Thirty seats away from a majority, faced with the necessity of haggling over every bill, outnumbered by left-leaning MP’s, the Conservative Party of Canada won only a victory yesterday, not a triumph. Nonetheless, it is a victory with genuine consequences.
First, the Conservatives established themselves as Canada’s only national political party. They have MP’s, in more than derisory numbers, everywhere except the barely inhabited Territories and minuscule Prince Edward Island. Their showing in Quebec, where they finished first or second in a solid majority of ridings (47 out of 75, winning ten) and surpassed the Liberals’ popular vote, was even more impressive than it looks, in view of their utter lack of electoral infrastructure in Francophone Canada. By contrast, the Liberals won no ridings and only 15 percent of the vote in Alberta, the country’s most prosperous province. In the three Prairie provinces combined, they got five ridings (out of 56) and 19 percent of the vote. In British Columbia, they came in third, behind both the Conservatives and the NDP.
Second, while the Harper government may not be able to accomplish a lot, it can undoubtedly make sure that the criminal activity of its predecessor is exposed, publicized and punished. The conventional wisdom is that the damage to the Grits’ prospects will be limited, because they will have a fresh, untainted leader to replace Paul Martin. But just a couple of years ago, Paul Martin was the fresh, untainted leader. What the party needs is not a newer and better leader but a cellar-to-ceiling housecleaning, including jail time for guilty bigwigs. The Machiavellian strategy for Mr. Harper would be a lackadaisical investigation and minimum of prosecution. I doubt that he will be a Machiavel, which is good for his country, his party and his opponents.
Third, the outcome had an important negative benefit for Canada. Americans pay almost no attention to north-of-the-border politics. The election results weren’t headline news here. The Wall Street Journal’s story ran on page A-19. My local classical music station gave them fifth billing in its three minutes an hour of news. The general tone was, Something happened in a far off land, and now back to our regularly scheduled programming. There was a chance, however, that a Martin victory would have been noticed by, if not a huge proportion of the U.S. public, at least enough to matter. And what would have been noticed was the relentless anti-Americanism of the Liberal campaign. In its waning days, Paul Martin was hard to distinguish from Michael Moore. The damage that Jacques Chirac has inflicted on Franco-American relations is nugatory next to the havoc that could have been wreaked by a Prime Minister who believes, or purports to believe, that good relations with the President of the United States are a disqualification for office.
Of course the final tally is less than the hopes that rose during the week before the balloting. For a few euphoric days, the polls suggested that a majority government was only a few ridings out of reach. Either the pollsters were all wet or the race tightened remarkably over the final weekend. The Conservative seat count and popular vote margin were on the low end of projections: 124 seats and a six-point differential instead of the consensus of roughly 140 seats and eight to ten points. Maybe fence sitters turned timid at the last minute, as the Liberals kept up their smear-and-scare tattoo. Or is it possible that Stephen Harper’s insistence during the final days that he was a harmless dishrag who would do almost nothing, especially not on those terrifying “social issues” (at one point, he found himself to Paul Martin’s left on abortion), drained the energy from the Conservative effort? The Conservatives clearly did nothing to appeal the unrepresented electorate whose existence most commentators try to ignore. David Warren is a rare exception:
There are, I would estimate, many million people in this country who still hold views that were fairly universally held a couple of generations ago – against abortion on demand, same-sex “marriage”, pornography in public places, among many otherissues. . . .
Many of them are New Canadians. Many of them came to this country for a chance to raise their children in freedom, as Christians, or as observant Jews, or Hindus, or Sikhs, or Muslims.
No mainstream political party will dare to represent these people. The Conservatives condescend to be polite to them, on the condition they will not say anything “embarrassing”. But the other three major parties contesting tomorrow’s election play directly to the elites – to the “urbane” and “enlightened” – going out of their way to mock the “dinosaurs” in the “backwaters” as a class, and accuse one another of catering tothem. . . .
I refer to a “silent minority” – it may well still be a majority up here – who are the natural constituency of the Conservative Party. Many in fact vote Conservative, many still vote Liberal from past family or ethnic associations, or are conned into doing so when they fall for various rhetorical and tactical tricks. But a considerable number, and those among the toughest, seldom vote in elections, for the simple reason that no one represents their views. Or else they vote for small hopeless outfits such as the Christian Heritage Party – among the several that will split the Tory vote tomorrow, letting the Liberals hold on to closely-contested seats.
Despite all the Liberal screeching, faithfully echoed in the local media, about “Harper the right-wing extremist”, it’s not very likely that Prime Minister Harper will be so daring as to seek the backing of the “silent minority”. For instance, he declared during the campaign that he would not support the enactment of even mild restrictions on abortion. Thanks to a judicial edict some years ago, Canada is the only country in the civilized world with no abortion regulation whatsoever. The one operation for which the sclerotic nationalized medical system has no long waiting period is termination of a pregnancy. This Conservative government will shrink from any alteration to the status quo.
But, who knows? The odds are that the next election will come circa 2009. The Liberal Party’s great electoral advantage – fear of the unknown – will have withered by then, and it may be possible to look rationally at a great many issues, “social” and otherwise, about which political correctness currently forbids debate. If so, January 23, 2006, will be a memorable day in Canadian history. If not – well, anyone who has followed the fortunes of Canadian conservatism for the past half century is used to disappointment.
Comments