It's a lesson Leitch said she learned the hard way, blaming the controversy she caused during her failed Conservative leadership bid not on her ideas, but on her failure to explain them. In a lengthy interview with The Canadian Press, Leitch said she has no regrets about how she ran her campaign, nor about her proposal to screen immigrants for Canadian values -- the policy that prompted accusations she was blatantly trying to be Trump.
Leitch was running for leadership at the same time as Trump was seeking the nod south of the border to be the Republican candidate for president. He would go on to win the nomination and the presidential election. With Canadians largely opposed to some of Trump's more controversial ideas, including one for "extreme vetting of newcomers," Leitch was fiercely attacked, including by members of her own party, when she proposed screening immigrants for Canadian values.
She suggested she became merely a "punching bag" for Trump's positions, and her own were simply badly communicated. She declined to discuss how she arrived at running on those themes -- during the race, it was pointed out by several of her caucus colleagues that she'd never spoken up on those issues while serving in cabinet. She said she wasn't yet ready to get into detail about her choices. Prior to entering elected office in , and even while an MP, she also worked as a pediatric orthopedic surgeon.
After losing the leadership race, she declared her intention to return to that work and leave politics. Trump lost his bid for re-election earlier this month but still captured In the U.
As parents and their children entered her clinics, she found herself dragged into discussions about her political views. In the interview, she at first said the interactions were positive, but when pressed acknowledged it was not always the case. For parents to be concerned she had an "agenda" was not in the best interests of the children she wanted to help, Leitch said.
And I can't imagine what it was like for the child. So, after encouragement from Canadian colleagues and after canvassing available jobs elsewhere, she settled on accepting a position as chief of pediatric orthopedic surgery at the children's hospital of Mississippi and moved there last spring.
With the support of high-profile Conservatives, Leitch won handily. On paper, Leitch is an ideal leadership candidate—an accomplished female doctor raised in Fort McMurray, Alta. As an MP, and later minister of labour and minister for the status of women in the Harper government, Leitch proved herself a good soldier.
Leitch threw her name into the ring in April , the first to do so. Leitch would express teary-eyed regret for her involvement in the tip-line. But it provided a screening device itself, indicating an MP willing to dog-whistle to a far-right, anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant base.
By November, she had traction. She had an arrogant, chilly personae. Pollster Frank Graves, who recently completed a polling project for the Canadian Press to explore the prospects for northern populism, sees a shift in Canadian attitudes about the economy, immigration and trade that could provide an opening for someone like Leitch. Graves polled thousands of Canadians, putting them on a spectrum from open—pro-trade, with positive views on immigration—to ordered.
He found a growing group of Canadians—particularly in southern Ontario—who are anxious about their economic prospects, hostile to the elite policy consensus, anxious about immigration and skeptical about the benefits of trade. The highest scores were in Oshawa, Barrie, London, Hamilton and Windsor, places where many workers have had to leave traditional industrial jobs, much like the rust-belt voters who made Trump president. The trend has reversed somewhat since , when Justin Trudeau was elected, but Graves believes there is a significant constituency for a populist message, based mostly on economic pessimism.
In , 68 per cent of Canadians described themselves as middle class. By , it had fallen as low as 43 per cent. Many people feel they are losing ground, and they are not convinced that the elites are looking out for their best interests. We are not supposed to be afraid of tackling the tougher issues, and we should be able to discuss issues like health care, climate change, abortion and immigration without name-calling, without bullying, without resorting to insults or character assassinations.
If we are not prepared to tackle the tough issues in a respectful manner in this place, then who is? Leadership is about courage and about having the courage to act. As one politician once accurately outlined, most politicians, with the exception of a few with great courage, wait to see how political events are breaking before they risk their own political capital.
I can say that I now understand that. Even with my challenging experience during and following the leadership campaign, I will continue to talk about issues that matter to Canadians, like the ones they talk about every day at the dinner table and at Tim Hortons.
This country and the responsibility we have as Canadians to help others both here and abroad is too important to me not to. I challenge members in the House to not shy away from bold and controversial issues. Do not be afraid of the critics and the media, the trolls and the angry people.
Have courage and move forward. It is an honour to serve in this House. I have many friends in this place and I have had many conversations, some more animated than others. No matter what our beliefs or political backgrounds, we share a common dedication to this country and to making it better. For that I thank my colleagues.
I encourage the leaders in this place to remember to take courage and bring forward bold ideas. Canadians are expecting us to do so. Speaker, I will be supporting this motion by the member for Kenora. It is a study that is long overdue. I, like the member opposite, represent a rural riding, but I will also say as a physician that patients who live in rural communities have substantive and challenging issues.
In Nunavut, if someone sprains their ankle, we can take care of that. However, if a child breaks their femur there, it is an expensive endeavour, both for the parents and the government, to bring them all the way to Ottawa to be treated. I support the member's motion, but I would like to ask him if there are some specifics that we should be focusing on in the study to make sure that rural Canadians receive the health care they deserve. Speaker, I am pleased to introduce this private member's bill today.
In that report, I recommended that Canada create a national office of child and youth health. This private member's bill is a long culmination of that report. It is now more urgent than ever to establish a commissioner. Canada is ranked at the bottom of the list for most children's health indicators.
Indigenous children and children with disabilities fare far worse than other Canadian kids. Poor health in childhood is proven to lead to poor health in adults.
We need to take the health of children in this country seriously. Earlier this year, I introduced the children's fitness tax credit, which I proposed as a start. However, we need an advocate. We need someone whose exclusive mission is the promotion of children, someone who can work with government to ensure that legislation improves the health of kids, someone who would work with think tanks, the private sector and parents to raise awareness about improving the outcomes for children.
A children's health commissioner of Canada, the one recommended in this bill, is exactly that person. I ask all members in this House to join me in supporting the creation of this important position, which would help improve the health of Canadian children. Canada Health Act May 16th, I recently held nationwide consultations on the state of health care in Canada. I met elderly people waiting for hip replacements and parents with kids waiting for mental health assessments.
In Canada, there is an explicit agreement about health care. The state provides health care services and, in exchange, Canadians expect that their loved ones will be taken care of: except that the state is not keeping up its end of the bargain.
Politicians get to say when and where people get their care, but they are not accountable to deliver health care in a timely manner. This is wrong. We need to take the politics out of health care.
My bill would amend the act to add a sixth principle, accountability. What I mean is the government's accountability to the patients it serves. Accountability means that insured health services must be delivered in a timely manner. This is the health care guarantee that Liberal Senator Michael Kirby spoke of in his report. Accountability means that governments must be more responsive to patients' needs. Accountability was considered as a founding principle in the s but was not included in the final five.
It is time that it was. Petitions April 10th, Speaker, I have a petition to present in the House with respect to increasing concerns about the international trafficking of human organs removed from victims without consent and the not yet legal prohibition against Canadians travelling abroad to acquire or receive such organs.
The undersigned are asking for amendments to the Criminal Code as well as to the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act to prohibit Canadians from travelling abroad with respect to this issue. Speaker, after spending eight years in elected politics, including serving in cabinet and running for the Conservative leadership, I will say that I first and foremost always define myself as a physician, a role that I will be returning to full time at the end of this year when I leave this place.
When people ask me what I do for a living, I always say that I am a pediatric orthopaedic surgeon, a doctor who gets to take kids who cannot play on the playground and let them play again, so it gives me great pleasure to rise today to speak to Bill S , an act respecting national physicians' day. This act would declare each May 1 national physicians' day. Children's health has been the primary focus of my medical career, and it was one of the main reasons I ran for office.
When asked in by then minister Jim Flaherty to chair the expert panel on the children's fitness tax credit, I was able to see first-hand how I could have a positive impact on the health of thousands of children via good public policy, not just one child at a time in a clinic. A tax credit to support healthy activities for kids and make activities more affordable for their parents was an innovative idea.
It was a welcome idea. Along with the reduction in the GST, I have heard from many people that this is the most popular and most memorable tax credit of the former government. Not only was it popular, but it was a success. Over 2. The children's fitness tax credit was so successful that the only criticisms of were that it was not enough and that low-income families should receive a subsidy. In , Conservatives made these changes to reflect what Canadians wanted and deserved.
The success and popularity of the tax credit made it even more puzzling why the Liberals promised to kill it in the election.
0コメント