EKOS Politics has a poll from Thursday of last week that shows the Conservatives and the Liberals in a statistical tie in terms of current voter intentions. While an election isn’t immanent and so I’d be careful about putting money down on these numbers, it is a pretty remarkable turn of events given that Harper and the Conservatives were in majority government territory as recently as October of last year.
As EKOS President Frank Graves notes,
For those who have been speculating as to whether Canadians really care about the ‘obscure’ issue of prorogation the evidence is now incontrovertible[.] Canadians have noticed, they do care and this is having a very negative impact on Conservative fortunes.”
The past couple of months have just been an utter PR nightmare for Stephen Harper’s Conservatives and there inability to address Canadians on issues of import in regards to their government is as much a condemnation as anything else they’ve bungled lately. What I find most interesting is that throughout the Afghan detainee scandal and the prorogation of Parliament, Harper et al have seemed to rely on this notion that “average Canadians” don’t care about these issues and the more they lean on that messaging, the more it hurts them.
As Graves notes further in the release, this hasn’t resulted in a noticeable electoral boon to the Liberals, which Graves attributes as a “comfort” to Harper. I disagree, not insofar as I think that this polling indicates an immanent Liberal resurgence, but rather because I don’t think this trend is a blip on the Conservative’s radar. It seems clear that many Canadians feel as though they have been treated with disregard and contempt by their governing party and that sentiment in unlikely to fade given that Harper’s movements over the past two months have, by my lights, belied a contemptible attitude towards his fellow Canadians.
In short, the PR disaster here is less about mis-messaging on key issues as it is about communicating what Harper actually thinks on those issues vis-a-vis his fellow Canadians.
In that regard, I think Harper and the Conservatives have a much more daunting hurdle to clear here than a lot of Canadian analysts are acknowledging. That’s true in no small part because it seems as though a decent chunk of Canadians get the sincerity of that messaging and are honestly offended by it. But those same Canadians aren’t headed in the Liberal’s direction in droves and so a clear alternative has yet to emerge from the frey.
That being the case, I think the NDP need to figure out what it’s going to do in the proceeding months to convince Canadians that they are that alternative and so the next little while is pretty key for them. The NDP has been faced with these moments before and has yet to really capitalize on them, so I have little evidence for being optimistic about their chances — but a chance I do believe they have.
My own advice would be to stop tacking to the centre in an attempt to wear as an off-white version of the Liberals. Canada is honestly lacking a left-of-centre party with some soul, integrity and an air of trustworthiness. The Liberals like to sell themselves as such, except that no one is yet buying the “soul” “integrity” and “trustworthy” parts just yet. Such a strategy might not lead anywhere near forming government territory, but then, neither has anything else the NDP has done to date.
What it might do, though, is break that rouhgly 15% barrier with which the Party has been struggling for years, which would be a step in the right direction for the NDP and, concurrently, Canadians, I think. What I’d really like to see the NDP do is take the first step in dropping the pantomime of political posturing around what the various parties think Canadians want and just be the parties they are. We have a multi-party system for a reason, it’s time the major parties acknowledged that fact.
Kazzy 
Russell Saunders 
Jaybird 
darlene 
Heidi
{ 30 comments }
You’re right.
It seems clear that many Canadians feel as though they have been treated with disregard and contempt by their governing party
This is novel? How about contempt and disregard originating in the courts and administrative tribunals?
Why not expel Quebec so as to remove the confounding factor of national identification from your domestic politics, restore the old constitution and put your appellate judiciary back in its place, and adopt ordinal balloting of the sort they have in Ireland to accommodate your multiplicity of parties?
Where did I say it was novel?
All right, I will withdraw the term ‘novel’, and instead make use of ‘distinctive’.
“Why not expel Quebec so as to remove the confounding factor of national identification from your domestic politics”
Because that does little to solve the dozens of other confounding factors that prevent national unity and has nothing to do with this present crisis.
What ‘dozens of other factors’?
Inherent and intractable regional disputes for one, ones rooted in something other than French/English antipathy and trace their origins back to before 1867. Every province is an issue that disrupts national unity, and there never has been a clear sense of purpose to the country as a whole. Ever.
And on Quebec: Jean Charest didn’t kill separatism, but it requires a special kind of delusion to believe that ’95 will repeat itself in the near future. I thought Chantal Hébert’s prediction for an independent Quebec 2020 was laughable when I first heard it, and it’s become even more so now. The framework since ’95 is far too accommodating and I think enough of the separatists realize how quickly Quebec’s economy would collapse. No, more can be done through Canada than without it.
Divergent regional interests are quite unremarkable in the occidental world. Bi-national states with political parties organized around communal distinctions are unusual.
Quebec’s economy will not ‘collapse’ due to a change in the locus of commercial or health and safety regulations from Ottawa to Quebec City.
“Divergent regional interests are quite unremarkable in the occidental world.”
Do you even understand the basis for, or the gravity of regional disputes in Canada? You have yet to demonstrate any insight into this; your glib assertions have no merit.
“Bi-national states with political parties organized around communal distinctions are unusual.”
I’m sorry, but you can’t possibly be suggesting that Canada is simply a bi-national state.
“Quebec’s economy will not ‘collapse’ due to a change in the locus of commercial or health and safety regulations from Ottawa to Quebec City.”
Yes it will. Substantial commitments have been made to Quebec that have underwritten much of it prosperity in the twentieth century. Quebec as it exists now, and as the separatists want it to continue, is not sustainable in the absence of Canada. And again, you have demonstrated no knowledge of these specifics.
One other thing. Whether or not Canada’s regional disparities and disputes are unique is irrelevant; they still function as “confounding factors” to national unity in Canada itself, and the system as established is not equipped to address them, nor is their sufficient momentum for a credible alternative.
The ‘system’ has bumped and ground along since 1867. What is peculiar and dispensible about it is the Bloc Quebecois.
If your domestic problems were that intractable, you could always break the country up.
“The ’system’ has bumped and ground along since 1867. What is peculiar and dispensible about it is the Bloc Quebecois.”
What exactly is so peculiar about the Bloc? You make the strangest of assertions. You dismiss without cause any other regional disputes and demonstrate no knowledge of either origins or function. You insist that there is nothing unique about this, while fixating on one recent and predictable regional protest party as being the proverbial wrench. As if Reform never existed and didn’t destabilize Liberal alternatives for nearly fifteen years.
“If your domestic problems were that intractable, you could always break the country up.”
Particular problems are intractable; some regions prosper and other regions suffer because of this. Nothing remains fixed. I don’t recall saying that absolutely nothing works, and because I view national unity as a worthless and irrelevant concept. There is little in history to point to a shared vision, and I see no point in wasting time trying to cultivate one.
Recent? Provincial parties have formed the government or principal opposition in Quebec, without interruption, since 1936. The Reform Party as a consequential force came and went over a period of about seven years. The Social Credit Party has dissipated and was never wholly restricted to Alberta and British Columbia.
Yes it will. Substantial commitments have been made to Quebec that have underwritten much of it prosperity in the twentieth century. Quebec as it exists now, and as the separatists want it to continue, is not sustainable in the absence of Canada. And again, you have demonstrated no knowledge of these specifics.
No, it will not. The language is witlessly florid and should be abandoned. There is a difference between a disagreeable economic recession and an economic collapse a-la 1929-32. Unless you are speaking of a dependent territory with a per capita income a modest fraction of the mother country (and that does not describe Quebec), net inter-governmental subventions tend to be small (on the order of 3% of domestic product). A scheduled withdrawal of net subventions over a business cycle or two should prevent severe disruptions. The notion that Quebec, which has a diversified economy with elements of agriculture, industry, and services, is a just a mendicant economy like the Pitcairn Islands needs to be ejected from your head.
Art, you should keep in mind yourself that were Quebec to leave confederation it would not be leaving in one chunk. The first nations have made it abundantly clear that, whatever the insane french decided, they were staying in Canada and they were keeping the northern 75% or so of Quebec with them.
That northern 75% of Quebec’s land area is composed of coniferous forest, tundra, and waste and has about 90,000 people living in it. It will not be missed.
Ha, you think? I imagine they’d miss most of their hydro power and mineral wealth.
Here are some statistics on Quebec’s contribution to the Federal fisc and expenditures on Quebec therefrom. Does’nt look like their allowance is that large.
http://www2.parl.gc.ca/Content/LOP/ResearchPublications/prb0639-e.htm#provexpend
I’m heartened to see such a price paid by the Conservatives for their antics. It seems there’s a race afoot now. The Liberals have to muck out their idiots and get the party ship shape again; the underlying structure of the party is excellent but there are a lot barnacles and caked on morons left over from their years and years in power. Against them we have the NDP with the party firing on all cylinders but their task is to actually be a credible governing party. Honestly I have no idea if they can do it without turning into Liberals. I find myself a bit taken aback by this to be honest. It seems to me the Liberals were due for at least another full on electoral cycle in the wilds before they’d be in governing shape again. It seems almost unfair to expect them to be ready. Perhaps it really is time for our beloved NPD hippies to take a stint at the helm. They’re running Nova Scotia for the first time so why not the whole country?
“They’re running Nova Scotia for the first time so why not the whole country?”
That requires a substantial alteration of their current national framework. The victory in Nova Scotia came from years of smart campaigning and moderation, and it took a considerable economic downturn to finally shift enough rural votes. If you look at the candidates, there are a few technocrats in key Cabinet positions, and the rest are the kind of personable community figures that won elections for the Tories for years. On a national level, the NDP is much more united than the Tories or Liberals, but any viable campaign requires some of the elements superseding the others, and thus far they haven’t been willing to make those steps.
Hmm good analysis there Zach.
My own advice would be to stop tacking to the centre in an attempt to wear as an off-white version of the Liberals. Canada is honestly lacking a left-of-centre party with some soul, integrity and an air of trustworthiness.
Couldn’t the same be said about the Democrats here in the U.S.?
Well, the Democrats are pretty thoroughly to the right of even the Canadian Liberals, and nowhere even close to the NDP. If the advice was for the Democrats to “stop trying to wear as an off-white version of the Republicans,” it works.
Yeah what Katherine said. You need to keep in mind when considering politics in Canadia that the entire political football field is considerably to the left of the American one. It’s one reason why even a lot of the Tories think that most Americans are loons.
Err replace Americans in that last sentence with Republicans.
Ah, the limits of multi-culturalism.
Meh, cuts both ways. A lot of Republicans think Canadians are commies.
Screw ‘em
Charming as always.
http://www.heritage.org/index/Country/Canada
Read em and weep.
Look up ‘belied’ before you use it again. It means the opposite of your intent.
Comments on this entry are closed.