Conservatives from across Canada deliberated Friday on 60 policy and 37 constitutional proposals during the second day of the party’s national convention, which is being held in Quebec City.
A handful of the policy proposals up for debate have generated significant media attention. These include a proposal to ensure “single-sex spaces” for women in washrooms and a proposal to prohibit medicinal or surgical interventions on minors to treat gender confusion or dysphoria.
Michelle Bataluk, a delegate from Edmonton West, is confident both proposals will come up for a vote in Saturday’s plenary session. Only top-ranked policy and constitutional proposals are presented to the more than 2,000 delegates at the final plenary session, where, if approved, they become party resolutions.
Party resolutions may have little impact on the Conservative Party’s election platform. But they can shape how the party is perceived.
“The party election platform is going to bear little resemblance to what’s in the party’s resolutions,” said Colby Badhwar, a three-time party delegate who was attending as a delegate for the Electoral District Association (EDA) of Parkdale-High Park.
“This is something you learn after being involved in the policy process for a few conventions,” Badhwar said. “It’s more about keeping dumb things out of the declaration, than about putting things you like into the declaration. But if some really dumb things get in there, the media and opposition will hit you over the head with it.”
Proposals aim to curb Liberal policies
The proposals that have made it to the convention for consideration were submitted by EDAs in early 2023 and then voted on by a representative from each EDA. There are 338 EDAs in Canada — one for every federal riding.
Each EDA can send up to ten delegates to the convention, and only delegates are permitted to vote on policy and constitutional proposals.
For either type of proposal to be adopted by the party, there’s a “double majority requirement,” notes Badhwar, meaning a majority of delegates and a majority of provinces must be in favour of them.
Aside from the headline-grabbing proposals, there were numerous policy proposals debated Friday that speak to the party’s eagerness to curb or undo the policy actions of the current Liberal government.
There is, for example, a proposal to better empower “the Ethics Commissioner with more punitive options for repeat offenders of the Conflict of Interest.” Since 2018, the ethics commissioner has found five senior Liberals in violation of ethics laws, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, cabinet ministers Dominic LeBlanc and Mary Ng, former finance minister Bill Morneau and parliamentary secretary Greg Fergus.
There is a proposal to ensure a news media “market free from government and lobby funding” and with minimal “government intervention and regulation.” The Conservative Party has been a vocal opponent of the Liberals’ two digital-regulation laws, the Online Streaming Act and the Online News Act.
There is a proposal to “implement a sustainable fiscal policy to eliminate the deficit and steadily repay the national debt.” At the Liberal Party’s national convention in May, the party rejected a proposal to develop a costed plan to balance the budget.
There is a proposal to “adopt an assertive foreign policy toward authoritarian dictatorships, including the Chinese Communist Party,” including by expanding trade and military alliances with like-minded democracies in Asia. The Conservatives have long accused the Liberals of being excessively cozy with China.
And there is a proposal that a Conservative government work towards “spending at least the NATO-recommended two per cent of GDP on national defense.” The Washington Post reported in April that leaked Pentagon documents showed Trudeau had privately told NATO that Canada would never meet NATO’s spending target.
‘Everything begins with the leader’
Philippe Ndayisaba, a non-delegate member observer from Toronto, said he was attending the convention for the first time to form a better understanding of the policy-making process. He was particularly keen to hear the Conservative Party’s position on military issues, he said.
“We’re not in good shape in terms of protecting our borders, our country,” Ndayisaba said. “I think our people — Canadians — have lost the ability, or desire, or understanding of the need to protect our country.”
“Russia and China provide a background that is dangerous enough. If you’re paying attention, you notice how dangerous they are,” he said. “The dangers they pose to countries include cybersecurity and interference in our democratic institutions. Those things require intellectual property responses, but also military [responses]. You have to be ready.”
Ndayisaba said he was frustrated with how much time Canadians spend debating domestic social issues, when Canada is facing major geopolitical issues and its standing in the world is falling.
Ndayisaba, who hoped to speak with party leader Pierre Poilievre at the convention, believes it is ultimately the responsibility of the leader to make Canadians care about these issues.
“Until your leader has put in the effort to inspire you to care, people won’t care,” he noted. “Everything begins with the leader.”
Poilievre has thus far refrained from weighing in on the convention’s proposals.
“There’s something like 55 different resolutions,” Poilievre told reporters Wednesday. “I’m not going to sit here and offer opinions on all 55 of them before they pass because that would be an unnecessary waste of time.”
“Leaders are never bound by convention resolutions,” he added. “But we do take them into consideration.”
In the view of Chris Bataluk, another delegate from Edmonton West, the proposals to amend the party’s constitution actually “have the most immediate impact on the party because governance is within the party’s control.” Bataluk wrote three of the constitutional proposals considered by delegates this year.
By contrast, “the policy resolutions are just signposts for the party to follow,” he said. “[Politicians] have to get elected to act on any of the initiatives that the grassroots would like them to act on.”
