Posts
I find Erin O’Toole’s speech to the Conservative Party policy convention underwhelming.
He begins by saying we cannot count on scandals alone bringing down the Trudeau government. Then he lists Trudeau’s scandals, and points out how they make it urgent that the Trudeau government be defeated.
It is necessary, he says, to do more: for the Conservative party to be “bold” enough to “change,” so that it appeals to more Canadians. It needs “new arguments.”
Translation: he plans to run on the same platform as the Liberals, and count on the scandals to bring them down.
Even though he knows this is a failed strategy. It did not work for Scheer, and he has no better idea.
His argument against Jagmeet Singh and Yves-Francois Blanchet is simply that they cannot bring the Liberals down. No hint of a disagreement on policy. Indeed, he made a point of endorsing, speaking only in French, Quebec nationalism and Bill 101. And of seeking union support.
He did outline, in vague terms, a platform: “Canada’s Recovery Plan.” A Conservative government would create more jobs. A Conservative government would toughen anti-corruption laws. A Conservative government would boost funding for mental health. A Conservative government would build domestic capacity to produce vaccines and PPE. A Conservative government would bring the budget back into balance over the next decade.
It is the same platform as the Liberals; there is nothing there the Liberals, in government, would not do.
What government does not promise to create more jobs? What government does not intend to?
What opposition party in Canada has ever not promised to toughen anti-corruption laws? Mulroney did to defeat Turner. Chretien did to defeat Mulroney. Harper did to defeat Martin. Trudeau did to defeat Harper. It’s boilerplate.
Funding for health care? For a suicide hot line? The Liberals are at least as happy as the Conservatives to shovel more taxpayer money into mental health care. It is a payout to their natural constituency, the professions. There is precious little empirical evidence that mental health care as we know it actually helps anybody but the mental health care professionals. And their big idea is a suicide hot line? Where in Canada is there not already a suicide hot line? And what of mixed messages—a suicide hot line at the same time that we have government-assisted suicide? Sure sounds like cynical window-dressing—or an admission that we have no idea what we are doing.
Building domestic capacity for vaccines? What government around the world is not already doing this? The Liberals have already announced their plans, and funding.
Balancing the budget? Again, what government anywhere does not promise this? The Liberals have. Perhaps they have not promised a ten-year time line; but that hardly sounds ambitious.
There is no hint of ideology or ideological consistency here. More government money for this and that, while promising to spend less government money.
So the only pitch for voting Conservative is either greater Conservative competence or Liberal scandals.
O’Toole is making the traditional calculation among political professionals: that the way to power is to seek votes from the centre. It sometimes works; it worked for Tony Blair, or Bill Clinton. Ominously enough, both leading parties on the left. But I think the strategy is overleveraged. And does not work nearly so well for the right. It did not work for McCain, or Romney, or Joe Clark.
To begin with, the average voter is not motivated primarily by the issues. Professional politicians are, so they misread the public here. Issues change during the course of a government, most politicians are just reading the polls, and they do not keep their promises. The way most people vote, and the way they should, is by judging character. Who do they trust? Who seems capable of leading in a crisis? Who seems to care?
Abandoning principles is not a good character reference. Blowing with the wind is not a sign of leadership. A relentless smile may or may not convince anyone you’re a nice guy.
Second, if the Tories run on the same platform as the Liberals, they are running largely on a claim of greater competence. But an objective observer would expect more competence from the Liberal benches: this is their traditional strength. Because they are the “natural governing party,” they are the side most likely to draw smart young up-and-comers or people successful outside politics. The CVs of Conservative leaders are generally thinner than those of Liberal leaders. Compare Scheer, Clark, or Day to Pearson, Ignatieff, or Martin. Advantage Liberals.
Third, if the Tories run on the same platform as the Liberals, they are running largely on a claim of being more honest than the Liberals. But on what grounds can they make that claim, if they are abandoning their own principles in hopes of power? Instead, they will be suspected of some “hidden agenda.”
Fourth, the apparent centre is not the real centre. It is an artifact of the media, which controls the discourse, and of the positions raised by the various political parties. The Greens and the NDP pull the discourse in Canada to the left; and the media class is leftist. For a party of the right in Canada, this means an appeal to the centre is conceding every argument to the left right out of the gate, without resistance.
Fifth, if the Tories run on the same platform as the Liberals, conservatives are left with little reason to vote, and less reason to volunteer. It therefore does not follow that an appeal to the centre will bring in more votes than one with an ideological core. The 2015 election illustrated this: Mulcair, sensing a chance at victory, pulled the NDP to the centre. Trudeau, in third place, pulled left. Guess who won?
It is an old saw in the Liberal Party that they lose any time they “run to the right of the Tories.” Which is really to say, if the Conservatives seem to have the ideas; when the Liberal leader runs as a competent manager, without an ideological message: Diefenbaker beat St. Laurent as a firebrand, Mulroney beat Turner when Turner’s platform was little more than “invest in infrastructure,” Harper beat Martin when Martin seemed to have no coherent platform but good management: “Mr. Dithers.”
Sixth, people want leadership. A government that just follows the polls, as most governments do, is useless. Donald Trump did well by speaking his mind; as, in their day, did Reagan, Thatcher, Ralph Klein, Rob Ford.
This is the way conservatives win. O’Toole has no idea and no ideas. The hope for conservatives is Bernier and the PPC.
No comments:
Post a Comment