Features
The JP&N goes one-on-one with Pierre Poilievre
By BERNIE BELLAN (Note: This article first appeared in the June 7, 2023 issue of the JP&N, but our website was under reconstruction, so it didn’t appear here until July 5.)
In the waning days of the 2015 federal election I was one of a small group of journalists representing “ethnic media” that was invited to meet with then-PM Stephen Harper. I agreed to attend.
Frankly, I wondered though, what was I doing there? After all, Harper had a well-known disdain for journalists and I wasn’t especially keen at the notion that I would be representing an “ethnic” publication which, I thought, was so parochial. Further, the Conservatives were clearly in trouble at the time. Why else was the publisher of a small Jewish newspaper who would, under any other circumstance, not be invited to meet with the prime minister of the country now being asked to meet with him?
As a result, when I wrote about that meeting, I titled my piece “My accidental meeting with Stephen Harper.” (That piece was picked up by the CBC and posted to its website. I guess the CBC couldn’t resist taking one final poke at a PM who had long held them in disdain – by publishing my somewhat sarcastic piece.)
And so, on Wednesday, May 31, when I received an invitation to conduct a one-on-one interview with Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre on Friday, June 2 (over the phone) – well, again, I was somewhat skeptical. We’re in the midst of a byelelection in which the Jewish vote in Winnipeg South Centre might be pivotal though, which would help to explain the logic in reaching out to a journalist who normally wouldn’t get the time of day from the Leader of the Opposition.
I was asked in advance what kinds of questions I might like to ask, but I was very general in my response, saying that I’d like to ask about climate change, Pierre Poilievre’s support for the convoy that laid siege to Ottawa in 2022, and abortion. The person who had contacted me didn’t say that I couldn’t ask about any of those subjects, which didn’t really surprise me, since Poilievre is an excellent debater and would surely be able to handle himself easily with the likes of me.
As it was, I did manage to get in all the questions that I had in mind – along with one more relating to the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.
Here is the interview:
JP&N: I’ve got to tell you before we begin to chat – you were on my street with Joyce Bateman in 2015 when she was running for re-election and you were helping her run. I met you. I remember you were wearing a black suit and a white shirt and it was a Saturday and I was thinking “You’re overdressed for this.”
Poilievre: Oh my goodness. Was it summer?
JP&N: Well, the election was in October, so it might’ve been in September, but it was a warm day. I wonder – are you dressed for the weather we’re having today (over 30 degrees when we spoke), or are you still wearing a suit?
Poilievre: I’m wearing a dress shirt and luluemons. They’re comfortable but not quite light enough for a day like this.
JP&N: Anyway, I was told I can ask you any questions I’d like, but I know you’re pretty fast on your feet so I don’t think I can corner you. Let me ask you this: Given the weather we’re experiencing and the conditions across the country, what would you say in answer to the question: “Do you believe in climate change, first of all? Do you believe it’s a reality?”
Poilievre: Yes
JP&N: Okay, but what about lessening the use of fossil fuels and drilling for oil? Does this change your thinking in any way – what we’re experiencing now?
Poilievre: I think we have to reduce emissions, which is different, so we will continue using hydrocarbons for everything from asphalt to plastics to medical equipment to components in electric cars for at least generations, and possibly centuries to come. The challenge is how to reduce the emissions into the atmosphere and the answer to that is you produce energy with less emissions, so that for instance in Alberta and Saskatchewan they’re investing in carbon capture and storage, which puts industrial emissions back in the ground where they came from.
You know, so power in the oil sands sustains emissions-free nuclear power instead of coal-fired electricity. We can speed up nuclear power production. It doesn’t take 15 years to get a big plant built; it can be done in five.
Fast- tracking hydroelectric dams in places like Manitoba, Quebec, and British Columbia to allow us more affordable, green emissions-free electricity.
We can incentivize large industrial corporations to reduce their emissions with a carb tax on their emissions so that they’re forced to reinvest in technology if they don’t bring their emissions down. The key here is investing in technologies to bring down the cost of carbon free alternatives rather than bringing up the cost of traditional energy that we still require.
JP&N: I’ll admit, the readership of our newspaper skews older, but a lot of our readers are as concerned about global warming as younger generations, but for younger generations – they’re so engrossed with what’s going on now, what can you say to them about the future because, quite frankly, the Conservative Party has aligned itself with the forces that would continue drilling for oil and continue building pipelines. What would you say to the younger generation – and the older generations that are also very concerned about that?
Poilievre: I would ask: “What is their alternative?” The world is going to continue to consume between 60 and 100 million barrels of oil a day for at least the next two decades, according to the International Energy Agency, so where do you want that oil to come from? Canada, Russia, Venezuela, Iran, Saudi Arabia? I want it to come from Canada and why not incentivize to grow greener, to reinvest in lowering emissions so that we have the lowest emitting barrel of oil on planet Earth? That’s the common sense solution. You can shut down our energy sector tomorrow. It’ll just mean more oil will come from Russia – where they have no climate change standards.
JP&N: Except that the oil sands are one of the dirtiest sources of oil on Earth.
Poilievre: No, not at all. Actually the oil sands have dramatically reduced their emissions from each barrel of oil. Alberta has had some of the most aggressive emission reductions policies for two decades that have worked through the “tier” program – the technology in a program that requires them to meet targets and, if they don’t, they have to contribute to a technology fund that all businesses can draw from to reduce emissions.
They also have an alliance of the five biggest oil companies that have drawn up a plan to get to net zero in the next several decades that is well advanced of almost all the oil producing countries in the world.
JP&N: Okay, the time is limited and we’ve been dwelling on this issue, so I want to switch gears and talk about what is undoubtedly going to be a wedge issue between you and the Liberals, which is the issue of abortion. I know the Liberals are looking forward to trying to trap the Conservatives in some way – I don’t know if that’s the right word, but does the Conservative Party have a unilateral position on abortion or is it left to each member to vote their conscience on that?
Poilievre: A Poilievre-led government will not have any laws restricting abortion, period.
JP&N: So if an individual member wants to bring it up as a private member’s motion, would you allow it?
Poilievre: No such bill would pass and no such bill has come from a Conservative MP – to ban abortion – in the 17 years that I’ve been a Member of Parliament, I’ve never seen that happen.
You know, a lot of people fear monger about it, but I’ve never seen it happen, so no such bill would pass.
JP&N: Another issue – perhaps it’s yesterday’s issue, but it still relates to the tone you adopted when you came out to greet the members of the (truckers’) convoy in Ottawa. Do you have any misgivings about having done that?
Poilievre: I think we had a group of people that had lost their jobs because the Prime Minister brought in unscientific and unnecessary mandates on the people who are least likely to spread a virus. A person sitting in a truck all day – we called these people heroes for two years while they brought us our goods and services across the border.
All of us were comfortable in our homes. These people were on icy highways bringing the essentials that kept us alive and suddenly, and inexplicably, Trudeau broke his own promise that the vaccines would be voluntary. He hit them with a mandate and took away their jobs, so they came to the nation’s capital to try to get their jobs back and I supported them in that.
I do regret the nasty, divisive approach the Prime Minister took. It was a political opportunity to divide people. What he really wanted to do is make you afraid of your trucker, forget about the fact you can’t pay your rent, you can’t pay your mortgage, you can’t afford groceries, the streets are more dangerous. Forget about all that and focus on the scary guy who delivers your food and your medicine in a truck. Maybe it was a successful political strategy but it was a terrible way to divide our people.
I’ll be a prime minister who unites our people, brings everyone together. That includes hard working truckers and others. What we need right now is less division and more unity.
JP&N: If you have a little bit more time, I’d be remiss if I didn’t ask you a question that’s close to the hearts and minds of a lot of Jews, especially in Winnipeg South Centre, which has one of the highest proportion of Jewish voters in the country.
Stephen Harper was here two weeks ago speaking at our Jewish National Fund Negev Gala and came out, as expected, four score in support of Israel. I wouldn’t expect anything different from you, but I’m wondering, what would you say to Jews who would like to see Israelis and Palestinians brought together in a way that maybe hasn’t been done? Do you have any ideas on how to do that?
Poilievre: Yes, I do. In fact, it’s a big priority of mine. I think there’s a lot of common ground between Israelis and Palestinians and one area in which Conservatives can help is by encouraging more trade and commerce between Palestinians and Israelis.
The Israeli economy is probably the most entrepreneurial in the entire world. If not – a close second to Singapore. And Palestinians are desperate for an opportunity to feed their families and to build a better future. I think if we – Canada – can assist in bringing together Palestinians and Israelis that share a common economic purpose to reduce poverty and desperation and division, I think it could create the foundation for a lasting peace. That’s how I’d like to proceed.
Features
Big Numbers, Small Print: Why Simpler Promotions Often Deliver More
Few things catch the eye more than a giant red sign advertising a 50% discount on a popular product. Just seeing it makes shoppers feel they’ve struck gold. However, experienced shoppers aren’t easily convinced, having seen many impressive offers shrink to next to nothing by the time they reach the checkout. The headline-grabbing number is rarely the full story.
Most of the gap between the advertised saving and the one found at the till comes down to the small print. Conditions, thresholds and expiry dates can all chip away at the discount. That’s why a modest promotion can sometimes offer better value for money, even if it doesn’t look as appealing on the poster.
Why Bigger Doesn’t Always Mean Better
Large discounts, cashback promises and bonus rewards are expressly designed to stand out. They are bright, bold and hard to ignore. Still, the advertised value doesn’t always translate into the same real-world benefit. A promotion is only worth what the customer can use, and the conditions behind it, not the headline figure, determine that.
Imagine two clothing stores on the same floor of a mall. One is offering a 30% discount on purchases over $200. The other offers 10% off everything with no underlying conditions. A shopper looking for a $60 pair of jeans will get a guaranteed $6 off at the second store, and nothing at the first. In this case, the smaller offer gives the customer greater value.
This doesn’t mean a smaller promotion is always best. A person spending $300 in a shop will get the better savings at the first store. When studying competing offers, the real question is which deal best fits the customer’s spending intent in that moment.
The Fine Print Behind Everyday Offers
Conditions are a part of modern-day promotions. Common conditions include minimum spending levels, limits on qualifying products and specific redemption windows. Others tie rewards to loyalty program membership or require extra steps before the reward unlocks.
Reward schemes are a clear example. A coffee chain might award loyalty points for every order, which customers can redeem for a free coffee on a future visit. A grocery store might add store credit onto a shopper’s loyalty card but tie it to a 30-day validity period. Both offers hold genuine value, but only if customers return.
Neither offer is unreasonable, as businesses need to manage costs while encouraging customers to return. But sometimes, having the extra condition makes customers pause and question what an offer is really worth.
Where Simpler Rewards Pull Ahead
When a promotion has few conditions, it holds an advantage over others because it is easy to understand. A straightforward discount or a free item with no extra steps before redemption leaves little room for confusion. Shoppers know what they are getting, and the reward’s value is clear.
This differs from an offer that requires shoppers to make two separate purchases, complete a mail-in form and then wait six weeks for a rebate cheque. The rebate reward might be bigger, but many people never get far enough to claim it because the steps are too confusing or too long-winded. When the offer isn’t claimed, the advertised value means nothing.
The same distinction is visible across digital entertainment. An online casino offering free spins, for example, often includes clauses such as wagering requirements. This means that any winnings that come from these free spins can only be withdrawn once their total value has been bet through a set number of times. Yet some casinos understand that an offer with no wagering requirements is a good promotion that carries real weight among players.
Even so, these promotions are often not free of all conditions. Many casino offers are restricted by caps on winnings, short validity periods and a limit on which games can be played.
Same Principle, Different Industries
Travel companies also follow a similar promotional pattern. A cheap city break in Vancouver or a discounted cottage stay may appear only on certain dates or may include a non-refundable clause. Blackout periods are also common, meaning the discount can’t be used during busy times.
Subscription services often go down a slightly different route, with a low introductory price that increases after a few months. Many tie the reduced price to contract length, meaning a longer contract comes with a lower introductory price. Bundling services is another way to reduce prices. However, the value only exists when the customer actually uses all of the services they buy.
Video games work similarly, with in-game currency and other bonuses available to players in exchange for a set number of daily logins or for completing certain challenges within the game. While the industries vary, the underlying concept remains consistent. Rewards are available, but the value depends on what the customer needs to do to get them.
Why Businesses Build Complicated Offers
Consumers often blame companies and come to the belief that promotions are designed to trip shoppers up. However, the truth is more practical.
Promotions also need to benefit the business. Minimum spend thresholds and loyalty point accrual encourage customers to fill their baskets before checkout or give them a reason to return. Similarly, limited-time offers prompt immediate action by creating a sense of urgency. These are normal marketing tactics, and when implemented correctly, they deliver real benefits to both parties.
When a program is well designed, customers can earn consistent rewards over time rather than relying on a large upfront discount. If the business can balance its offers with clear explanations of the conditions behind them, customers are far less likely to be caught out.
How to Weigh Up an Offer Beyond the Headline
A simple way to judge a promotion’s value is to ask a few basic questions. What is the advertised saving or reward? Does it have any additional spending requirements to unlock? Are there any time limits for claiming the reward? And does the shopper meet the eligibility requirements in the first place?
Then it’s important to look at what the offer actually is and whether it is something that will be used. An offer that pushes a customer to buy something they never normally buy doesn’t really represent a saving.
An offer on a music streaming service is only useful for someone who listens to music. For someone who doesn’t even listen to music, the deal has no value, even at a reduced cost.
Reading Past the Headline
Big discounts and rewards can be highly beneficial, but only when customers understand the difference between the advertised value and what they’ll actually receive. A 30% discount that goes unused is worth nothing, while a 10% discount that applies to every purchase can offer real savings.
Although simple promotions tend to offer greater clarity surrounding conditions, more complex promotions can still be beneficial, provided they align with the customer’s existing plans or spending habits. However good the offer may seem, it is essential to weigh the value against the cost of obtaining it.
Features
Why Teachers Are Exploring Sound Buttons for Classroom Activities
A single correct-answer chime can make a shy student sit up a little straighter. Teachers notice moments like that. Small sounds change how a room feels, and how a room feels shapes how students learn.
That is why more teachers are exploring sound buttons. One tap plays a drum roll before a quiz answer, applause for a finished project, or a ding to start a new task. The tools are free, quick to use, and fit almost any subject. They give teachers a fresh way to keep students curious and involved.
What Is Drawing Teachers to Sound Buttons?
Teachers are always looking for simple ways to keep students engaged. Many classroom tools take time to set up, need training, or cost money. Sound buttons avoid all three. A teacher can open a page, tap a sound, and see the whole class react.
Students also respond to sound almost instantly. A sudden drum roll grabs attention faster than a spoken reminder. A cheerful sound rewards effort without stopping the lesson. These quick reactions make sound buttons feel useful from day one.
Flexibility adds to the appeal. The same set of sounds works for a morning math quiz and an afternoon story. Teachers can match each sound to the activity’s mood.
How Do Sound Buttons Change the Feel of Classroom Activities?
Many classroom activities follow a familiar routine. Students answer, the teacher responds, and the lesson moves on. Adding sound breaks that pattern in a positive way. Used by teachers in a variety of classroom activities, SoundButtonsLab.com is a free soundboard offering sound buttons for classroom activities and sound effects for children’s pronunciation training. The site notes, “A simple sound can change how a whole class responds to an ordinary moment in the lesson.”
That change often shows up in student energy. A drum roll before an answer makes everyone lean in and wait. A cheer after a correct response turns one student’s win into a shared moment. Even quiet students tend to join in when the activity feels like a game.
Sound also adds structure. When each sound means something specific, students learn the routine quickly. A ding can mean start, and a chime can mean stop. That predictability helps lessons run smoothly with fewer reminders.
What Does Research Say About Game-Like Learning?
Adding game elements to lessons is more than a fun trick. A meta-analysis by Michael Sailer and Lisa Homner reviewed studies on gamification in learning. They found small but positive effects on students’ learning, motivation, and behavior.
Sound buttons bring several game elements into a classroom at once. They add suspense, instant feedback, and moments of celebration. A quiz with a drum roll and a correct-answer chime feels closer to a game show than a test. When students enjoy the format, they are more willing to practice and try again after mistakes.
Which Classroom Activities Work Best With Sound Buttons?
Sound buttons fit nearly any lesson, but some activities benefit the most. These four are easy places to start:
Quiz Games
Quizzes become exciting with a drum roll before each answer and a chime for correct ones. Teams can compete for points while the sounds keep energy high. Students often ask for review games once sounds become part of the routine. Keeping the wrong-answer sounds gentle so no one feels embarrassed.
Reading and Pronunciation Practice
Teachers can record words or sounds on buttons for students to hear again and again. Kids tap, listen, and repeat until the pronunciation feels natural. Hearing the same clear model every time helps them notice small differences. A cheering sound rewards each new word they master.
Transitions and Routines
Moving between activities can waste valuable class time. A short ding can signal clean-up time, and another sound can mark the start of a new task. Students learn these cues quickly and respond without repeated instructions. Smooth transitions leave more time for learning.
Celebrations and Rewards
Applause or kids cheering can mark a finished project or a goal reached. These sounds make effort feel noticed and valued. Save big celebrations for real milestones, so they keep their meaning. A small reward sound can still mark everyday wins.
How Do Sound Buttons Help Different Kinds of Learners?
Every class includes students with different strengths and comfort levels. Some speak up easily, while others hold back. Sound buttons give quieter students a low-pressure way to join in.
Engagement matters for every learner. A review by Jennifer Fredricks, Phyllis Blumenfeld, and Alison Paris described engagement as behavioral, emotional, and cognitive. Students who feel involved are more likely to stay focused and keep trying. Sound buttons touch all three areas. Students act on cues, enjoy each sound, and think ahead to the next question.
How Can Teachers Get Started Without Overdoing It?
Start small. One or two sounds used well beat a dozen used randomly. Try these simple steps:
- Pick one sound for attention and one for celebration.
- Explain what each sound means before using it.
- Preview every sound to make sure it fits the age group.
- Keep the volume comfortable for the whole room.
Once students know the routine, add new sounds slowly. Let students suggest favorites now and then to keep things fresh. A thoughtful start keeps sound buttons fun for months instead of days.
Features
Arabs in the coalition – yes or no?
By MARTY GREEN The Jewish People are facing a moment of decision today which will define who we are for generations to come. Should we, or should we not, form a coalition government with the Arab parties?
There was a moment in our recent history where we faced a parallel question…or, if not in our actual history, at least in the historical narrative which defines us. I am talking about Leon Uris’s masterwork, “Exodus”. I read it as a teenager, and I can’t imagine that there are many Jews my age whose worldview was not fundamentally influenced by that story.
Our protagonist, Ari Ben Canaan, grew up close to the Arab village of Abu Yesha, where he became close friends with the mukhtar‘s son, Taha. Now, twenty years later, on the eve of the War of Independence, Taha’s father is gone and the young man is now the village leader. Arab irregulars have made themselves at home in the village, and are preparing there for the coming assault on Gan Dafna. Ari goes to see his old friend to ask for cooperation. (I am paraphrasing here:)
“You said we would always be friends.”|
“Times have changed. I am an Arab.”
“You are first of all a human being.”
“What do you expect me to do?”
“If you don’t rein in the irregulars we will have to attack Abu Yesha.”
“Is that what you want to do?”
“What do you expect me to do?”
The two are at an impasse. Then Taha speaks: “You said we were brothers, didn’t you? Well, if that is true, if you really meant it, then give me Jordana. Yes, give me your sister to be my wife; to bear my children…”
Ari’s fist shot out, sending Taha sprawling to a corner. He leaps up and instinctively grabs his knife and raises it towards Ari…
Now, let us pause in the telling, because I remember how I felt when I read this as a teenager. And I feel very differently when I read it today. Who was in the wrong? Was Taha in the wrong for demanding Jordana as a sign of brotherhood? Or was Ari wrong for responding with outrage?
I am all but certain that the answer to those questions is glaringly obvious to everyone who is reading here. And I am further all but certain that half of you choose Answer A and half of you choose Answer B.
Because that is exactly how the Jewish People appear to be divided on the question of whether or not to form a coaltion with the Arab parties who hold the balance of power. And the decision we make will have consequences just as far-reaching as the (fictional) decision made in the spur of the moment 80 years ago in the village of Abu Yesha.
Ari stood there dumbfounded by what he had done, unable to find the words to explain. But Taha understood perfectly well.
“Never mind”, he spoke. “You’ve told me everything I need to know. Now get out of my house, zhid!”
(It happens that the only copy of Exodus in my possession is an old samizdat version from the Soviet Union, kindly given to me many years ago by an elderly Russian immigrant. I couldn’t resist the chance to offer Taha’s final words using that particularly expressive insult from the Russian original. It also explains why my quoted passages are inexact, having passed from English to Russian and back again.)
And what is my point with all of this? It is the question of whether we should offer the Arab parties a place in the coalition government. From reading the online discussions, it is quite clear to me that we are just as divided on this question as we are on the Exodus question…should we or shouldn’t we. And each opposing side is equally vehement in the certainty that they are right.
What I can tell you for sure, is that if we make the choice which I fear, it will be just as it was between Ari and Taha. |If we manage to cobble together a coalition of parties that have nothing in common except a determination to keep 20% of our population out of the seats of power, we will have told the Arabs everything they need to know. I can only hope against hope that Eisenkot has the courage to do the right thing.
Ed. note: If you don’t remember this scene from the movie, that’s because it was only in the book.
