It should come as no surprise that Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre, famously nicknamed “Harper’s pitbull” when he served in Stephen Harper’s cabinet, has acquired a pitbull of his own. That would be Jenni Byrne. Byrne was well-known in political circles for her aggressive tactics when she served as one of Harper’s strategists, but she was on the outs with his more moderate successor, Erin O’Toole, and left for greener pastures in Toronto with Doug Ford. However she returned to Ottawa and has been Poilievre’s closest adviser ever since he assumed the leadership from O’Toole in late 2022.
The results have been dramatic. Two pitbulls egging each other on. Catering to each other’s worst instincts. If anyone thought Poilievre took political discourse to a new low when he served with Harper, they now have an explanation for his even more aggressively negative and polarizing take on politics since becoming leader. And, as he has made abundantly clear on several occasions, including his most recent interview with uber rightwing podcaster Jordan Peterson, he has absolutely no intention of moderating his tone during the upcoming federal election. Instead, he plans to double down on his destructive criticism. [i]
Ottawa insiders have long known who Jenni Byrne is but, not surprisingly, she is a complete unknown to the vast majority of Canadians. Her name rarely makes the news, since she is a ‘mere’ unelected staffer. Yet her influence was, and is now, huge. Considering that Poilievre is likely to be the next prime minister, this becomes even more important.
And now, thanks to the advent of social media, everyone can see for themselves what Ms. Byrne thinks and how she operates. A string of increasingly vicious and vindictive posts by Ms. Byrne on X have made this clear. Amazingly, the latest object of her vitriol is a fellow Conservative, none other than Erin O’Toole. Mr. O’Toole is no longer the party leader, and he is not even an MP, having resigned over a year ago to return to the private sector. Nevertheless Ms. Byrne felt impelled to take umbrage at a recent post by O’Toole that anyone else would have seen as innocuous. In fact, almost everyone else who has waded into this ridiculous ongoing dispute has described O’Toole’s post as civil, gracious, and a role model for appropriate political behaviour in a healthy democracy.
O’Toole’s crime, in Ms. Byrne’s eyes, is to have thanked Liberal cabinet minister Anita Anand for her service to Canadians as Minister of Defence, a role she held for several years before assuming her current role as President of Treasury Board. The reason for his post? Ms Anand recently announced she would not seek the Liberal leadership and is not planning to run again in the upcoming federal election. Had he still been an MP, and had the House of Commons not been prorogued, Mr. O’Toole would undoubtedly have risen in his seat to make the same comments found in his tweet. What is more, he would have been only one of many MPs from all political parties to do so. This is an extremely common practice when long-serving MPs announce their intention to leave.
In Ms Anand’s case, Mr O’Toole was specifically referring to her time at Defence, undoubtedly because he himself is a former member of the Canadian armed forces (CAF) and a former minister of Veterans’ Affairs. He emphasized this by saying “I saw the dedication that Ms Anand brought to National Defence at a time when it was desperately needed. She cared deeply about the CAF, their families and the need for Canada to do more,” and then he wished her “fair winds and following seas.”[ii]
Ms. Byrne was quite simply outraged. She re-posted Mr. O’Toole’s tweet and then stated “For anyone unsure why Erin is no longer Leader of the Conservative Party, Ms. Anand supported EDI policies like name, rank and pronouns, tampons in the men’s rooms, etc.”[iii] When Toronto lawyer and former O’Toole campaign manager Walied Soliman came upon Byrne’s post (do none of these people have anything better to do than spend time on X?) he delivered what many rational observers might have considered to be the definitive blow for civility, and a cautionary tale for politics a la Byrne. “To all the young people involved in Conservative Party of Canada and politics generally, this is exactly how not to behave in those inevitable fleeting moments when you feel you are on top. Be humble in leadership. Jenni, as one of your party’s current leaders you should take this down.”[iv] But Byrne did not take it down, or hesitate. Within hours she had come out with both barrels blazing, concluding a lengthy attack on Soliman by declaring “I need no lessons in leadership from you.”
And so it goes.
Why does this matter to most of us? Because Byrne and Poilievre appear to be extreme examples of a political phenomenon that well-known social psychologist Jonathan Haidt of NYU has studied for some time. He has demonstrated that there are fundamental philosophical differences in underlying values and beliefs between conservative and liberal-minded individuals, with the former prioritizing ‘loyalty, authority and sanctity’ and the latter giving precedence to ‘liberty, fairness and care (vs harm)’. [v] Even more significant is the disparity he has identified between right-wing conservatives and liberals regarding their views of each other. Since these conservatives see the world as black and white, their positions on issues are right and others are wrong. In politics, therefore, their opponents are seen as enemies, not legitimate spokespersons for alternative opinions. There is no room for compromise, accommodation or the need to achieve consensus. There is almost no need for debate. And, given that these conservatives have found themselves in the minority until recently, their primary take on the majority response to issues is almost always negative and highly critical.
On a practical political level, this character trait may actually be the Achilles’ heel of Byrne and Poilievre. Poilievre has already demonstrated that he has no plans to back off his criticism of Justin Trudeau, even though the man will no longer be prime minister in a few weeks. As a result, both of the primary Liberal leadership contenders, Mark Carney and Chrystia Freeland, have quickly been labelled “Just like Justin.” In addition, since he has no policies of his own to promote, Poilievre has once again relied on attacks on Liberal policies. What Canadian is not familiar with his “Axe the Tax” slogan? But if “Gas Tax Carney” and “Gas Tax Freeland” declare that they too will axe the tax, as appears likely, what does Poilievre – or Jenni Byrne – have left? A new target for their vitriol will have to be found quickly. And, should Poilievre’s party nevertheless win the massive majority he is currently expected to obtain, it might be prudent to ask now, rather than later, who will be the object of his future attacks.
[i] https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/poilievre-jordan-peterson-interview-1.7423197
[iii] https://x.com/Jenni_Byrne/status/1878513929229320380
[iv] https://x.com/waliedesq/status/1878545343626752361
[v] Jonathan Haidt. The Righteous Mind. (New York: Pantheon, 2012)
