Conservatives update platform to include omitted ‘anti-woke’ promise

The Conservative Party has recently republished their English-language platform after an oversight led to the omission of a key commitment to crack down on “woke ideology” in the public service and federal funding for university research. This commitment was originally included in the Quebec platform, where the Conservatives vowed to “put an end to the imposition of woke ideology in the federal civil service and in the allocation of federal funds for university research.”

However, when the full national platform was released, this commitment was missing from the English version, although it was present in the French version. When questioned about this discrepancy, the party initially did not respond. It was only after further inquiry that a party spokesperson acknowledged it as a “publishing oversight” and confirmed that the platform has been updated to include the policy.

Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has been vocal about his opposition to what he deems as “woke” ideology, using the term to criticize Liberal policies. This stance has raised concerns, particularly from the Canadian Association of University Teachers, regarding how the Conservative Party’s commitment could impact federal research funding. The association’s president, Peter McInnis, expressed worry about politicians interfering with research funding based on ideological reasons or political expediency.

In a recent interview with The Canadian Press, McInnis highlighted the ambiguity of the term “woke,” stating that it has become so vague that it could mean anything the Conservatives disagree with. This lack of clarity raises concerns about the potential implications of the party’s commitment to combatting “woke ideology” in the public service and university research.

Overall, the Conservative Party’s decision to reiterate their commitment to addressing “woke ideology” in their platform reflects their stance on this controversial issue. However, the lack of clarity surrounding the term and its potential impact on research funding continues to raise questions and concerns within the academic community.