Lies about Pierre Poilievre being circulated by unthinking Liberals and Dippers.
There is a long post of either fictitious, or misleading misinformation circulating about Pierre Poilievre. People gullible enough to still be supporting the Liberals are passing this list of lies along as their contribution to “intelligent discourse”. Here is point by point refutation of this blatant propaganda.
Allegedly Poilievre voted against:
• Support for Ukraine – False/misleading. Poilievre and the Conservative Party have supported aid to Ukraine and condemned Russian aggression. They have occasionally voted against specific bills due to unrelated provisions, not the aid itself.
• Workers’ rights – Misleading. Poilievre has supported worker choice and opposed mandatory unionization processes. His position is about balancing worker freedom, not eliminating rights.
• Paid sick leave for federally funded entities – Context-dependent. Conservatives opposed some versions due to concerns over employer burden or implementation issues, not the concept itself.
• Repeal of Harper-era union certification rules – True. Poilievre supported keeping secret ballot votes for unionization to protect workers from coercion.
• Raising the minimum wage – Misleading. He opposed federal minimum wage increases, arguing provinces already have jurisdiction and that such moves increase costs and inflation.
• $10 a day childcare – Opposed due to its centralized design. Poilievre favours giving money directly to parents (as in the Universal Child Care Benefit), not funding institutional care only.
• Housing initiatives – Misleading. He opposes government-run programs but has championed policies to increase housing supply by cutting red tape and municipal gatekeeping.
• The Child Tax Benefit – False. The CCB was implemented by the Liberals, but Conservatives support it. Poilievre did not campaign to repeal it.
• Dental care for kids – Opposed centralized programs; prefers empowering individuals with choice or provincial management. It’s a disagreement over delivery model, not child welfare.
• Women’s right to have control of their bodies – Misleading. Poilievre has stated repeatedly that he will not reopen the abortion debate and will not introduce legislation on it.
• Enforced equal pay for equal work – Misleading. Conservatives have supported equal pay laws in principle. Specific votes may have been over implementation or broader omnibus bills.
• Middle-class tax cuts – False. Poilievre supports tax cuts broadly and voted for certain middle-class cuts. He’s opposed tax hikes and spending packages he sees as inflationary.
• Increased support for seniors – Misleading. Conservatives have supported OAS increases and split income tax for seniors. Some votes opposed Liberal bills with unrelated spending.
• Universal pharmacare/dental care for low-income workers – Opposed due to fiscal concerns and belief in provincial management and private-sector delivery.
• Expanded pandemic relief for workers – Contextual. Conservatives supported CERB initially but opposed extensions they felt were mismanaged or incentivized non-work.
Allegedly he voted for:
• Cancelling the Veterans Disability fund – Misleading. Conservatives restructured veteran benefits into a lump-sum payment model; this was controversial but not a cancellation.
• Raising the retirement age – True. Harper-era change to raise OAS age from 65 to 67 was supported by Poilievre. It was intended to reflect longer life expectancy and fiscal sustainability.
• Prioritized worker pensions during corporate bankruptcies – True. Conservatives introduced reforms to give workers better protection for pensions, contrary to the criticism.
• Slashing OAS & CPP – False. No record of Poilievre slashing CPP. The OAS age change was a delay in eligibility, not a cut in benefit. CPP enhancements were a Liberal policy he did not support, but he hasn’t proposed cuts.
• Cancelling school lunch programs – No record of Poilievre voting to cancel such a program. Canada doesn’t have a national school lunch program; this may refer to budget choices or misinterpretation of provincial responsibilities.
Allegedly Poilievre has done the following:
• “Sucking on the public teat” – Ad hominem. He has worked in public service since young but is elected and accountable. It’s not unique in Canadian politics.
• Gets a government-funded pension – True, like all long-term MPs. It’s part of the standard MP pension plan, not unique to him.
• Refused to submit security clearance application – Misleading. There’s no public evidence of him refusing. As Opposition Leader, he does not need security clearance; this may be conflating an unrelated event.
• Instructed MPs to stay silent on LGBTQ+ issues – Unsubstantiated. He encourages freedom of speech among MPs. His platform is focused on economic issues; silence ≠ opposition.
• Is a climate change denier – False. He acknowledges climate change but opposes carbon taxes, favouring technology and innovation as solutions.
• Vowed to use the notwithstanding clause – Misleading. He’s spoken of it as a tool provinces should have but hasn’t pledged its use to remove Charter rights.
• Shamelessly lies and misinforms – Subjective opinion. Both sides accuse each other of spin and misinformation.
• Opposes pharma and dental care, enriching insurance companies – Misleading. He favours competitive markets and decentralized approaches, not a blanket rejection of coverage.
• Supplied coffee and donuts to the trucker convoy – True. He supported the peaceful elements and criticized disruptions, not endorsing illegal actions.
• Wants to replace Canadian money with Bitcoin – Misleading. He has expressed support for Bitcoin freedom but not replacing the Canadian dollar.
• Blamed Trudeau for inflation – True. He argued that government spending fuelled inflation, which is a legitimate economic debate. He acknowledges global factors as well.
• Blamed Trudeau for interest rate hikes – Misleading. He has said government deficits pressured the Bank of Canada into rate hikes—not direct control, but indirect effect.
• Supports austerity cuts to most federal entities – He has called for fiscal responsibility and ending wasteful spending. “Massive austerity” is a subjective framing.
• Will defund the CBC – True. He believes the CBC is biased and advocates cutting most funding, preserving French services and local news.
• Demeans journalists, favours far-right interviews – Misleading. He criticizes media bias, but regularly takes media questions. Jordan Peterson is controversial, but not a “fruitcake” by standard political discourse.
Disclaimer: I don’t participate in the charade of democratic electoral politics wherein politicians vie for the authority to steal our property and control our lives, differing only by degree. Being “the lesser” evil” has never appealed to me to be a justification for anything when “the better good” is a perfectly valid option. I say this as an explanation for why I am not a supporter of Pierre Poilievre, but even less so of Liberal liars.