Stephen Harper, Man of many Politicians

So my dad and I were talking last night about the election. “I hate to say it,” he said, “but it looks like Stephen Harper is the star in this election.” I thought a couple of comments about Canada’s Prime Minister might be worthwhile. It’s a remarkable story. Here’s a guy who has done the impossible several times over: he won the leadership of one party (Canadian Alliance), negotiated a deal to merge with another party (Progressive Conservatives), and won the leadership of the newly merged party, all in a very short period of time. Two highly disciplined federal elections later, he found himself the the Prime Minister of Canada’s New Government(tm).

Someone who has spent a lot of time and energy trying to understand this atypical, yet remarkably successful politician is Paul Wells of Maclean’s fame. His first book was about Harper’s rise to power from his decision to run for the leadership of the Canadian Alliance right up to his winning the 2006 election. It’s a good read if you’re interested in smart, narrative journalism about Canadian politics. Also a good read if you’re looking for clues about what another term of Harper government might mean.

For Wells’ perspective on what has motivated Harper decisions in government, I’d recommend a column he wrote back in May comparing the Conservative leader to one of the longest serving Prime Minister’s in Canadian history: Mackenzie King. Here’s a quote(link):

Look, I’m not trying to make King a saint here. He was eccentric and uninspiring at best, creepy and soul-destroying at worst. But he effected massive change in the only sure way it has ever been done in Canada: through sheer endurance. Not revolution, nor even really evolution. More like erosion. Harper wants to make change on a similar scale and with similar patience. He will creep, not run, as far down the field as he can, then do what it takes to win again. And then, whether with a majority or minority, he will so govern as not to put Canadian conservatism’s long-term viability at risk. Often he will not even look like a conservative. We have Andrew Coyne on hand to tell you all about it when that happens. In the meantime, what matters to Harper is that he does not look like a Liberal.

If you’re not a conservative-minded Canadian but you’re thinking about voting for Harper, I’d encourage you to read that quote over a few times. Voting for Harper by default is exactly what he is hoping for in this election.

Speaking of election strategy, Wells’ more recent column considers the electoral mind that Harper brings to bear on his campaigns. It is even more worth reading (link):

The immediate goal is to win an election. The longer-term goal is to settle Harper in for a durable transformation of Canadian politics. Some of his oldest friends talk about a Harper era that would last a decade; confirm the healing of Canada’s legendarily factious conservative movement; encourage division within the Liberal party and between Liberals and other opposition parties; and durably transform the country’s political culture.

and more:

Canada today is blessed beyond the imagining of America in the 1960s, with its urban riots and its racial and social strife, but the Harper team is acutely sensitive to anything that might sound like a culture war. That’s why, when a CBC reporter fed questions to a Liberal MP interrogating Brian Mulroney at a committee hearing, Conservative campaign manager Doug Finley fired off a fundraising letter to Conservative supporters, arguing that the swells were conspiring against them and it was time to give. It was the party’s most successful fundraising drive to date.

Stephen Harper knows what happens when a Conservative leader in Canada takes his base for granted. Harper walked away from the Progressive Conservatives in 1987 because he thought Brian Mulroney was snubbing the Welkish mass. He will never make the same mistake. He retools now and then, sometimes spectacularly, as he is doing this summer with Giorno. But his eye is always on Middle Canada — on Harperland, if you like, and even if you don’t.

It’s recommend that last column in it’s entirety. Particularly if you’re interested in one of the stranger episodes in the election to date - Harper’s decision to cut funding for arts programs.