Where is Scott Gilmore when you need him?

Bring on the split of the Conservative Party of Canada; we deserve it.

I briefly met Scott Gilmore in the spring of 2017. He was in Calgary; just one stop on a nationwide tour asking conservatives whether they thought the recent fall of Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party of Canada to Justin Trudeau’s Liberals in 2015 provided an opening for a return of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada.

Mr. Gilmore was, probably, still reeling from the fact that— as a self-styled conservative —he had cast a vote for the Liberal Party that year.

Partisanship isn’t simply about supporting a political party, it’s about confirming one’s identity; as we’ve seen plenty of in recent weeks. If one can see themselves supporting a rival political party, it calls their loyalty, values, and principles into question. At least, that’s what the party’s spin doctors will say.

Alternatively— for those who are secure in their own values and principles— it calls the party’s loyalty, values, and principles into question.

I always considered myself part of the “Conservative base.” But, over time, it became obvious to me that the Prime Minister was only interested in one part of that base: voters who were suspicious of the world, afraid of their neighbours, and jealous of other Canadians. As he chased those votes, he chased away others, like mine, and totally neglected attracting voters from other parties.

Scott Gilmore, Maclean’s, October 20, 2015

In 2017, the CPC loss was not seen as a game changer. It’s possible that more than a few would have had a different opinion if Maxime Bernier had not been narrowly defeated by the cherub-cheeked Andrew Scheer, but there’s no reason to think it didn’t still have a role in turning a few swing voters back to the Trudeau Liberals in 2019.

One gentleman said he didn’t quite understand why these discussions were taking place right now. Why not wait until after the federal leadership race was over? My best guess is that it’s because people are engaged right now; after the leadership race, they may pack up or disengage. I agree that the time for these conversations is now.

Unsurprisingly, there were a number of people who complained their MP didn’t seem to represent them. The majority of people in the room self-disclosed as card carrying CPC members with a show of hands when (Mr. Gilmore) asked. The leadership race has been incredibly divisive with anti-Canadian values and anti-everything that most people realize is the new normal. Many agreed with a statement from one woman who said “the country has evolved; the CPC has not”.

From me, May 5, 2017

Under Andrew Scheer’s leadership, the CPC increased their vote share in the 2019 election; they even won “the popular vote” that year. Unfortunately, that “popular vote” was the result of additional support in electoral districts and provinces where the party already had enough support to win the seats. Much of the party’s increased support that year was from higher turnout on the prairies rather than in seat rich urban areas like the 905 in Ontario or Quebec.

Sure, they increased their vote share but that didn’t turn into additional seats. Mr. Scheer was then taken down by those of a more “PC” persuasion (which took Stephen Harper out of the mix as well), and the die was cast for another leadership race.

I wondered if I might have the chance to hear from Mr. Gilmore again, but we were imposed upon by a global pandemic instead. With gathering restrictions in place, and travel not recommended, I didn’t expect to see him, necessarily; but I wondered what he was thinking as the political engines started up again.

Erin O’Toole became leader after a greatly pared-down race. Instead of 14 contestants, the 2020 leadership had only four; newcomer Leslyn Lewis, former PC backstabber Peter MacKay, and two CPC MPs from Ontario, Erin O’Toole, and Derek freaking Sloan. Like me, I imagine even the most dedicated politicos (let alone everyone else) had completely forgotten about him.

Mr. Sloan ran the most right-wing campaign, setting the stage for Leslyn Lewis to be a more palatable (mostly because she was an unknown quantity)space for the Christian nationalist right. Where Mr. Sloan could be entirely transparent, Ms. Lewis was (back then) left to enjoy a space of anonymity. For a book-smart person, she has since outed herself as a person who cares little for, let alone considers, opinions of those who know more than she does about any topic.

I wish it was unexpected, and far less popular, than it was.

The final two contenders were Erin O’Toole and Peter MacKay; a moderate CPC member and the former leader of the Progressive Conservatives. The membership, unsurprisingly, chose Erin O’Toole.

It could be hindsight speaking, but I think Mr. O’Toole would have made a good Prime Minister; if he had a caucus that supported him. If Mr. O’Toole would have had control over his caucus, I think he would have been a good choice. I don’t think he did, I didn’t think he did, and as it turned out, he didn’t.

With hindsight, many people look at Erin O’Toole and say that he would have staved off a Pierre Poilievre but really, the fact that Mr. O’Toole was taken out so unceremoniously by Pierre Poilievre and enough support from caucus to do so tells us that everyone who would have rather voted conservative but threw their support to Trudeau in 2021 was entirely justified in doing so because the number of caucus members who were against him were stronger than those who were supporting him.

One could make the argument that, had Mr. O’Toole won the 2021 election, his caucus would have fallen in line but I think the ones who turned on him to support Pierre Poilievre would have done it anyway; just later rather than sooner.

After Mr. O’Toole’s loss, I didn’t wonder where Scott Gilmore was.

By then, it was obvious that those with power in the party would not have Mr. Gilmore’s support. They were legitimately the exact same people Mr. Gilmore was hoping his party would move away from; the people he wanted to ensure never actually obtained the power they wanted. They were the same people who helped take Mr. O’Toole down; not that they were alone.

Partisans of another persuasion helped bring down Erin O’Toole as well. Yes, the campaign was not great. Yes, Mr. O’Toole’s flip-flopping between party-specific messaging and mainstream messaging was inconsistent and led to a lack of confidence… but partisans of another stripe helped bring him down and pave the way for Pierre Poilievre.

I believe the saying is that “perfection is the enemy of the good”.

While I don’t think that needs to be reduced to “perfection is the enemy of the ‘good enough’,” and I don’t think Canadians were wrong to mistrust the CPC caucus as a whole, I understand why more than a few people are looking back at Erin O’Toole and wondering if they could have avoided someone as unlikeable and untrustworthy as Pierre Poilievre.

We couldn’t have avoided that. The political plays were already in motion. The zealots were already in place. Mr. O’Toole may have been able to command some allegiance if he had won but it would not have been because they supported his vision; it would have been because he won. Mr. O’Toole very likely would have faced the same opposition from his caucus as Prime Minister as he did as leader.

It still leaves Canadians in the position of wanting to have options.

I’ve seen many complaints that the conservatives and liberals are just opposite sides of the same coin but that’s more a complaint against the fact that the majority of Canadians do well under either Liberal or Conservative governments. Which means that they both do well enough for the majority of Canadians.

Or at least they did when they could be counted to represent a majority of Canadians.

When Pierre Poilievre faced off against Mark Carney, he lost.

If, like me, Canadians looked at the experience Mark Carney had— or the global reputation Mark Carney had— and chose Mark Carney to lead us through this time, that explains why people chose Mark Carney over Pierre Poilievre. I don’t think it had as much to do with the fact that Mark Carney was the Liberal leader, myself, but I’m completely biased in this case to my own reasoning. Before Mark Carney, I voted Liberal because I didn’t trust the CPC; when Mark Carney showed up, I voted Liberal because I trusted Mark Carney to lead Canada through an economic crisis. Plain and simple; to me.

However, I still think of Scott Gilmore.

I think of politics and partisanship, and I think of the fact that people who really care about these words need a space in between Liberals and Conservatives.

And today— right now— I think of the fact that conservatives need a space where they can say they respect the values and principles of conservatism while standing against alternative facts and fairytales that don’t help anyone.

This is the time where conservatives who value the things they once proclaimed to value need a space where they can champion those values. They need a space where they can agree that— for all intents and purposes— they will support conservative values no matter where they come from. They need a space where they have the opportunity to respect conservative policy, even if a Liberal Prime Minister proposes it. They need the space to make decisions that align with facts and their conscience without it being turned into some partisan witch hunt.

That’s why I thought of Scott Gilmore. It’s why I thought of a revival of progressive conservatives, again. It’s why I added one more reason that I hate partisanship with an absolute passion; because if a party line stops you from doing something better… and admitting it is a shameful space to occupy… then we are in worse shape than we thought.

Prove me wrong.

Thanks to everyone who reads, shares, and becomes a free subscriber. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to support my work; to those who have, your support is greatly appreciated!