LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

O'Toole speaks about climate change during an announcement in Ottawa on April 15, 2021 (CP/Adrian Wyld)

Last week, federal Conservative leader Erin O’Toole boldly went where his predecessor would not: He introduced a plan to put a price on carbon emissions which would potentially replace the current federal program, should O’Toole and his party take the reins of the House of Commons in the next election.

Reactions to the plan have been mixed, and I will let more knowledgeable experts argue the merits of O’Toole’s plan. However, O’Toole had promised to get rid of Trudeau’s carbon tax during the CPC leadership race and even signed a pledge on the matter, so some pushback from the conservative faithful had to be expected. Many columns I have read from conservative-leaning publications since have claimed that O’Toole has gone against the will of the conservative base. “O'Toole has turned on his back on supporters” one Edmonton Sun columnist wrote. “His plan to return the money it raises to the public is more interventionist than Trudeau's,” a Postmedia editorial said.

However, O’Toole’s strategy is becoming increasing clear: He made the alliances he needed to make in order to win the leadership, such as courting the party’s social conservatives, and then understood he could not win a general election unless he stirred the party closer to the country’s political centre, where most voters in several key regions of the country actually are.

Cynics will call this electoral math; realists will call it forging a possible path to victory.

To wit, here is some interesting data from a pre-pandemic poll conducted by the Angus Reid Institute (The poll was fielded in December 2019, shortly after Andrew Scheer’s resignation as CPC leader), in which respondents were asked to choose the most important issues facing Canada today from a list. Which issue came out on top? Climate change with 36 per cent. In second place with 29 per cent was improving access to health care. Taxes and access to affordable housing were in third and fourth place respectively.

Breaking down the results by vote intentions, the numbers reveal a stark contrast between what conservative and non-conservative voters perceive as their priorities:



(On the table above, the top-three issues per party supporters are highlighted in blue.)

While climate change topped the list of Liberal, NDP, BQ and Green voters, it did not even make the top-five issues among conservative voters. For conservatives, the top-three issues were related to taxes, the federal deficit, and transparency/honesty in the federal government.

So did Erin O’Toole turn his back on his supporters by adding carbon-pricing mechanisms to the party’s platform? While some will argue he did just that, others will point out that he had no alternative—unless the CPC plans to remain on opposition benches for the next few years. The conservative base in this country is strong, probably stronger than any other federal party, but it alone cannot deliver enough seats to win power at the House of Commons.

In short, if you cannot bring voters to you, then go where voters are.

Politically, it’s a matter of simple math: Hypothetically, if O’Toole loses 15 to 20 points in Alberta compared to 2019 (as polls currently show), but manages to grab five points away from the Liberals in Ontario, the most probable result would be a net win of seats for the CPC. Obviously, the balancing act O’Toole has to perform is a challenging one: Keep enough of the base on his side—even at the risk of losing a handful of uncompromising ones—and convince moderate voters disappointed by (or tired of) the Trudeau Liberals to tip the seat totals in the CPC’s favour.

In a radio interview last fall shortly before a vote of confidence (which could have brought down the governing Liberals), the host asked whether O’Toole would be given a second chance should he lose his first election as leader. At the time, with O’Toole in charge for less than two months, it was plausible to believe that perhaps O’Toole would be given this opportunity, which had been denied to Andrew Scheer. But O’Toole recent actions may have completely flipped that script.

If O’Toole is successful in the next election, no doubt that many (if not most) conservative voters will at least tolerate O’Toole’s carbon pricing, and perhaps will choose to fight reducing its scope rather than abolish it entirely. However, should the Liberals win the next election with O’Toole leading the CPC to a third consecutive defeat, it would be more likely than not that an aggrieved membership, which has recently voted against a motion stating that “Climate change is real and the Conservative Party should act upon it”, would give O’Toole the boot.

Therefore, it is not hyperbole to state that O’Toole, with his new carbon pricing plan, has pushed all his chips in the political pot, and will be playing his political career whenever the next federal election is held.

Follow 338Canada on Twitter. For the latest federal projections, visit 338Canada.

The post Erin O’Toole’s make or break climate change bet appeared first on Macleans.ca.


Former Solicitor-General Rich Coleman will appear before the money laundering inquiry on April 28.

After nearly two years of sometimes eye-glazing testimony, B.C.’s inquiry into money laundering will begin grilling politicians this week about dirty cash distorting the provincial economy.

Former Liberal Premier Christy Clark, her controversial minister Rich Coleman, and crusading NDP Attorney-General David Eby will be in the commission’s crosshairs.

The inquiry’s focus on the government’s response to the apparent money-laundering crisis starts today online with Sam MacLeod, the assistant deputy minister and general-manager of the regulatory Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch.

The public, however, will probably want to connect Tuesday to hear from Clark, premier from 2011 to 2017, when the flood of suspicious cash swamped B.C. casinos.

Clark has been rarely mentioned at the inquiry, but she can provide an overall view about how her administration dealt with gaming, the roughly $1 billion in annual revenue it provided, and the challenges it created.

Shirley Bond, interim Liberal leader and former minister of public safety and solicitor-general as well as the ex-attorney-general, will provide a more granular view on that era Thursday.

She was on watch when the RCMP abandoned any attempt to police the casinos and Ottawa internally restructured the force.

Michael de Jong, opposition attorney-general critic and former minister of finance, will appear Friday and should provide the most pertinent testimony about what the previous administration knew and why it did what it did within the key timeframe.

Of course, the biggest star will be Eby, who appears April 26.

He set all this in motion after helping lambaste his predecessors for allegedly turning a blind eye while casinos were turned into laundromats for proceeds of crime.

Coleman’s appearance on April 28 is also eagerly anticipated — he held several cabinet posts, including public safety and solicitor-general, and for years was responsible for gaming.

Although he was a lightning rod for gaming critics, Coleman’s involvement does not appear to have been pivotal during the rising tide of suspicious transactions.

Indeed, the fulcrum of the discussion has shifted from what happened inside casinos to underground banking and the problems plaguing police.

The casinos seemingly did what they were asked — as cash rolled in, they collected and provided information and videos to the authorities. The B.C. Lottery Corp. did too, pleading with the Gaming Policy and Enforcement Branch and the RCMP to investigate. It was law enforcement that ignored the problem.

Money swept into the casinos because the government decreed they only accept cash and, although some of it was suspicious, the RCMP failed to conduct a proper investigation until 2015. Then, it collapsed without a prosecution.

The commission has heard the RCMP’s only previous probe of casino money laundering, which lasted from 2010 until 2012, ended without the force discovering where the cash was coming from, or a link to a crime.

They still aren’t sure where the bags of currency came from.

Indeed, there is a paucity of real information period — there are no academically sound financial estimates of either the scope or the social impact of money laundering.

The federal government has only in the last year “refocused” its efforts and launched new initiatives to combat money laundering after years of futile or no investigations in B.C.

The RCMP is getting $98 million over five years to modernize and establish new “Integrated Money Laundering Investigative Teams” across the country, including in B.C., that will include municipal police and other agencies.

Until now, RCMP witnesses have complained they didn’t have the resources, the funding, or the expertise — and they felt handcuffed by Canada’s constitution and guarantees of timely trials and laws demanding disclosure to defendants.

They pointed particularly to the relationship between financial institutions — the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre and law enforcement.

The institutions have the data and FINTRAC has advanced analytic capabilities to detect money laundering, but both are reluctant to share information because of privacy laws and other concerns.

As a result, police lack valuable contextual data — seeing only the suspicious transactions, but not patterns of similar transactions that might be detected with access to the full data set to uncover criminal networks and connections.

Still, the biggest hurdle appears to be the ability of criminals to distance the proceeds from the offence, making a money-laundering prosecution impossible.

Professional money-launderers use underground banks, cryptocurrencies and international trade to provide financial services for criminals, their money often intermingled with legitimate funds also being moved outside regulated financial channels.

The complexity of the chain between the predicate offence and the profit has meant more than 90 per cent of cases result in charges being stayed or dropped.

The gamblers who brought suspicious cash into casinos weren’t necessarily criminals, but the subterranean system that allowed them to skirt China’s currency controls to access their wealth also provided an opportunity for someone else to wash their dirty cash.

The commission has been told much of the currency came from a Richmond money service business that provided millions, mostly in $20 bills from drug deals.

But none of that has been proven.

The commission, as a result, has been scrutinizing provincial policing, the gaps in the enforcement structure and the clash between federal and provincial priorities.

There are more than 13 federal departments and agencies led by the finance minister receiving some $70 million for anti-money laundering efforts.

Inquiry commissioner Austin Cullen cannot tell Ottawa what to do, so his recommendations will be aimed at Victoria, which has jurisdiction over key areas — company incorporation, tax authorities, securities, real estate regulation, the land registry and, most importantly, policing.

imulgrew@postmedia.com

twitter.com/ianmulgrew