ADAMS: Inside the Restore the North event at Liberty Church
I've been to every stop on this tour where the location was accessible: Toronto Metropolitan University, Canada Christian College, and the University of Calgary. Jamil Jivani is my MP, and he's seen me do this before. He knows why I do it, and until the stop at Liberty Church, it never seemed to bother him.
TMU was boring. CCC was unhinged. UofCalgary felt tightly managed. Liberty Church was angry. You could feel it from the remarks Jamil gave before opening up the mic. And I mean feel it in your chest. I stood in line with adrenaline running for close to two hours, which hadn't happened to me at any of the earlier stops.
By the time I got to the microphone, the mood had been set, and it wasn't set by the audience.
The Liberals hate you
Every political movement has a pitch. Normally the Conservative Party of Canada's pitch is some version of "the other side is out of touch, and we can manage things better." This wasn't that.
Jamil spent a good part of his opening yelling. Not raising his voice for emphasis, the way you might at a rally, but yelling. And his message wasn't that Liberals are wrong or bad at governing. It was that Liberals hate you. Your neighbours, the people who vote differently from you, the teachers at your kids' school: they hate you. They only value you because of your skin colour, Jamil implied.
Tell a room full of people that 44% of the country hates them, and it shouldn't surprise anyone when the room starts treating basic dissent as an attack. It was likely the intended effect.
The event was billed as a defence of religious freedom, and that's a worthy cause. Every Canadian of every faith should be able to worship, pray, and raise their children by their beliefs without harassment. But across the evening "religious freedom" came to mean one faith only. Other religions got a quick nod now and then, the way you'd thank the sponsors before the main event, and that was it.
There were Muslim families and people from many backgrounds in that church. Despite this, nobody on stage found time to mention the Muslim man in our own community who has been publicly targeted and falsely accused of running an illegal slaughterhouse. If the principle is religious freedom, a real case of a neighbour being smeared over his faith seems like the obvious place to start.
It never came up.
The "mask off" moments
Conservative MP Jacob Mantle gave an opening that was more substantive than I expected; spending real time on Bill C-9 and what he sees as its dangers. But when it came to what matters most, he gave no evidence. He didn't name one passage of scripture that has become "illegal." When asked whether Christian schools were under threat by an audience member, the most he offered was "probably." You don't rally a church full of worried parents on a "probably."
Jacob also said Christians are unfairly persecuted when organizations that "believe in the right to life" don't receive charitable status. By the way, this is from a party whose leadership is telling Canadians that the abortion debate is settled and won't be reopened by any of their MPs.
If the debate is closed, stop reopening it in church basements. If it isn't, say so to voters in daylight. You can't have it both ways.
Then came the schools. Jacob told the room that kids are being taught there are 23 or 50 genders, "or however many there are now," and claimed schools are letting children identify as cats. That claim has been debunked so often it has practically retired. Jamil, answering a question about schools overstepping, condemned the teaching of homosexuality to children. Not a curriculum dispute or a disagreement about age-appropriateness. Homosexuality. He also called discussions of what he referred to as "gender ideology" to be "nuts."
Parents do have every right to ask questions about what's taught in classrooms, but an elected MP telling a crowd that the mere existence of gay people is a threat to be kept out of schools says who he thinks belongs in this country and who doesn't. Just as telling, the event also worked as an organizing hub, with Jamil helping anti-LGBTQ rights school-board trustee hopefuls network with the crowd.
The moment that defines Restore the North
Near the end, one speaker told the room that anyone who disagrees with Conservatives on LGBTQ issues, communism, and similar topics is a "traitor." Neither Jamil nor Jacob pushed back. Not a word. Keep that in mind, because it matters for what came next.
I asked what I think is the fairest question anyone could put to a Durham Region MP right now. With CUSMA hanging over us and tariffs hitting Canadian industry, why is he aiming his fire at Mark Carney and Doug Ford instead of the American administration actually imposing those tariffs? And does he think any tariff above zero is acceptable?
For anyone who has the region's interests at heart, that's an easy question that leaves plenty of room for a unifying answer, and it's one even someone like Pierre Poilievre could properly answer. Any competent politician could have offered an answer that sounded good in their sleep.
What I instead got was a tantrum.
Jamil noted that it looked like I "had some fans" in the audience, because a handful of people clapped when I asked. Some people in that room clearly wanted an answer, and he knew it. I think that's what set him off.
With aggression, he asserted he shouldn't be expected to focus on a leader he "can't control," which is rich coming from a man who went to Washington (presumably on OUR DIME) and built his brand on having a special relationship with the people now trying to deindustrialize his own riding. If that relationship doesn't give you any influence when it counts, what was the point of advertising it? And if it does, why won't you use it for the people who elected you?
He never answered whether any tariff above zero percent is acceptable. He skipped that part entirely, instead choosing to go after me personally. He called me a Liberal due to volunteering for Bridget Girard in the 2025 election. He pointed at my hat and shirt and told me, "You aren't Canada First, brother."
And the room loved it.
My MP was up there more or less asking whether I even love my own country, and people were cheering as the Leafs had finally won the Cup. Somebody across the room yelled at me to stop being a "commie." A few seconds before, someone else yelled "traitor."
Think about what came before that. I'd sat there for close to two hours listening to other people's questions, and a few of them were pretty out there. Nobody heckled them. Nobody called them names. They all got a polite hearing and a real answer. The only person who got shouted at was the one guy who pushed back on the man with the microphone. That was me.
This is an event that exists, supposedly, to defend free expression and open debate. Yet when one MP's own constituents was being mocked and denigrated by the room, neither Jamil nor Jacob stepped in. Freedom only for people who agree with you isn't freedom. It's a loyalty test.
What does "Canada First" actually mean???
Since Jamil brought it up, let's talk about that phrase "Canada First. General Motors Canada (GMC) builds Chevy Silverados in Oshawa, in our backyard. Thousands of families here depend on that plant and its supply chain. Right now his friends in Washington are openly trying to pull that kind of manufacturing south of the border.
If I'd had a chance to follow up, I would have asked how prioritizing a personal feud with Doug Ford over those workers counts as Canada First. I also would have asked why it's fine for the American president to cut a deal with China while our prime minister gets lectured for even considering one.
Given how he has talked about Canadians to the American press, it's hard to escape the conclusion that he would have given Washington whatever it asked for on trade if he'd been in charge.
And even setting individual policies aside, there's the basic question of conduct. Is yelling at the constituent you're supposed to represent appropriate for an MP? Is it "Canada First" to lash out like a young adult because someone disagreed with you in public? I don't think most people in Bowmanville, whatever their politics, would say yes.
I'm sure that some will read this and point straight to my campaign history and who I've voted for. Go ahead. But this isn't about me. It's about what's being said by an elected member of Parliament, in public, to the people he serves. People have a right to know what their representatives are saying and doing when they think the room is friendly.
My political affiliation is beside the point. He freaked out. He ignored the tariff question. He stood silent while a constituent was called a traitor, and he helped set that tone.
And if my status is the only thing you can argue about, you've already lost.
This piece was written by an individual contributor and reflects the editorial position of The Provincial Times. Read our Content Policy here.
Comments