The ability of the Conservatives to re-establish themselves as an alternative federal government will rest on at least two factors.
First, their new leader, Pierre Poilievre, needs to hold the party together following a bitterly divisive leadership campaign in which he managed to alienate, perhaps deliberately and permanently, centrists who backed his only serious opponent, Jean Charest, the former premier of Quebec.
Second, the Conservatives have to take advantage of the desire for change that prevails in the country today, nurture it through the long haul to the next election, present honest policies, and offer themselves to the electorate as a party that Canadians can feel comfortable voting for.
They might start by reading a letter to the editor of the Globe and Mail the other day from Carl Bourassa of Port Elgin, Ont. He was commenting on the divisions in the party today. “I don’t see the issue as harder-right conservatism versus mushy, centrist conservatism. It is conservatism versus populism, principles versus grievances,” he wrote.
“Mushy centrism is the result of social conservatism and populism. Populists want to focus on anger, not policy. Social conservatives want others to live in a manner of their choosing. Traditional conservatism would give individuals tools and choice without harming others… Traditional Conservatives would believe in the rule of law, and that freedom is in balance between the rights of society and the individual. They would accept other people for who they are, as long as they don’t impose their preferences on others.”
Bourassa’s conclusion – “Traditional conservative principles no longer have a political home” – is shared by other Tory moderates, a number of whom have to my knowledge quietly resigned from the party. Whether quiet resignations will develop into a movement powerful enough to split the Conservative party into incompatible factions will depend on the leader.
Poilievre did a reasonable job of reaching out to the moderates on the night he was elected leader, only to blow it a few days later when he showed that vengeance, not accommodation, was top of his mind. An important caucus member, Alain Reyes, a former deputy leader and Quebec lieutenant, who had supported Charest, resigned to sit as an independent.
A new leader anxious to build bridges, if he had a few grains of common sense, would have reacted calmly, thanking Reyes for his service and keeping a door ajar for his potential return. Instead, he attacked him. He described a reporter who tried to question him as a “Liberal heckler who’s snuck in here today.” And his office, in a classic exercise in overkill, sent a robotext message to the members of his riding association, urging them to flood Reyes’ office with demands that he resign his seat.
Poilievre, a career politician, has risen to leadership because he is smart, highly articulate, proficient in both official languages, a skilled organizer and a master of social media. He is ambitious to the point of ruthlessness.
Against these assets are liabilities. He does not recognize the difference between reasoned critics and mortal enemies who must destroyed. He is as paranoid about the news media as Stephen Harper; his press conferences are sham events where reporters are allowed to take notes, but not to ask questions. He embraces conspiracy theories and wacky ideas, from the power of cryptocurrencies to the menace of the World Economic Forum. He flirts with separatists in Alberta and with extremists on Parliament Hill who call for the overthrow of the government. And I think he underestimates the resilience of Justin Trudeau’s Liberals.
Poilievre has some distance to go to achieve a comfort level with voters. It won’t be easy.
Cambridge resident Geoffrey Stevens is an author and former Ottawa columnist and managing editor of the Globe and Mail and Maclean’s. He welcomes comments at geoffstevens40@gmail.com