Why a Conservative Majority Under Pierre Poilievre Is the Change Canada Needs
As Canadians prepare for a pivotal federal election, the choice between Pierre Poilievre’s Conservatives and Mark Carney’s Liberals is stark. Both options come with significant drawbacks and risks, but there is a compelling case to be made that a Conservative majority, despite its flaws, represents the change Canada needs to revitalize its economy and assert its sovereignty.
Acknowledging the Negatives: Poilievre’s Controversies and Weaknesses
Pierre Poilievre is far from a perfect candidate. Critics and opponents have branded him as “Maple MAGA,” drawing parallels between his rhetoric and that of Donald Trump, an association that is deeply unpopular in much of Canada. Poilievre’s record on women’s rights is particularly troubling: he has voted against free birth control, supported laws that would restrict abortion rights, and remained silent as access to abortion services declined in some provinces. On child care, his preference for a market-driven, voucher-based approach threatens to undo the progress made under the Liberals’ $10-a-day system, potentially making child care less affordable and accessible for many families.
His stance on immigration is ambiguous and, at times, divisive. While he has called for smaller population growth and stricter deportation policies for immigrants involved in hate crimes, he has not provided a clear, consistent plan for immigration levels or integration, drawing criticism from both the left and the right. Additionally, Poilievre’s unwavering support for Israel, often at the expense of acknowledging Palestinian perspectives, has alienated many Canadians who seek a more balanced foreign policy.
The Case for Change: Economic Renewal Through Resource Development
Despite these significant negatives, the argument for a Conservative majority rests on the urgent need for economic renewal and national self-reliance. Under the Liberals, Canada’s resource sector, long a pillar of national prosperity has been stifled by red tape, slow permitting processes, and an ideological aversion to oil and gas development. In the past five years alone, $176 billion in energy and resource projects were cancelled, robbing Canadians of jobs, investment, and economic independence.
Poilievre’s Conservatives offer a clear alternative. His “Canada Shovel Ready Zones” initiative would pre-approve sites for major projects like pipelines, LNG terminals, and mines, enabling rapid construction and job creation. By streamlining approvals and cutting bureaucratic delays, Poilievre promises to unleash hundreds of billions of dollars in new economic activity, making Canada less dependent on the United States for energy exports and more competitive globally.
This approach is not just about corporate profits, it’s about paycheques for Canadian workers, economic sovereignty, and funding for public services. Energy sector leaders themselves have called for the kind of decisive action Poilievre is proposing, arguing that it is essential for strengthening Canada’s economic future. The Conservative plan aims to boost economic activity by half a trillion dollars over five years, cut taxes, build homes, and make life more affordable for ordinary Canadians.
Mark Carney and the Liberals: More of the Same
Mark Carney, the likely Liberal leader, represents continuity rather than change. The Liberals have made real progress on child care, affordability, and inclusivity, but their approach to economic growth has been hampered by regulatory overreach and an aversion to resource development. Carney’s background as a banker and central banker suggests a steady hand, but also a reluctance to break with the policies that have left Canada’s economy underperforming and overly reliant on foreign markets.
On key issues like pipelines and offshore oil, Carney has signaled that he would maintain, if not strengthen, the restrictions that have held back development, particularly in regions like Newfoundland and Labrador. For Canadians frustrated by stagnant wages, high living costs, and a sense of national decline, the prospect of “more of the same” is simply not good enough.
A Difficult but Necessary Choice
Voting for Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives is not an endorsement of all his views or past actions. His record on women’s rights, child care, immigration, and foreign policy is deeply flawed and demands vigilance from civil society and Parliament. But the status quo under the Liberals has failed to deliver the economic dynamism and national self-reliance Canadians need.
The resource sector is Canada’s economic engine. Opening up pipelines, expanding oil and gas, and unleashing the resource sector will generate jobs, increase national wealth, and provide the fiscal room to invest in social programs. As painful as it may be to vote for a candidate with a checkered record, the need for change and for a government that will put Canadian workers and economic sovereignty first makes a majority Conservative government the best, if imperfect, choice for this moment in Canada’s history. I voted, have you?