Pardon My French

We have a problem.

The Quebec press is already making noise about Peter MacKay’s weak French. It is immediately a big issue in Quebec. He has been in public life forever, they say. Why has he never made the effort to learn French?

He took no questions after his kickoff announcement. Perhaps to avoid any questions in French. He cannot do that for long.

This seems to me a fatal flaw. Never mind losing any competitiveness in Quebec. It matters almost as much in Ontario, because Ontario considers itself profoundly vested in preserving Canadian unity.

At this point, MacKay’s only credible opponent is Erin O’Toole. Erin O’Toole’s French is apparently not much better.

So it is not just that the Tories are going to end up with a unilingual leader; there will not even be a prominent candidate who speaks good French. At best, Quebec is likely to tune out. At worst, it begins to look as though they don’t think about Quebec, have no sense of Quebec. Quebec tends to nurse grievances over this sort of thing that can last for many years.

What an epic disaster it turns out to have been that the Conservatives did not choose Max Bernier last time. He was their most prominent Quebec politician. At the time, he was running on a libertarian platform, economic conservatism with social liberalism, which might have overcome the current party divisions.

Sorry to repeat myself, but the best hope for the Conservatives now is the second coming of Stephen Harper.

Failing that, the best hope for small-c conservatives may be Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party. He has more natural support in Quebec, being both bilingual and a native son, and to top that, as a libertarian Tory, he has more natural support in the West than MacKay as well.

The official Tories may soon be reduced to what they were the last time MacKay was leader.

MacKay Weighs In

Seems to me it was a VERY good speech that hit all the right notes.

But this does not especially reflect on MacKay--he's got a really good speechwriter.

The campaign logo is also great.

A really professional effort.

He also did well by giving so much of his speech in French. He is surely aware that this is a vulnerability. I thought his French pronunciation, at least, was decent.

We'll see how it goes.

All the Way with Jean Charest?

The new frontrunner.

Peter MacKay has, as expected, entered the Conservative leadership race. He becomes the front runner. 

I am not keen on Peter MacKay.

He won the Progressive Conservative leadership years ago by cutting a secret backroom deal with David Orchard. The deal was, in large part, that he would not, under any circumstances, allow the PCs to merge with the Canadian Alliance.

This was in May, 2003. In October, 2003, MacKay merged the party with the Canadian Alliance.

It was a historic display of lack of principle.

Why would we want such a man as prime minister?

To be clear, I was delighted at the party merger. The real problem was the original pact with Orchard, which sold out the party and the conservative movement for personal ambition. But this was then compounded by the breach of trust.

MacKay is all about MacKay.

One pressing issue in the current leadership race is that the new leader must be ready to hit the ground running, to assume the prime ministership at any moment. This is a minority government situation. There will be little time to find their feet, little time to introduce themselves to the public.

This looks like a MacKay strength, because of his long resume; but his conduct as PC leader suggests otherwise. He won a leadership, and within a year surrendered it. It looks as though he really had no idea or plan for what to do with it.

It looks as though he is not temperamentally a leader.

Also in the race, so far, are Pierre Poilievre and Erin O’Toole.

Poilievre looks great in parliament; he is fluently bilingual, and has Western roots. Yet I fear he is handicapped by this vital consideration, that the new leader be ready to assume command. Poilievre’s talent is in opposition. One remembers John Diefenbaker: the segue into government is not an easy one, it is in many ways an opposite role, and Dief turned out not to have the personality for it.

Poilievre would have made better sense last time, when the task appeared to be to rally forces for a long haul in opposition.

He might be great, but it’s a bit of a shot in the twilight.

I like O’Toole. However, he too is not ready for this. He only came third last time, in a weaker field. His government experience is as Minister of Veterans Affairs, not a major portfolio. He has no natural regional power base—coming up through the military means he is not really from anywhere.

Jean Charest has not announced, but rumours are swirling around him.

I like Jean Charest. He has at least as impressive a resume as MacKay; and it includes actual governing experience, as Quebec premier.

Yet there seems to be a lot of resistance to him within the party. I think there is a special resentment, in the West, towards there being so many national leaders from Quebec. They feel, by comparison, excluded.

One can sympathize, but in pragmatic terms, Quebec is important; it has a lot of seats. The Tories already have the West secured; Atlantic Canada is not seat-rich; and Ontario too likes leaders from Quebec, while Quebec is not impressed by leaders from Ontario.

Somebody has crafted a pre-emptive assault by pointing out that Charest has been advising Huawei. This supposedly makes him a Manchurian candidate. Kind of like Trump with Russia.

I’m not impressed by this claim either. My greatest criticism of the current, Trudeau, government, is that it has been trying to hector other countries on how they should conduct their business. Given Canada’s lack of either financial or military might, this does no good for anyone, and only harm to Canadians. I’d rather stick to trying to be friends to everyone, and being fair to everyone. And doing business with everyone.

Stephen Harper, rumours say, also strongly resists Charest’s bid. He has just resigned from the Conservative National Fund, reputedly so he is free to work against Charest.

I think this is a matter of protecting his legacy; if Charest wins, it will no longer be Stephen Harper’s party. It will be the old Progressive Conservatives again.

I too would prefer it to remain in Harper’s mold. And, frankly, I am probably not going to vote Conservative next time, with Charest or any of the others here as leader. But this is also an indication of how competent a leader Charest is. MacKay too comes from the old PC, yet Harper does not so fear him.

At this point, I think the CPC would do best to choose Charest.