Pierre Poilievre might be cooked

The clock is officially ticking on Pierre Poilievre. The Conservative Party of Canada is reportedly set to hold a leadership review next January in Calgary, one that will give members an opportunity to weigh in on his performance. Even making it to next January's vote will set him apart from his two predecessors, Andrew Scheer and Erin O'Toole, who both resigned before they had to face their party's membership after losing their own elections. Winning it by a sufficiently convincing margin will be another matter entirely.
First, of course, he has to win back a seat in the House of Commons. Mark Carney has said he will call a byelection for the riding of Battle River-Crowfoot, one officially resigned by Conservative MP Damien Kurek earlier this week. And while it's one of the safest Conservative seats in the country, it also presents a special kind of danger for Poilievre given the increase in separatist activity — if not support — in the province. Alberta separatists are heavily overrepresented in the Conservative membership of Kurek's largely rural riding, and Poilievre will have to find a way to put them in their place without risking a backlash.
This is the kind of tightrope he'll have to walk for the next six months. In order to secure the support of his base, and especially the members enthusiastic enough to turn out for a leadership review, he'll have to continue catering to them with Costco-sized quantities of red meat. But it's precisely that sort of pandering that helped cost him the last election, and could just as easily cost him the next one. The more he tries to hold onto his current job, the further the job he really wants slips from his reach.
So far, at least, he's shown no signs of being able to thread this particular political needle. Take his recent comments about immigration, ones that seem designed to appeal to a very specific slice of his party's base — and alienate the rest of the country in the process. 'We want severe limits on population growth to reverse the damage the Liberals did to our system,' he told reporters before turning on his heel and walking away from their follow-up questions. If this sounds more like something PPC leader Maxime Bernier would say, that's probably by design.
Never mind, for the moment, that the federal government has already made massive changes to its immigration policy — ones that could actually produce negative population growth over the next few years. As Waterloo economics professor Mikal Skuterud said on social media, 'Poilievre's call for 'severe limits on population growth' suggests he hasn't understood how far Liberals' 2025-2027 Immigration Targets go. We may see *declining* population levels (not just growth rates) in coming quarters.'
His comment about immigration also suggests he doesn't understand the real challenge he faces right now. He can spend the next six months pushing his party further to the right in an attempt to motivate its base and retain the leadership. But he may simply be securing the most Pyrrhic of victories, given the impact that would have on his standing with the broader Canadian public.
According to multiple pollsters, that standing has already eroded since the election. According to Nanos Research, Mark Carney now enjoys a 26 point advantage over Poilievre when it comes to who Canadians prefer as prime minister. 'The proportion of Canadians who prefer Conservative Leader Poilievre as PM has hit the lowest level since he assumed the leadership of the party in 2022,' Nik Nanos said.
EKOS Research has the spread even wider, with Carney's job approval rating at +36 and Poilievre's at -34. Maybe the most damning data points come from Spark Advocacy's latest poll, which shows that two-thirds of Canadians have positive feelings about their new prime minister. Worse, for Poilievre and his team, Carney is more popular among young people (by 10 points) and men (by 15 points) than the Conservative leader. These were supposed to be key building blocks in the new Conservative coalition Poilievre is building.
Pierre Poilievre probably thought that losing the election and his own seat was as bad as it could get for him. But if his own personal popularity continues to collapse, he might be in for an even bigger surprise than the one he experienced in April.
It's not as though Poilievre and the Conservatives are doomed to lose a fifth federal election in a row, whenever that election happens. Canadians will eventually tire of Carney, and that could happen far sooner than the prime minister and his advisors would like to imagine. But relying on Carney to fail is not a recipe for Poilievre's success. If he wants to win the next election, he needs to actually take stock of why he lost the last one — and make the necessary adjustments.
Mark Bourrie, who wrote a biography of Poilievre in advance of what looked like an inevitable victory, doesn't think that's going to happen. In a recent piece for The Walrus, he noted that 'Poilievre seems to lack self-awareness and reflection. Loyalty, a virtue in others, becomes a liability when a politician clings to those who aren't up to the job. Or who alienate potential friends. Since he was a kid, Poilievre's rigidity has walled out new ideas and contrary, sometimes better, ways of looking at things.'
The leader, in other words, is not for turning. He may be incapable, both by virtue of temperament and training, of the sort of introspection and humility required to acknowledge mistakes and make changes. Even if he did, it's not clear his party's radicalized membership, which has been trained by Poilievre and his team over the last few years to see moderation as weakness, would accept it.
Poilievre's leadership is safe for now, at least. But as Global News's Mackenzie Gray noted in a recent story, 'one source warned that if the Conservative leader isn't careful, a push to remove him could snowball quickly.' He might want to ask Scheer and O'Toole what that looks like — and whether there's any way to stop it.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Winnipeg Free Press

2 hours ago

• Winnipeg Free Press

Canada still doesn't understand respecting Indigenous rights

Opinion Thirty-five years ago this week, history was made in Manitoba. Events this week in Ottawa point to just how little we have learnt from that history. In Manitoba in June of 1990, Elijah Harper, MLA for what was then the third party NDP Opposition in a minority government, said 'No', and opposed the Meech Lake Accord. The backdrop was clear. A crisis. In this case, the 'need' to include Quebec in the constitution. The solution, Canadians were told, was the Meech Lake Accord. It was agreed to by Canada's premiers with an artificial deadline set by then-prime minister Brian Mulroney. He talked about rolling the dice. There was one problem. There were many people opposed to Meech Lake. In particular, Indigenous people were clear. It not only excluded Indigenous people, but threatened to be a major step backwards. Elijah Harper was the voice for Indigenous Peoples when he came out against the Accord. What is often missed is how Elijah Harper said 'No'. He said no to procedurally giving leave to rush through the ratification of Meech Lake. Despite great pressure from the federal government, Speaker Denis Rocan ruled in favour of the key point of order brought forward by Elijah Harper arguing that the proper notice procedure had not been followed. There was no closure and the Legislature could not pass the Accord before the deadline. Thirty-five years later, in Ottawa, the House of Commons is rushing through Bill C-5 without consultation. It is a bill that claims to respond to a crisis. That somehow Canada's response to the so-called existential threat with Donald Trump is to throw out our existing processes for approving major projects, and instead we must speed up approvals by threatening to sideline Indigenous rights and environmental protections. To achieve this, the government is relying on the full support of the Conservative opposition, not only to support the legislation but to bring in closure, limiting debate. A handful of MP's have spoken out against both the contents and process of Bill C-5. The Green and NDP MPs who face a challenging situation because they do not have party status have opposed it. Even one Liberal MP called out the unfairness of the process. What is different is that in 1990, despite all the pressures, the Manitoba legislature followed its own procedures based on hundreds of years of parliamentary democracy and did not ram through the Meech Lake Accord. The actions of not only Elijah Harper, but so many other Indigenous people forced Canada to recognize the need to respect Indigenous rights. In many ways, it was a major first step towards what in subsequent years has been reconciliation. What has been happening with Bill C-5 in 2025 couldn't be more different. There has been a blatant disregard for the process you would expect for a bill of this significance. The hasty introduction and closure being attached to Bill C-5 fly in the face of the consultation you would normally expect on any bill, let alone the constitutionally required consultation on matters involving Indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples have been clear in opposing both the process and substance of the bill. Many people have been calling out what is seen as a betrayal of reconciliation. We learned a major lesson in 1990. That Indigenous peoples will defend their rights. That reconciliation starts with not only recognizing Canada's history of genocide against Indigenous peoples but that provincial and federal governments must recognize the limits of their own powers in the context of Indigenous rights. But as Santayana said 'Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it ' Sadly, in 2025, key political leaders have chosen not to remember these lessons of history and are repeating Canada's failure to recognize Indigenous rights. There is one more lesson too. We also learned that the 'crisis' of 1990 was greatly exaggerated. Despite subsequent efforts with the failed Charlottetown accord, the constitutional question was never finally closed. But Canada continues. The so-called crisis we are facing currently will go the same way. What will matter is not just how we react to Donald Trump or any other political leader or economic threat. In terms of history, it is how much we will have acted in accordance with our own values based on our own distinct history. The events of 1990 set us on a better course. The events of 2025 with Bill C-5 threaten to set us back dramatically. Steve Ashton is a former member of the Manitoba Legislature. He was the NDP House Leader during the debate on the Meech Lake Accord in the Manitoba Legislature in 1990. Niki Ashton is the former NDP MP for Churchill-Keewatinook Aski

CTV News

5 hours ago

• CTV News

CTV National News: What the passing of the 'One Canadian Economy' Act means

Watch The Liberal government's contentious 'One Canadian Economy' bill cleared the House of Commons thanks to votes from Conservatives. Rachel Aiello explains.

Toronto Star

8 hours ago

• Toronto Star

Mark Carney promises to consult with Indigenous communities in choosing projects under controversial Bill C-5

OTTAWA — Facing concerns and warnings of Indigenous resistance against a key part of his governing agenda, Prime Minister Mark Carney acknowledged Friday that 'more fulsome conversations are needed' to choose the development projects his government wants to fast-track through controversial new legislation, Bill C-5. Speaking moments after the bill passed third reading in the House of Commons, Carney pledged to hold meetings in the coming weeks with First Nations, Inuit and Métis leaders and experts in a series of summits to 'launch the implementation of this legislation in the right way' in 'full partnership' with Indigenous communities.