Conservative MP Switches Parties, But Not Policy

A political quagmire was created when Conservative MP Michael Ma crossed the floor to the Liberal Party on December 11th. This follows the earlier defection of Chris d’Entremont back in November. 

Now, if you read the headlines, this is being portrayed as a great betrayal of principles by other Conservative MPs. The argument is that these Conservatives who flee to the Liberals are doing so in opposition to the Conservative political platform. However, I contend that very little has changed in the hearts of these MPs, despite their change of party lines.

It is well known that the two major political parties in Canada share significant donor interests, as put excellently by Riley Donovan on the day of Ma’s defection.

These donors and lobbyists pay no heed to chest-beating for party colours. They care only about the efficient effecting of their desired policy, and have succeeded in purchasing the policymakers of both the Liberals and Tories.

In a Canada where mass immigration is opposed by a strong majority of Canadians, no political party has the fortitude to seriously address the problem. This betrayal of the democratic will is especially biting from the Conservative Party, whose history ought to make clear the correct path towards improving Canada’s situation.

Instead, we have to hear talking points which bear no real weight. Discussion in the House of Commons is used in endless debate over minute taxes and implementation of various projects and technologies – in short, doing whatever is necessary to dance around the root causes of Canada’s strife and unaffordability.

In fact, I would ask you to consider the last time that a Conservative actually fought in Parliament to conserve anything. Throughout the last election, Poilievre played dress-up with countless diaspora communities, and spoke out against a Conservative MP who disagreed with same-sex marriage and supported restrictions on abortion:

“As our party’s policy book, adopted by party members, has said for years, ‘a Conservative Government will not support any legislation to regulate abortion.’ When I am prime minister, no laws or rules will be passed that restrict women’s reproductive choices. Period… 

I will lead a small government that minds its own business, letting people make their own decisions about their love lives, their families, their bodies, their speech, their beliefs and their money. We will put people back in charge of their lives in the freest country in the world.”

As I pointed out in a previous article, the Tories do not fight on behalf of beliefs that are particularly conservative. 

The concept of “a small government that minds its own business, letting people make their own decisions about their love lives, their families, their bodies, their speech, their beliefs and their money,” is not conservatism, it is an ideology known as “Economic Liberalism.”

Economic Liberalism is defined as: “an economic philosophy that emphasizes personal liberty, private property, and limited government interference, advocating for a free competitive market where individual self-interest leads to the best outcomes for society.” This is the exact belief system that the Liberal Party of Canada fought for throughout their pre-Trudeau (the Elder) political history.

Edmund Burke, the father of conservative thought, says in his Reflections on the Revolution in France: “But what is liberty without wisdom, and without virtue? It is the greatest of all possible evils; for it is folly, vice, and madness, without tuition or restraint.”

So, when these Tories cross over to the Liberals, are they really changing their policy? The statements of both Michael Ma and Chris d’Entremont seem to imply that they really have not. 

“[The Liberal Party] hits the priorities I have heard most in my riding, to build strong community infrastructure and grow a stronger economy” said d’Entremont following his floor crossing. Meanwhile, Ma said that Carney is offering “the steady, practical approach we need to deliver on the priorities I hear every day while door knocking in Markham—Unionville.”

All the Conservatives could muster in response to the floor crossings was a flaccid appeal to fiscal growth, which Pierre Poilievre voiced in a post on X:

“Michael Ma was elected as a Conservative by the constituents of Markham-Unionville to fight against Liberal inflationary spending driving up the cost of living in his community. 

Today, he chose to endorse the very policies he was elected to oppose. The same policies driving up food prices and making life more expensive for all.”

No statement regarding the failure to uphold conservative principles, no accusation of abandoning the wisdom or guiding hand of the state, no appeal to the protection of our nation against existential forces. Merely a complaint that Ma failed to adequately hold firm to the Conservative plan for the increase of Canada’s financial growth.

Which is not to say that I am opposed to growing Canada’s finances – this is an issue that desperately needs to be tackled. Yet, shuffling around money is not going to solve the fundamental perils that we face.

Action needs to be decisive and significant. We need to investigate and address root causes, not band-aid our situation with tax breaks. No party in Canada is interested in genuinely solving mass immigration, or the rot of our national identity and value system. Even if every Liberal became a Conservative, or vice versa, we would be undergoing the exact same strife.

They can shuffle parties just as much as they shuffle cabinets, but what needs to change are the policies which are driving our nation into utter ruin. As it stands, there is not a single Member of Parliament for which that is a priority.