party values" as well as being an affront to party icons of "the movement" is a reminder of where "virtue-signalling" originated. Superior virtue or "holier than thou" is absolutely valid on the left, but in that context, the NDP needs to compare "unholy alliances" by noting the de facto one between Christian Nationalists and the GOP.
Here's a sobering perspective of where THAT alliance currently IS:
https://newrepublic.com/article/180453/voter-disconnect-trump-vance-ohi…
Thinking of "holier than thou", I think it's the outside of enough for you to come across all "holier than thou" about the failure of your political opponents to suicide their political movement for your sake. Do you have any conception how selfish that comes off? If you're going to make a huge (and invalid) ask, I think a bit of humility and gratitude would be in order.
The problem here is that you keep talking merger as if that is what it would be, like this would be some equal thing where both sides would give a bit and so you're losing exactly as much as NDPers would, so why is it only the lefties who are so upset about the concept? Even though you KNOW that's NOT what it would be. It would be the growth of the Liberals and the erasure of the NDP, and it would be the elimination (until another party grew) of all chance at left-of-centre policy in any form. If you're going to ask for that, you could at least have the sincerity to admit what you're asking, to say you realize this is a huge thing to ask and you never would if it weren't for the massive perils of fascism and climate change. But you don't do that, instead you try to pretend like nothing would be lost because the Liberals are fellow "progressives" who are just like the NDP--which is utter and complete bullshit, and I'm sorry but you are clearly too knowledgeable to be unaware of that. Your line of argument on this issue drastically reduces my general respect for you.
I don't give a sh** about ANY "party" or "club" or "tribe" or "movement," or whatever other ennobling term you want to ascribe for the usual, predictable "leg-up," and that includes the frigging Liberals, but they are the vehicle we have, and they are progressive ENOUGH. You're talking like Pounder who wants to keep punishing them more than stopping the serious bad guys. There's NO comparison! That's conservative level irrational!
That competitive zeal, that compulsion to get the leg-up is clearly more hard-wired into men, and is the entire basis of all the different religions/tribes/cults etc. etc. that I keep trampling on because THERE ARE WAY MORE IMPORTANT THINGS now, to say the bloody least; speaking of basic intelligence and/or reading the room FFS! Who do you people think you ARE? Pure narcissists of SMALL DIFFERENCES, obviously, who are incapable of thinking bigger than your petty, imagined hobby horses, and are arguably just as obsessed with "owning the Libs" as the bloody cons! And this article outlines the fact that they also recognize that, so there's never been a better time to join forces against the clear and present danger! The NDP has been splitting the vote for decades. Nenshi is capturing new hope here for the first time in years by coming in from outside as a progressive, and not part of the clubby group of women who are now competing. Lovely and they accomplished much, but so important to know when to advance or change direction for the greater good.
It's simply the only reasonable solution so don't shoot the messenger; that's what the cons do.
Egos, ideals and identities aside, at what point do you question your affiliations? I say the same thing to believers all the time.
What disgusts me is that the Conservatives get plenty of press talking about how "populist" they are even when they've never advanced a single goddamn policy that wasn't purely for the benefit of the rich. Not counting the cultural horror, which doesn't put any dollars in anyone's pocket. So what exactly makes them "populist"? The media being willing to pretend they are.