logo
BC Conservative Leader John Rustad is criticized from several sides amid review

BC Conservative Leader John Rustad is criticized from several sides amid review

Dave Sharkey still remembers how he felt about the future of the Conservative Party of BC when he was part of the delegation that marched in the 2022 Aldergrove Christmas Light Up Parade.
"There were only four of us," Sharkey said. "Two of us were holding the banner, and the other two were handing out candy canes. But the reception was actually surprisingly positive, and it was a kind of experience that led me to believe that in terms of our political ambitions, we were on the right track."
Sharkey, a party member since 2017 and a former provincial candidate for the Libertarian Party, now sees Conservatives on the wrong track.
His conclusion comes despite the BC Conservatives coming within a whisker of forming government in October 2024 when 912,000 residents voted for the party that had just under 36,000 votes in the 2020 election.
Sharkey said he blames the same man others credit for reviving a party that once polled at two per cent: Official Opposition Leader John Rustad.
The party's direction and identity is at the heart of a dispute that set off the departure of three members of the legislature and arguments among riding associations. Should it be populist or moderate? Big tent or small?
It also comes as party members review Rustad's leadership in accordance with the party's constitution.
Rustad became the leader a month after joining the party in March 2023. He had been with the BC Liberals since 2005, but was kicked out in 2022 by then-leader Kevin Falcon.
Relations between the rivals then reversed in August 2024, when Falcon suspended the election campaign of his party, rebranded as BC United, following the defections of members to the Conservatives.
Now, Sharkey said, the Conservatives have become a rebranded version of Rustad's old party.
There was no appetite from the members to be that big-tent party, he said.
"There is an appetite from the members to remain a grassroots party, and if Mr. Rustad wants to be a big tent, start a big-tent party."
He believes Rustad's changes cost the Conservatives the election win, said Sharkey, who considers himself the riding association president in Abbotsford-Mission.
Domenic Cinalli describes himself as an early supporter and one-time close confidant of Rustad, but said he doesn't like the direction Rustad has taken the party.
"He has abandoned what we all stood for," Cinalli said. "He's abandoned the strong stances that we had and it wasn't just John who brought us there. It was all the volunteers and the people who were out there fighting tooth and nail."
Cinalli said he's disappointed about the party changed directions on reconciliation with First Nations and Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity programming.
"They have gone more mediocre, more to the middle," said Cinalli, who is no longer a party member.
But for others, the Conservative tent isn't big enough. Ryan Beedie, a prominent Vancouver businessman, said in a social media post last month that the Conservatives will need to "rebrand to something more inclusive" if they wish to appeal to "centrist voters" just as Social Credit or the BC Liberals did in the past.
A months-long leadership review is underway amid allegations from Rustad that three former Conservative MLAs — Tara Armstrong, Dallas Broadie and Jordan Keely — "blackmailed" Conservative staff.
Rustad first made the allegation in a letter to his caucus without naming the MLAs directly. All three have denied the claims, and have instead accused Rustad of using the allegations to distract from questions about his leadership.
While Rustad has since expressed regret for using the term blackmail, his critics have seized on it.
Beedie said Rustad's allegations raise questions about his leadership and the party should use the review to move toward the middle.
"Hopefully, this (review) is a positive step toward the BC Conservatives getting their house in order and shifting their political strategy to a more centrist approach. They will need to do so, or the BC NDP will be staying in power for the foreseeable future."
UBC political science lecturer Stewart Prest said the Conservatives consist of a "populist" wing and a moderate wing, and the current riding-by-riding leadership vote could make for a "messy summer" with Rustad facing pressure from both sides.
"We are already hearing rumblings of challenges from both camps, so I don't know if it is an either-or situation," Prest said, when asked which faction was more likely to challenge Rustad for leadership.
A central source of criticism concerns the handling of the party's last annual general meeting held in March.
The "Team Rustad" slate swept elections for the party's board of directors. Delegates also approved amendments to the party's constitution as proposed by Rustad.
But not everybody has accepted the results, including Armstrong, Brodie and Kealy.
Brodie was kicked out of caucus days after the general meeting for comments concerning residential school survivors and Armstrong and Kealy followed her in solidarity.
In May, they alleged Rustad and his team "rigged" the meeting that endorsed the board, claiming it was stacked with South Asian supporters paid "to vote the way Mr. Rustad wanted."
Brodie and Armstrong have since gone on to form their own party, One BC. Its chief of staff is Tim Thielmann, a former Conservative candidate in Victoria-Beacon Hill. After losing the election, Thielmann was fired from his party job as director of research.
Thielmann later ran for party president at the AGM, but delegates re-elected current president Aisha Estey.
The allegations surrounding the AGM received another airing last month when 50-plus signatories describing themselves as "executive members or former executive members" of riding associations called on Estey to launch an external audit of the AGM.
The letter repeats the allegation that Team Rustad stacked the meeting with paid supporters, but also alleges that delegates were selected and rejected on the "basis of their political leanings or allegiance to Rustad."
It alleges Rustad and the executive team increased the influence of party executive over the selection process by "improperly delaying, denying, or withdrawing certification of riding associations," and placing Rustad loyalists into ridings where they were not residents.
Sharkey said he signed the letter because he believed procedures were not correctly followed and he regarded the whole meeting "to be illegitimate."
Sharkey shared this view in March, when he stood outside the meeting in Nanaimo to protest it, where Aeriol Alderking, another signatory, had joined him.
Alderking, who ran federally for the People's Party of Canada in the last federal election, said the AGM was the site of a "coup" where a "handful of people" under Rustad's leadership stole the party from "grassroots" Conservatives.
"Under John Rustad, it has become a centralized BC Liberal Party top down," she said in an interview. "The only thing they have done is put a blue coat on a red party."
A statement from the party said the letter is "signed largely by those who are not even members of the party, let alone (directors)."
The "allegations are just as absurd as the notion of a letter written by non-members, signed mostly by non-members, made to artificially inflate a non-issue for the sake of attention and mudslinging," it said.
Rustad has denied any wrongdoing at the meeting.
"I have been advised by our legal counsel and experts, who were present to scrutinize the voting process that our AGM was 100 per cent in line with this party's 2024-2025 constitution," he said in the letter containing the blackmail allegations against the three former Conservative MLAs.
Rustad said in an interview last month that critics like Sharkey and others "want this party to be something that it is not."
"I have said this all way through the campaign, and I don't know why people haven't heard it — it's not about being Conservative or Liberal, or NDP, or Green. It's just standing for what's right and fighting for the average everyday people. That is the party that we have built," Rustad said.
Conservative member of the legislature Gavin Dew said the current party "has had incredible success in building a new voter coalition" that includes many more young voters and more voters from different cultural communities.
"We have made incredible strides with blue-collar voters," Dew added. "We do incredibly well with suburban voters. So, we have made all this progress, but it is clear that we still need to win over that incremental voters, which I would say is that middle-of-the-road voter."
If the party holds its current coalition together and adds more "economically oriented voters" from the middle of the spectrum to this coalition, Conservatives can hold government for "multiple terms," Dew said in an interview.
Prest is more skeptical. While strong poll numbers now and victory down the line might entice both wings of the Conservatives to put aside their differences, "there isn't really a stable policy compromise that would make both of those sides happy" in the long-term, he said.
"In some really important ways, the divides between populist and more middle-of-the-road Conservatives are deeper than the divides between middle-of-the-road Conservatives and NDP, " Prest said.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Tory members of House trade committee call for emergency meeting on tariffs
Tory members of House trade committee call for emergency meeting on tariffs

Toronto Sun

time21 minutes ago

  • Toronto Sun

Tory members of House trade committee call for emergency meeting on tariffs

Escalation of U.S. trade war prompts call for House international trade committee to reconvene Conservative MP for Simcoe North Adam Chambers rises during question period on Thursday, Nov. 23, 2023, in Ottawa. Photo by Adrian Wyld / THE CANADIAN PRESS OTTAWA — As Parliament slumbers for the summer, recent escalations in the U.S. trade war against Canada prompted members of a House of Commons committee to call for an emergency reconvening. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account In the letter to Humber River—Black Creek MP Judy Sgro, chair of the House Standing Committee on International Trade, six Conservative MPs urged her to recall the committee to address the latest threats by U.S. President Donald Trump to impose 35% tariffs on Canada beginning Aug. 1. 'If the prime minister is briefing premiers this week, it would be reasonable to give a little more information to Parliament and Canadians, especially since Parliament has to review any deal,' Tory international trade critic Adam Chambers told the Toronto Sun. 'And most importantly, provide a forum for employers, workers and industries that are affected to provide more details about how the current situation is affecting them.' This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. After another unjustified tariff attack on Canadians, workers and industries, Conservatives are offering to recall the Trade Committee to help secure the best deal for Canada — Adam Chambers (@adamchamb) July 11, 2025 The letter, signed by Chambers and five others, describes Trump's latest salvo as another unjustified attack on Canadian workers and the economy, saying the tariffs will inflict harm on both sides of the border. 'President Trump's tariff announcement is the latest in a growing list of trade-related actions unfairly targeting Canada,' the letter says, adding the committee needs to examine unresolved U.S. measures, including those impacting the Canadian steel, aluminum, copper and energy industries. Read More 'We believe the committee can play a meaningful role in guiding the government's response and in offering Canadians a clear understanding of the negotiation status.' Trade-exposed businesses, the letter says, deserve the opportunity to share how the trade war is impacting them, particularly since the Carney Liberals have yet to provide such an opportunity since adjourning an abbreviated spring session of Parliament. 'Canadians are rightfully concerned about their livelihoods and they deserve a full and honest account of the government's strategy and progress to reliver on that promise.' bpassifiume@ X: @bryanpassifiume RECOMMENDED VIDEO NFL Editorial Cartoons Canada Toronto & GTA Toronto & GTA

9 First Nations ask court to strike down federal, Ontario bills allowing infrastructure fast-tracking
9 First Nations ask court to strike down federal, Ontario bills allowing infrastructure fast-tracking

CBC

timean hour ago

  • CBC

9 First Nations ask court to strike down federal, Ontario bills allowing infrastructure fast-tracking

Social Sharing Nine First Nations in Ontario are seeking a court-ordered injunction that would prevent the federal and provincial governments from using newly passed laws to fast-track infrastructure projects. The constitutional challenge states provincial Bill 5 and federal Bill C-5 "both represent a clear and present danger" to the First Nations, which include Attawapiskat, Fort Albany and Apitipi. The First Nations argue both pieces of legislation authorize "the Crown to unilaterally ram through projects without meaningful or any engagement with First Nations" and "violate the constitutional obligation of the Crown to advance ... reconciliation." The claim calls the promises of consultation with Indigenous communities a "smoke and mirrors trick" and says the "authorized exclusions" of First Nations contained in the legislation are "unconstitutional." "It is like a law that authorizes what should in fact be prohibited, such as authorizing commercial airline pilots to fly drunk, without knowing the flight path, and without having to engage with air traffic control," the claim reads. "Both governments have tried to soften the effects of their laws by effectively saying to First Nations, 'Don't worry, we'll speak to you.' This is hollow. The content of the laws authorizes the opposite." Bill C-5 allows the federal cabinet to quickly approve big projects deemed to be in the national interest. They include mines, ports and pipelines. Ontario's bill allows its cabinet to suspend provincial and municipal laws in "special economic zones." The First Nations are asking court to strike down the laws, require the federal and provincial governments to make a series of declarations about how they were passed without respect to First Nations or the constitution, and pay $100 million in damages to the communities. "Sort of a penalty, if you will, on the Crown for failure to act honourably," senior counsel Kate Kempton, who is representing the First Nations in the legal challenge, said in an interview with CBC. "And so, we simply applied precedent. There's no magic in the dollar amount. It's a substantial amount because the breach in this case is substantial ...." WATCH | Ontario passes controversial mining law: Ontario passes Bill 5 despite opposition from First Nations, environmental groups 1 month ago Kempton said while these laws are "supposed to be addressing the manoeuvring of the Trump administration" (a reference to the U.S. president's tariffs), they will instead turn Canada into "a nation prepared to 'build, baby build' or 'drill, baby drill,' despite the pretty horrific consequences in this case if these bills are allowed to go ahead unchecked." The federal and Ontario governments have 30 days to comment on the claim in court. CBC asked the office of Premier Doug Ford about the legal challenge and was provided with the following statement: "We will continue to build consensus with First Nations on shared priorities including legacy infrastructure, all-season roads and resource development that support long-term prosperity. "We have begun productive conversations with First Nations who share our vision of unlocking economic opportunity and critical infrastructure in their community, and will continue these consultations throughout the summer. These consultations will shape the regulations and criteria for new special economic zones and Indigenous-led economic zones."

Snubs and scrambles ahead of Carney's major projects meeting with First Nations
Snubs and scrambles ahead of Carney's major projects meeting with First Nations

National Observer

timean hour ago

  • National Observer

Snubs and scrambles ahead of Carney's major projects meeting with First Nations

Prime Minister Mark Carney speaks with reporters in Ottawa on May 2, 2025. Photo by: Natasha Bulowski / Canada's National Observer. Listen to article As First Nations leaders head to Gatineau for a high-stakes summit with Prime Minister Mark Carney, tensions are running high over the federal government's handling of Bill C-5 — a sweeping new law that accelerates approvals for major infrastructure and resource projects. Indigenous leaders say the process has left their communities out and broken promises to respect their rights, protect the environment and seek free, prior and informed consent. 'We worked hard to get the prime minister to agree to this meeting,' said national chief Cindy Woodhouse-Nepinak, calling it a 'historic' gathering. 'First Nations cannot be on the sidelines in the year 2025.' But many see the haste with which the July 17 meeting was assembled as a reflection of the flaws in the bill itself. Rushed preparations and disjointed messaging The July 17 summit at the Canadian Museum of History is the first in a series of promised meetings between Carney and Indigenous leaders, put together after increasing criticism of Bill C-5. Invitations, agenda and venue details landed in chiefs' inboxes with barely a week's notice, forcing communities to scramble for travel and messaging strategy. 'First Nations are united in an understanding that we have always supported economic development and prosperity for all,' said Cindy Woodhouse-Nepinak. 'But not at the expense of our rights.' Abram Benedict, Ontario regional chief for the Chiefs of Ontario said the lead-up was 'chaotic,' with little chance for communities to develop a clear message. 'We didn't have a national position on C-5. Every region, every community faces different realities. How can we possibly have a unified message for the prime minister when there's been no real chance to come together and talk?' Woodhouse-Nepinak said chiefs will be arriving with diametrically opposing goals and viewpoints, depending on their communities. 'Many chiefs are very concerned about Bill C-5,' said Woodhouse-Nepinak. 'Other chiefs are saying they want to proceed quickly with projects and resource revenue sharing.' The meeting with Carney and federal ministers is also limited to four hours — a timeframe seen insufficient for substantive dialogue. 'The challenge we are going to face [with] several hundred First Nation leadership or delegates in a room with the prime minister for four hours, I hope accomplishes more, but I'm going to be encouraging our leadership that we have a single message to the prime minister, and that four hours is not going to achieve enough,' Benedict said. Nation-building priorities One collective priority the national chief identified is the infrastructure gap separating life on reserves from the rest of the country. 'Canadians win by fast-tracking the construction of modern schools in First Nations, and housing in First Nations, by fast tracking clean water systems, all-season road access and reliable internet service.' She named 'a commitment to closing that infrastructure gap, with timelines' as a top priority for the meeting in Gatineau. Carney hasn't associated Bill C-5 with those priorities to date. Instead, he's sold the bill as a way to accelerate approvals for major projects — pipelines, mines, ports — deemed in the 'national interest.' The government touts the law as essential for economic growth and international competitiveness, but Indigenous leaders say the process sidelined their voices, undermined environmental protections, and broke faith with commitments to free, prior and informed consent under UNDRIP. Senator Paul Prosper, former chief of the Paqtnkek (Afton) Mi'kmaw Nation, said that trust is "the cornerstone of the relationship with government" for many First Nations and is concerned that the expedited process for Bill C-5 represents a setback due to the lack of real involvement from First Nations leadership. Russ Diabo, Indigenous policy analyst pointed out that some BC chiefs did not receive invites. 'I feel like the feds are purposely selecting those chiefs who will be favourable towards this Canada Act initiatives,' said Mike Christian, chief of Splatsin First Nation in BC. He said he recently got the registration link from another chief. Wet'suwet'en Hereditary chief Na'Moks was also not formally invited to the summit. 'This exclusion is not only disrespectful — it undermines the very foundation of Nation-to-Nation relationships,' said Na'Moks in a press release. 'Decisions made at this summit will impact our lands and people. We will not be silenced or sidelined.' Canada 'has to follow its own laws' A successful meeting, according to Benedict, would require the government to acknowledge the rushed and 'very disrespectful' process of Bill C-5 and commit to 'more solid engagement' with First Nations going forward. He said if the government is truly committed to working with First Nation leaders, then just holding national meetings about Bill C-5 isn't enough. He hopes Carney will promise a process with more direct regional engagement. Not all chiefs are opposed to the spirit of Bill C-5. 'There are those that want to get economic development going, they do want the jobs, the skills and training, they want the revenue sharing, the equity agreements in place where they're part of it and ownership of it on their own terms,' said Robert Phillips, a political executive with the First Nations Summit and regional chief with the BC Assembly of First Nations. 'But we can't have these agreements going ahead with 'trust us we will take care of you' and it can't be after the fact — we have to be at the table now.' With Carney suggesting that a pipeline to the coast is 'highly likely,' leaders in BC are seeking clarity on what projects are being considered and how decisions will be made. 'If the Liberal government wants to continue with reconciliation it has to follow its own laws. First Nations are very concerned, not only in terms of the law itself but significant procedural and substantive concerns with the bill,' Phillips said. 'We want to see our rights and interests met, not just be brought in after the fact.' A related challenge leaders want Carney to address in Gatineau is that many nations lack the resources to fully participate in project consultations. This makes it hard for them to make informed decisions or advocate for their interests during the development and implementation of major infrastructure initiatives. 'Without additional resources … we're going to end up in the same situation,' Benedict said. The PMO wrote in an email to Canada's National Observer that it has committed to establishing an Indigenous Advisory Council as part of the office managing the major projects under C-5, and that it will allocate $40 million to 'strengthen Indigenous Peoples' capacity to participate in implementing the Building Canada Act.' 'Forty million sounds like a lot, but spread across more than 600 First Nations? It's not nearly enough,' said Benedict. Legal flashpoint On Tuesday – two days before the Gatineau meeting – news broke that nine First Nations in Ontario are challenging the constitutionality of Bill C-5 in court; they're also seeking an injunction to block the bill until the court reaches a decision on their challenge. 'There is no standalone obligation to consult [Indigenous peoples] on proposed legislation,' explains Bruce McIvor, a Métis lawyer and the founder of First Peoples' Law firm. Governments routinely pass laws without consulting Indigenous groups – for instance, the tax cut Carney passed in June – which doesn't automatically raise any legal issues. 'But if you pass a law and that law has the effect of infringing Aboriginal and treaty rights, the law itself can be challenged. And if you didn't adequately consult before the law was passed, that's one of the things that the courts will take into account.' While challenging the law itself may be an uphill battle, First Nations have a long track record of defeating specific industrial projects in court. 'No projects in Canada will go ahead without the support of First Nations,' said the national chief, though she declined to comment on the constitutional challenge against C-5 itself. McIvor sees the moment when cabinet's uses its self-appointed power to define the 'national interest' as one critical legal flashpoint. 'My expectation is, when that occurs, if there's a court challenge, the court will look at whether the constitutional obligation to consult and accommodate was fulfilled up to that decision point.' Now that the legislation has passed, the government is focusing its consultation efforts on the projects themselves. In an email response to Canada's National Observer, Pierre-Alain Bujold, a spokesperson for the Privy Council Office, confirmed this approach. 'The Building Canada Act ensures that Indigenous Peoples whose rights — including treaty rights — may be affected are consulted at key stages: before a project is designated as being in the national interest, before the issuance of the conditions document, and before any amendment to the conditions document.' That may be enough for some nations. But the history of major industrial projects in this country – pipelines in particular – is that some Indigenous communities support them while others don't. A perfect example is the Coastal GasLink pipeline, which feeds the LNG Canada export terminal in Kitimat. That pipeline was supported by several First Nations whose territories it crossed; it also sparked the historic Wetsuwet'en protests that dragged on for years, briefly spread across the country, and provoked a violent RCMP response that made international headlines. Hereditary chief Na'moks, who wasn't invited to Gatineau, was a key leader of those protests. The government hasn't clarified what it would do should this scenario repeat itself, as appears likely if a new pipeline to BC makes the Major Projects list. This is the nightmare outcome for Indigenous leaders, opening the door for the 'divide-and-conquer' politics invoked by Robert Phillips. 'First Nations are united in an understanding that we have always supported economic development and prosperity for all,' said national chief Woodhouse-Nepinak. 'But not at the expense of our rights.' The future of Carney's bill is in the chiefs' hands going into Thursday's meeting. He's got a lot of ground to cover in four hours. July 15th 2025 Sonal Gupta Reporter Arno Kopecky National Politics Reporter Keep reading Federal departments fall short of Ottawa's 5% Indigenous procurement target By Sonal Gupta News Urban Indigenous Communities in Ottawa July 15th 2025 Toronto couple turns to green roof as city faces climate-driven flooding By Abdul Matin Sarfraz News Climate Solutions Reporting Ottawa Insider July 15th 2025 Extreme heat is a workplace hazard. We must treat it that way By Bea Bruske Opinion July 15th 2025 Share this article Share on Bluesky Share on LinkedIn Comments

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store