Charles Sousa on re-entering public life and why he thinks Poilievre is 'the epitome of feeding off the public trough'

Charles Sousa, the newly elected MP for Mississauga-Lakeshore, used to be Ontario's minister of finance.

He was defeated in the 2018 election that swept the Kathleen Wynne Liberals out of government and nearly off the electoral map.

Jessica Smith Cross, the editor-in-chief of iPolitics and QP Briefing, was a Queen's Park reporter when Sousa held the province's purse strings.

What follows is their Zoom conversation of Dec. 21, edited and significantly condensed for readability.

Hi. I saw you at Pierre Poilievre's speech to the Empire Club in November. I tried to say a quick hello, but you were surrounded by people.

Well, I'm deaf in one ear, as you may recall. Oftentimes I have someone staff me on the bad side and they tap me and say, "Someone's talking to you."

But yeah, it was a big event. There were a lot of people there.

And it was just a couple of days before you announced you were going to run in the byelection. 

It was on a Wednesday, and I didn't get announced until the Saturday. I didn't agree until the Friday.

All right, let's jump right into it: how did you come to make that decision? Can you take me through the secret pros and cons list that I'm sure you made?

I've been in political life for some years, and I enjoyed it immensely. I really took a lot of value from the engagement. And I was in the private sector for many years prior.

As I left politics, I started my own foundation, building a long-term care home and affordable housing complex, giving back to the community. That wasn't a paid gig, that was all volunteer.

That project was always the one that sort of kept me awake at night, preoccupied. But then I was involved in several other boards, where I did get, you know, compensated effectively, I have to say. And so I had independence. The quality of life was good in that regard. It allowed me to travel and do other things. So it was a decision, when the seat became vacant.

Immediately, people started calling and saying, "Hey, you want to consider this, come back to it?" And I thought, "Listen, I'm OK right now."

And I was helping on the provincial campaign trying to get a former colleague of mine — who worked with me for 20 years — to get her elected in my old riding. We had funded the campaign and I wanted to see her get through. In the end, there was a lot of pushback. There was still anti-Liberal play going on. And although it was a tight riding, the Ford machine made the win again.

So, I was sensitive to the mood, right? I had to give that consideration.

I went away. I went to Europe with my wife and six other couples, and we had a good time travelling, enjoying a sort of semi-retired life. I did all my meetings through Zoom like everybody else, and I was still being productive and that was good.

And then they started coming at me harder, right? There were more and more people trying to get me to run. They know, deep down, that I've always had a desire to go back into politics, maybe in a different capacity.

So, as the calls are coming in from various colleagues — I can call them that now — various ministers across the country and others saying, "We want someone with more of an economic focus, a little bit more centric in their viewpoints, try to co-ordinate the promotion of the economy with protecting the environment, all those good things, and for finding ways to sustain the programs that are necessary." And that's what I did provincially.

And then I was giving it more thought.

All of us know what polls were saying and recognize it was a tight race and a bellwether riding. It's held by the Conservatives provincially. And Poilievre is making a lot of hay and getting a lot of notice — I get that. But people, especially the Progressive Conservatives in this riding, also recognize some of the recklessness of some of these proposals, and the negativity and the division that was being promoted by Poilievre throughout. And they're looking for an alternative.

And a byelection is a different kind of thing. It's a bit of a challenging campaign for the governing party.

In my riding here in Mississauga-Lakeshore, there are about 15 active ratepayer groups that I've been involved with. They were all saying, "Why don't you come back? Let's re-engage, and let's find a way to help localize some of our issues, and it's a growing community." I was enticed by that. And I was enticed by the opportunity, hopefully, to be a stronger voice. I have to admit, there was a bit of love out there. And I felt good.

When you go through these political battles, you win some you lose some. It's never fun to lose, especially when you devote so much time to it, and you really care to give back.

Here's what happened. I approached my kids first. It was my oldest daughter who said, "Why, dad? Why do you want to do this again?" There's a lot of exposure, a lot of attacks. It's very toxic. These young kids see politics as much more negative than how I saw it when I grew up.

It's like Poilievre — you were at that speech. When I was there, I was kind of shaking my head. I get the guy is very articulate. But he misdirects and it infuriates me. You're talking to a Bay Street crowd, and you're talking about the governor of the Bank of Canada, you're talking about monetary policy, and now you want to impress upon that crowd, oh quantitative easing? Oh, please. And he's reading from a script. And then I found him contradicting himself. I thought, "No, that's not who we need in leadership. That's not who we need to run the country and fulfil the needs of Canada. And it's not the guy that's going to provide unity for Canada."

Do we have challenges? Absolutely. How do we overcome them? And how do we do it in a way that's not extreme? From the left or the right? I'm not on either side of the spectrum. So, I found myself feeling drawn to possibly doing something more.

I'm doing a lot of talking. You're not asking any questions, so I'm going to continue to talk.

Ha.

So, I had some further discussions. I wanted to have a better sense of how I would fare in this race. And I got some positive feedback and that was encouraging. My wife was very supportive. And maybe she wanted me out of the house, I don't know. She worked really hard in this campaign. She was out of the house before me.

The biggest challenge was having to co-ordinate my team — and with no money, because there was nothing in the coffers.

And I think we caught the opposition a bit flat-footed.

I was at the Poilievre speech with the opponent, his manager and a few others. And they're all kind of laughing and saying, "Thank God, you're not running, blah, blah, blah," that kind of stuff. Meanwhile, I'm thinking to myself, well, I may. I'm considering it.

Ultimately, it was a well-jelled campaign. A lot of people came together. I raised a ton of money. We had constant special guests come to the office, a lot of rallies, a lot of encouragement. The prime minister came and did his bit too.

And so it was Poilievre's first election in a bellwether riding — now they're saying, "Well, it was a safe riding."

You've answered so many of the questions I had planned, but I'm curious about what you'll be doing next. I don't know if there have been any promises made to you about what roles you might have in the future, but I know you were the minister of finance in Ontario and I'm wondering what it might be like for you to be a backbencher.

I just want to be able to contribute as best I can and provide as much value as I can. I want to be able to provide a strong constituency office and serve the needs of the community. I get it, I'm going to do my part, be on some committees, and be part of whatever special projects may come. We have yet to determine what roles will be had.

There's a little Queen's Park caucus there. You've got Michael Coteau, Marie-France Lalonde, Yasir Naqvi —

And Helena Jaczek. Peter Fonseca, who was there previously under Dalton McGuinty. You got a few people on the Hill as staffers. And all of them called, they're all engaged, trying to attract me to come.

I'll rely on them to provide me with guidance. Listen, Ottawa is an ocean. And Queen's Park was a pond. Like, I was a big fish in a pond. That's a bad analogy, but you get my meaning. I know that when I get there, I'm going to have to show my worth and recognize I've got to do some work. I'm not a prima donna.

I addressed the caucus on the first day I was there. Addressing the Liberal caucus is bigger than addressing the Legislative Assembly of Ontario. And so I thanked them, and I recognized the tremendous amount of work and support I received from them, and from their teams too.

I want to bring you back to little old Ontario again —

It's really what matters most.

I was wondering if you're going to be involved in the leadership race — if you're going to back somebody, or if you have any advice for what kind of leader the party needs.

I think the prime minister has every intention of staying on and running again.

Oh, I mean, the Ontario Liberals.

That's fascinating too. There are a lot of individuals who have approached me now, about five. And it's a long road because there's going to be some time to position and rebuild. It needs to be rebuilt. But there's a strong grassroots group that exists in the party still.

It's going to be a new generational play. But my preference is somebody outside the GTA.

Why does that matter?

I think people care about being seen as the party representing all of Ontario. Right now, we have this separation between rural and urban.

We have to reconnect in a more respectful way with the needs of northern Ontario and rural Ontario. People sometimes feel that Toronto is too centric in what happens.

I'll wrap here with a federal question: you've already commented a little bit on the Pierre Poilievre speech that you watched. I would like to know what you think is the best way for you and your party to combat his message. You described him as a compelling speaker. What do you bring to that political fight?

During my campaign, I ignored it completely. I didn't go negative on the guy. I didn't talk about my opponent. I didn't comment on those issues. I let other people do it for me.

He does it to himself. Here's a guy who complains about gatekeepers, and he needs to combat all these forces, and that Canada is somehow broken. And he wants to, you know, have a war on drugs now in B.C. and so forth. And I go, "You are a product of these very gatekeepers that you're talking about. You're the epitome of feeding off the public trough. That's what you've done all your life." He's fully maxed out on his pension. I don't have a pension. I never had a pension from the provincial government. I have to fend for myself.

I had to make payroll for companies I've been part of. I know what it's like in business and the so-called real world, and to hear him be flippant about it — he's tackling complex issues with simplistic, gimmicky solutions and they're all kind of throwaways. That's where there's this misdirection.

And yeah, we can cite him on the cryptocurrency stuff. Anybody that does anything that's going to harm the Canadian economy or the Canadian dollar and weakens our strength in the international marketplace — that's reckless.

For him, the glass is always half-empty. I'm not trying to be over-optimistic, but no, it's half-full here. We do have good opportunities to improve and excel. And most Canadians, I believe in them.

I'm not suggesting he's a bad man. That's not what I'm saying. I'm saying what he's proposing is just not a positive attitude. I think we have a lot more we can do.

Is there anything else you want people to know before I let you go?

I just want to wish everybody a Merry Christmas and happy holidays, and I look forward to being hard at work in the coming year.