I enjoyed the brief respite allotted me by Dominion Day - I hope you did as well. This fifth and final analysis is dedicated to the largest party at the national level and our current sitting government: the Conservative Party of Canada, led by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Like the two other major federal parties, it is hard to briefly summarize the policies of the Tories and the personalities of their leaders. What must be said however is that contrary to popular opinion, conservatives in Canada have been innovators more often than reactionaries.
It was the Conservative PM Sir John A. who welded Canada together from pathetic and estranged colonies into a national entity with government, police, and a railway that defied all expectations.
Borden enfranchised women to hold Canada to its responsibilities; Bennett started mass mailings for political ends; Dief proposed a bill of rights and promised 50 cents for every one healthcare dollar; Clark opened up government documents to the public; and Mulroney helped bring about an efficient sales tax and free trade with our southern cousins.
In fact, the single strongest historical criticism to level against the Tories in general is that their arguments over the decades have often failed to resonate with voters. While I must admit I tear up over thoughts of duty, the monarchy and tradition, many Canadians don't - and this fact, combined with a lack of enthusiasm in getting out the vote, doomed the Tories to live on the opposition benches for over 81 years between 1900 and 2006.
Unfortunately, what I like about the Conservative Party of Canada is an ever shortening list.
I'm glad to see taxes frozen or cut, harsher penalties for violent crime, reform for immigration and deportation, tax free savings accounts, six per cent annual increases to healthcare transfers with no "national conversation," job grants, investment in infrastructure, celebration of our military, uncompromising foreign policy objectives and "less red tape" for transporting or owning guns.
But, just as the Harper policy of incrementalism dictates, much of these things are underwhelming at best, and at worst, pure political posturing.
The Tories' new gun legislation does not go far enough to free firearms owners from intrusive, ineffective laws; any economist can tell you that lowering the GST makes zero fiscal sense; the military still remains chronically under-equipped; minimum sentencing is championed even for minor or regulatory offences; and the budget was balanced by borrowing from EI.
Furthermore, many Canadians, regardless of stripe, are still hopping mad about Bill C-51 and Poilievre's "fair elections" legislation that makes it harder to vote.
Add to this the complete failure of Harper and gang to make meaningful changes to the decadent Senate and the overzealous Supreme Court, even after appointing 59 of 105 Senators and seven of nine Supreme Court Justices, and the Conservative record really does take a kick in the pants.
So why would anyone vote for members of this government again? Well that's simple: Harper has ensured that more Canadians have more dollars in their back pocket via tax credits, and even for those voters who do desire a more principled, intelligent style of politics, the other two options are not necessarily the paragons of virtue their spinmeisters make them out to be.
Notley's crew in Alberta appears set to tax, spend, and borrow without remorse, despite the pleading of moderates in the NDP's own base to set a good example so that Mulcair can have a fighting chance. Between this evidence, Tom's temper and his own policies that have not been fiscally mapped, I am almost certain many fence sitting voters will wake up on voting day, and like British Columbians, Ontarians and, as our U.K. relatives did most recently, pick the devil they know.
And if that's not damning enough, the other "anything but conservative" champion has been seen posing with Ontario Liberal Premier Wynne and a few hand-picked candidates after promising a fiscally accountable, transparent government, as well as a fair nomination process. I'm honestly sad to say it, but if you think the attack ads are bad now, just wait for the debates. It will make Obama's attack on Romney's
"47 per cent" quote look pathetically bush league.
This brings us to PM Harper, and the essence of his brand: consistency.
Even with all the issues listed above, the partisanship, and empty talking points, Harper must be credited with his uncanny ability to appear unshaken and hard working. He is now a veteran G7 leader, the Tories as they are today are essentially his brainchild (no easy accomplishment), and in all of his addresses, even many of his attacks, the PM speaks like a leader.
Canadians know Harper, and whether they trust or fear him, they really do believe much of what they see is exactly what they'll get if they give him their ballot on E-day.
In short, what the Harper government has lacked in the visionary aspect that has dominated (and brought down) previous governments, it has made up for by carefully outflanking opponents while simultaneously slushing the public with its own money, as well as delivering policies long overdue but just short enough to keep the public feeling grateful and coming back for more.
Yes, that's not really very good or principled leadership - but it is great politics.
