Cynics Unlimited

Soon after the results started rolling in, bloggers and journalists went mad posting information and analysis concerning the 2006 Canadian Federal election. Related terms related to the election briefly shot to the top of Technorati’s most searched items, while Canadian political blogs (including this one) saw a sudden surge in web traffic. Looking through the Technorati search results, it became clear that most blogs were either political analysis that assumed a good amount of knowledge of Canadian politics (not a great assumption for an international forum, especially given Canada is notoriously “boring” politically speaking) or were garbage posts that included the “right” keywords. The following post is part 1 of a quick summary for those unfamiliar with or mildly familiar with Canadian politics and will attempt to explain the significance of this election. It was typed somewhat in haste, so I’ll guarantee 90% accuracy for now …

“Quickly Explain the Results to me…”

The Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) won a minority government in the 2006 Canadian Federal Election. A minority government effectively means that a piece of new legislation cannot be passed unless the CPC aligns with another party to create a majority of votes in the House of Commons.
Stephen Harper is the Prime Minister designate. Harper is the first Conservative Prime Minister in 12 years
The Election Results (seats won) are as follows: Canadian Conservative Party - 124, Liberal Party - 103, Bloc Quebecois - 51, NDP - 29, Independent – 1
The western-identified Conservatives made breakthroughs in Eastern Canada, gaining seats in Ontario and Quebec. However, no seats were won in Canada’s 3 largest cities (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver)

“What’s the Difference Between These Parties?”

Liberal Party of Canada:

• Leader – Paul Martin (soon to be vacant)
• Political Slant – Centrist/Liberal; Will swing left or right as the need arises
• Recent History – Jean Chretien (who served under the [in]famous Pierre Trudeau) defeated Tory Kim Campbell in 1993 to win a Liberal majority government. Chretien’s most noteworthy accomplishment was passing the Clarity Act, which specified the terms under which a province’s secession from Canada would be recognized by the Canadian government. This legislation was aimed at the growing separatist movement in Quebec, federally under the Bloc Quebecois and provincially under the Parti Quebecois. The Liberals under Chretien were also credited for cutting taxes, eliminating the federal deficit and paying down over $30 billion of the national debt. However towards the end of Chretien’s reign, rumors of scandal were rumbling under the surface, while the Liberals ran afoul of the American Government after refusing to participate in the post-9/11 war effort. After months of public infighting, Chretien stepped down and rival Liberal Paul Martin became Prime Minister. Martin’s reign was instantly turbulent: Quebec separatism was still flaring, the West’s own separatist movement was gaining steam, the U.S. Government barely acknowledged Canada and allegations of scandal were growing louder. After winning a minority government, a vote of non-confidence forced Martin into a fatal election.

Conservative Party of Canada:

• Leader – Stephen Harper
• Political Slant – Right Wing / Conservative
• Recent History – The original Progressive Conservative Party (also called the “Tories”) fell after the reign of Brian Mulroney. Following several mini-scandals and the controversial passing of the GST (Mulroney used an obscure constitution clause to gain enough seats to pass the hated tax) the Tories lost horribly, not even gaining enough seats in the House of Commons during the following election to retain official party status. Meanwhile, an Alberta-based populist movement would become the Reform Party, under the lead of Preston Manning. With the slogan “The West Wants in”, the Reform’s policy centered on increasing the sway in national politics of western provinces (Manitoba, Saskatchewan, Alberta, and British Columbia). The party also attracted a large number of social conservatives as well as a small number of extremists, which made Reformers tremendously unpopular in Ontario and eastward. After briefly achieving Official Opposition status, the Reform fizzled due to vote splitting on the right with a slightly resurgent PC party. This vote splitting would continue until, after several failed attempts, members from both camps created a united conservative party called the Canadian Alliance. Stockwell Day led the united party to disastrous defeat against Jean Chretien’s Liberals in 2000, and the party was overtaken by Stephen Harper in 2002. Harper united the Alliance with remaining Progressive Conservatives (then under the leadership of Peter Mackay) to form the Conservative Party of Canada. The CPC are now also referred to as Tories.

NDP:

• Leader – Jack Layton
• Political Slant – Left Wing / Socialist
• Recent History – While it could be said that the NDP’s socialist views are closest to what most people think of when they think of Canada, the party has never been elected as a majority or minority government. After posting a high of 43 seats in 1988, the NDP’s political stock has steadily declined. Some blame this on the uninspiring leadership of Alexa McDonough and Audrey McLaughlin, while others feel that the disastrous reign of the provincial Bob Rae government in Ontario (Canada’s most populous province) contributed most to the party’s decline. Despite the loss of numbers, the party has retained a lot of power in the event of minority government: the Liberals and Conservatives will not work with each other, and so both sides must court a third party to align with in order to defeat or pass legislation. Given that the only other major party (Bloc Quebecois) regional are separatists, the NDP is usually the logical choice.

Bloc Quebecois:

• Leader – Gilles Duceppe
• Political Slant – Somewhat Left Wing, but mostly just Separatist
• Recent History – The Bloc is a Quebec-only party created by former Mulroney-era Tories. The Bloc’s ultimate Goal is to turn Quebec into a sovereign nation with loose economic associations to the rest of Canada. In the ultimate twist of irony, the Bloc’s first election resulted in the party becoming her majesty’s official opposition in a Liberal dominated parliament. Bloc leader Lucien Bouchard called Quebec’s second referendum for sovereignty and lost when 50.8% of Quebecers voted against secession. The Bloc’s share of the Quebec vote steadily declined until the Liberal party AdScam scandal came to light, causing voter outrage and spike in support for new Bloc leader Duceppe.

“Ok, so what’s so Significant About this Election?”

As stated earlier, this is the first time in 12 years that a conservative party has controlled parliament (if only by a thin minority rule). This victory is especially important to the western provinces, who see the election of a party driven by western interests to ensure they have a greater say in the federal arena. Previous Liberal and Conservative governments, by contrast, have generally ignored the west and been accused of exploiting Alberta’s oil resources to the benefit of Eastern industries. This animosity came to a head after former Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau introduced the National Energy Plan (NEP, established in 1980) in response to the energy crisis of the 1970’s. Under the NEP, Canada would aim for oil self-sufficiency by artificially lowering oil prices through subsidies and maintaining an oil reserves in the event of external oil supply fluctuations. Westerners resented the federal intrusion on what was considered a provincial resource and blamed the NEP for the subsequent recession in the region.

“What is this Liberal Corruption you Speak of?”

Adscam – The sponsorship scandal (coined “adscam”) involves the misuse of Federal funds marked to promote national unity in an increasingly separatist Quebec. Money destined for federalist advertising in Quebec was instead filtered through Liberal-friendly firms that did not produce any advertising in most cases, and in some cases kicked back a portion of the money directly to the Liberal Party fund. The program started in 1996 under the Chretien government and ended shortly after Paul Martin became Prime Minister. Martin subsequently set up the Gomery Commission to investigate the corruption, possibly in an attempt to obliterate his rival Chretien.There were several other minor scandals during the Martin era, and an increasing number of Canadians (including former Liberals) referred to the Liberal Party as having a “culture of entitlement”.

Stay tuned for the more speculative part 2 when we will discuss:

• Why Canada’s large cities would vote for such a corrupt government
• Just how “right wing” Stephen Harper really is
• Exactly who is the one independent sitting in parliament

Update: The Canadian Election - A General Summary (Part 2)

With less than a week left before Election Day, the question of Stephen Harper’s victory appears not to be a matter of if, but how. In a previous post, the possibility of a Harper minority (versus a Liberal minority) was discussed – now, with a 9-11% lead (depending on which poll you believe), Harper may be headed for a majority. Instead of crowing about this prospect as he disastrously did last election, the Canadian Conservative Party leader quickly set out to assure the public that a Conservative minority would not be “scary”:

“The reality is we will have for some time to come a Liberal Senate, a Liberal civil service — at least senior levels have been appointed by the Liberals — and courts that have been appointed by the Liberals … There’s certainly no absolute power for a Conservative government … we’ll have checks on us and limits on our ability to operate that a Liberal government would not face.”
-Stephen Harper, TorStar Interview (January 19, 2006)

Ironically, it is Stephen Harper who should fear a majority government. Absolute power over the House of Commons will greatly exacerbate the upcoming conflict between Harper’s core/historic constituency and his new-found audience of mainstream Canada. Prior to this election, the Canadian Conservative Party of Canada (and its previous post-Mulroney variants) tended to appeal to a few special interests.

• Western Separatists/Nationalists
• Social Conservatives
• Neo-Conservatives

Throughout his days as part of the Reform Party and Canadian Alliance, Harper relied on these groups both politically and financially. In fact, all three parties became regional phenomena in a Bloc-esque manner: most analysts dismissed them as a having no chance to form a government, but to their respective regions they were the majority, and in fact it was perceived the entire region was being suppressed rather than the respective political party.

Then along came Paul Martin.

The spectacular decline of the scandal-ridden Liberals has left the door open for new blood on Parliament Hill. At the same time, the Canadian Conservative Party seems to have created a palatable mix of fiscal conservative policy and political frugality that resonates outside its Western base. Unwavering support for U.S. military intervention has turned to wary caution:

“we support the war effort and believe we should be supporting our troops and our allies and be there with them doing everything necessary to win”
-Stephen Harper, Montreal Gazette Interview (2003)

Harper has since promised backed off the idea of sending more troops abroad. An open invitation to debate abortion has become a cautious defense of a status quo:

“I have always said that controversial issues of a moral or religious nature, such as abortion, should be settled by free votes of MPs, not by party policy”
-Stephen Harper, Date unknown (at least a few years old)

“I have no desire to see that issue debated in the near future. We’re saying very clear in our platform we’re not going to support or initiate abortion legislation and frankly I don’t want this Parliament to have an abortion debate.”
-Stephen Harper, Global National Interview (January 18, 2006)

Western nationalism has become Canadian nationalism:

“Withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan… Collect our own revenue from personal income tax… Resume provincial responsibility for health-care policy. If Ottawa objects to provincial policy, fight in the courts… Each province should raise its own revenue for health… It is imperative to take the initiative, to build firewalls around Alberta…”
-Stephen Harper, Letter to Ralph Klein (2001)

“Canada needs a government that will stand up for our values of freedom, fairness, and compassion. That means a democratic government at home that respects all of our provinces, and defending our national interests and values abroad through a stronger military and a tougher stand on international trade disputes”
-“Stand up for Canada”, Conservative Party of Canada Website (2006)

So, what to make of this? Many will probably see this as indicative of Harper’s “hidden” agenda and that he is simply lying in wait until being elected to unleash a torrent of Bush-fed, extreme right wing tyranny. What’s more likely is that Harper is finally in the position to make his true/evolved pitch as a pseudo-libertarian with a very minimal social agenda. Even in the days of the Canadian Alliance he was on record cautioning then-leader Stockwell Day to limit the influence of socially conservative voters; now he seems ready to ditch them entirely and appeal to the mainstream.

However, the Conservative Party of Canada leader must remember that Canadian voters are not voting him in so much as they are voting Paul Martin out. Stephen Harper still needs to prove to angry voters (and in particular Toronto voters who probably still won’t embrace the Conservative platform for this election) that he can run the country competently. In doing so, he will ultimately alienate the special interests who have sustained him up to this point.

If Stephen Harper accomplishes this under a minority government (in which it would be essential to gain the necessary support from the NDP to pass any measures) then he can simply blame Jack Layton’s group and not appear to have “sold out” his core audience. With a majority, however, Harper would have no excuse to have not pushed the same-sex marriage and abortion issues he pimped to build his political fortunes. If he does not manage to convince the mainstream voters (re: Ontarians/Quebecers) that he should be a mainstay, he may find himself with no audience at all and will join Kim Campbell in the dubious club of short-term, one-shot Prime Ministers.

Harper’s best scenario would be to win a minority government and gently shake off his more extremist factions by virtue of his need to cooperate with the left (i.e. he can blame Jack Layton). In the meantime he can implement enough of his fiscal measures to validate the beliefs of his less extreme audience while convincing skeptical Ontarians/Quebecers that there is no evil “hidden” agenda. As long as Harper throws one economic goodie at each region of the country he could sail to an easy and painless majority thereafter.

After years of defeat, disappointment and disastrous political strategies, things finally seem to be going Stephen Harper’s way.

Recently published polls indicate that if an election were held today, Harper’s Conservative Party could win a minority government with 33% of the popular vote. Harper’s gains in Ontario, which has remained elusive to post-Mulroney Conservative parties, were most significant with 38% of the popular vote vs. Paul Martin’s 36%. Harper’s often-maligned image has also made gains, with 36% of survey respondents saying their opinion of him has improved (28% said their view of Harper has worsened). Compare this to Paul Martin, whose image has suffered in a whopping 50% of respondent’s eyes.

Having learned from history, Stephen Harper is not ready to declare victory yet – the Conservative Party of Canada looked set to win a minority during the previous national election, until a last-minute surge by the Liberals relegated the Conservatives to opposition status once again. It is widely believed that the Ontarian fear of Harper’s socially-conservative “hidden agenda” led to a last minute switch back to the Liberals.

Does Stephen Harper need to fear another such defeat? The answer may depend on just how dissatisfied Ontarians are with the Liberal Party. While the initial round of scandals (including the much publicized Gomery / AdScam Inquiry) had only a marginal effect on the opinion of Canadians who didn’t already have a conservative-driven vendetta, more recent missteps have seriously shaken voter faith in the once-dominant Liberals:

• The recent Goodale scandal served to illustrate that the previous AdScam scandal was closer to Liberal routine than chance incident. The RCMP is currently investigating whether the department of Finance Minister Ralph Goodale leaked details of changes to the income trust tax policy to investors ahead of its official November 23rd release. Hours before the policy became law, stock trading soared unexpectedly for companies whose stocks were to benefit most from the policy changes
• The surge in gun crimes throughout the Greater Toronto Area highlighted the ineffectiveness of the $2 billion national gun registry. Only after the murder of Jane Creba –Toronto’s 52^nd gun death of 2005- did Martin seriously address the loose enforcement of laws that directly contributed to several of the deaths

It would be easy to assume that the Liberals have merely ignored the mounting problems for too long and Canadians are fed-up with the seemingly monthly scandals/boondoggles. This is probably part of the answer, but one also has to consider the economic effect of these problems. Investor confidence in Bay Street will be severely shaken if the RCMP does find evidence of inside knowledge being passed to select investors from the government. Increasingly negative media coverage of Toronto gang-fueled violence is already affecting both business and tourism downtown.

These economic problems go to the heart of the Liberal election strategy of selling their economic record. While Canada has economically flourished over the past few years, the future remains uncertain. Aside from the aforementioned problems, Canada’s increasingly strained relations with its largest trading partner are adding further jitters to Canadians on Bay Street and beyond. Fluctuating prices of raw exports have factored heavily into Canada’s economic growth, and these fortunes could turn on any international policy or economic change. A weakened tourist and/or business sector could leave Canada extremely vulnerable, especially provinces like Ontario that rely less on the export of raw materials.

With this in mind, the federal election would once again appear to be Harper’s to lose, as Liberal inaction and corruption are easing Ontario’s traditional hostility toward the Conservative candidate. As long as Harper continues to press on sure victory issues (crime, fighting corruption, taxation) while avoiding Ontario-repellents (abortion, bible-bashing, healthcare privatization) he could easily become our next Prime Minister. Canada requires political change in order to remain economically and politically viable; thus many wait in hope that Stephen Harper doesn’t pull another defeat from the jaws of victory.