_______________
The ballots are counted, the results are in, and Canada has made a choice. Another Tory minority government.
This is indeed a strengthened mandate for the Conservative Government, led by Mr. Stephen Harper. I share the Prime Minister’s view that a second consecutive minority win – this time with a stronger plurality of seats in the House – does indeed add heft to the Conservatives’ claim to have a strong national mandate. This is especially so in light of the Tories’ broad support across the country, from Prince Edward Island to Quebec, from Ontario to the prairies, Alberta and British Columbia.
_______________
The Vision Thing
George H. W. Bush was once lampooned for carelessly referring to a governing philosophy or comprehensive plan as “the vision thing”. A clear reference to the idea that governments ought to “muddle through” with measurable, achievable and seemingly positive reforms and programmes as dictated by necessity or common sense, “the vision thing” comment made it clear to Americans that the elder Bush wasn’t about grand national agendas. He just wanted to keep things moving in the right direction. Proceed with caution.
Bush 41’s lack of interest in over-arching ideological agendas seems to pretty accurately reflect the recent Conservative election campaign. What, exactly, did the Conservatives run on? What’s the agenda? And therefore, what’s the mandate?
There was a hodgepodge of good stuff, to be sure. Helpful tax relief to first-time home buyers, tax credits for parents who enrol their children in arts-related programmes, a pledge to extend significant parental benefits to female, self-employed small business owners, etc. These and a number of other policies shed important light on the real not-so-hidden Conservative agenda: replace the Liberal Party as the natural governing party of Canada.
Thankfully, there were also a number of items designed to assist the less fortunate and persons with disabilities, as well as stable and predictable, if still light, investments in defence and arctic sovereignty. That’s just to say that although the Conservative agenda (from here on into the foreseeable future, as far as I can tell) is designed to appeal to the small town/suburban middle class, there are still important elements that can be explained more accurately as extensions of conservative ideology, and not only political expediency.
But in the end, is it a strength or weakness of the Conservative Party that they’ve won government on such a middle-of-the-road agenda? No sweeping plan like in 2006 – just a bunch of small and achievable good stuff.
For the most part, the current economic climate played into the Conservatives’ ideal campaign narrative: leadership and economic management. And the Tories’ reluctance to put forward anything more than a narrow arrangement of modest tax cuts also enabled a very negative campaign, which focused on individual leaders more than the appeal of the different parties’ ideas and visions for Canada.
_______________
Monsieur Dion
There can be no doubt that Liberal leader Stephan Dion got the worst of it. It’s perfectly reasonable to draw contrasts that show the differences between different leaders’ ideas and visions and record. And it’s perfectly reasonable to any party to go after any other party’s performance in government. But I did, I admit, regret seeing Mr. Dion portrayed as being “not worth the risk”.
I agree with the Conservative Party that the Green Shift is not be worth the risk at this juncture. If nothing else, it just smells funny to get into a major fiscal overhaul during the middle of a global financial crisis – an overhaul that would hit the profits of a key Canadian industry at a time when Canadians’ savings are tanking.
But from my own, personal perspective, Mr. Dion was in fact worth a bit more graciousness and magnanimity. As a Minister of the Crown – from Quebec, no less – he staunchly defended our country against those who want to tear it apart. He was an effective Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs by all accounts, and he’s maintained a high level of personal integrity both in government and in opposition. He’s a perfectly decent fellow and, it goes without saying, a patriot.
_______________
The Future for the Liberals
There’s already buzz that former premier of New Brunswick, Frank McKenna, will seek the leadership of the Liberal Party should Stephane Dion step down. Which means, obviously, that euphonious rhythm emanating from the Red Machine is that of knives sharpening.
First of all, should Mr. Dion retire, he can do so in dignity and with a clear conscience. He failed to win election and showed, I believe, poor political instincts from time to time. But taking the broad view, he’s rendered distinguished service to this dominion, and that’s what he ought to be remembered for – by all sides.
The main problem the Liberals face is their continuing inability to focus on rebuilding and renewing their party. The fact that the Tories won another minority means that the Liberals have to focus both on being an active and engaged and legislatively creative Official Opposition and on rebuilding the party. Not to mention, the party is in rough financial shape. Especially compared to the governing party.
A Tory majority, which I think many Liberals were hankering for privately, would have given the Liberals two and a half years to unwind and get their things in order, and a year and a half to start taking it to the government. No such luck.
_____________
The Future for the Conservatives
The Tories are well positioned for the same reason the Liberals are poorly positioned – the Grits can’t focus (almost) exclusively on rebuilding for a few years, and the Conservatives are comparably well heeled. But there’s a minor sub-narrative developing: can Mr. Harper, under any circumstances, deliver a majority? If he is able to do this, shouldn’t it have happened this last election?
To me, this is a moot point for a few reasons.
First, it is most certainly not clear at this point that there are any prospects out there with Harper’s strategic instincts and abilities. Even if there were, Harper has done nothing to demonstrate he deserves to be replaced. To all those out there who think Harper’s leadership limits the appeal of the Conservative Party: your views will perhaps fall on more fertile ground after Harper, say, stops winning elections.
Second, the Tories have a government to administer. It is in the national interest and the Conservative Party’s interest that the Tory government continue to provide measurable and progressive results for Canadians. This should be the focus.
Stephen Harper has united the right, won government, and thrown the Grits into a protracted tail-spin. This is already plenty of material for the memoirs, but I suspect he’s got a few more chapters to write. I suspect these chapters will tell the story of how the Conservative Party achieved at least parity with the Liberals in national support on a stable and long-term basis, and how the Tory government steered the ship of state slowly, but consistently, toward lower taxes, stronger national institutions, a modest surge in patriotism and stronger national unity.
_______________
UPDATE: Scott Pruysers on the Dion Issue.
UPDATE 2: Jeffrey Simpson on the same.
