National Post attacks Conservative Party leader Stephen Harper

Decision time for Stephen Harper

National Post

Copyright
Monday, June 13, 2005



In last year's federal election, we endorsed not only the Conservative party, but also the leadership of Stephen Harper. We called Mr. Harper's "stolid approach" to politics and campaigning an asset in scandal-plagued times, complimented him for constructing "by far the strongest political agenda articulated by the major parties" and declared him "the only political leader in Canada with a practical plan that would take this country forward rather than backward."
After that election, when he and his party failed to win, Mr. Harper surprised many observers by declaring he would take some time to contemplate his political future. We urged him to remain at the CPC's helm and expressed our confidence he would make the Conservatives a viable government-in-waiting as Canadians got to know him better.
We have had our differences with the Tory boss, to be sure -- most notably, when we wondered in print last fall whether Canada still had a "conservative" party, given Mr. Harper's endorsement of Liberal deals with the provinces on health care and transfer payments, and the party's failure to come out boldly in support of ballistic missile defence. (He grumpily shot back that Canada had a conservative party -- "what it lacks is a national conservative newspaper.") All in all, though, we have probably been as supportive of Mr. Harper as any mainstream newspaper in Canada. But even we must conclude that now may be a good time for the Tory leader to contemplate his future.
We are not calling on Mr. Harper to resign. But recent events have put into question whether he is the man who should be leading the Conservatives. In particular, the failure of the party to surge ahead of the Liberals in popular support, even as the government has been buried in scandal, and Mr. Harper's misplaced trust in Gurmant Grewal's claims regarding his jobs-for-votes tapes, suggest this is a good time for reflection.
If an election were coming in a month or two, there would be no question of Mr. Harper standing down. But the fact that there is unlikely to be an election until at least the fall means the party would have plenty of time to unite under a new leader before Canadians went to the polls.
Mr. Harper certainly deserves a lot of credit for his accomplishments. After he took over as leader of the Canadian Alliance, he moulded that fractious party into a unified whole, put a stop to the periodic bozo eruptions its MPs were prone to and cleared up its outstanding debt from the 2000 election. He then forged a merger with the Progressive Conservatives and reunited Canada's right -- a goal that had eluded his two predecessors.
In short order after the merger, he organized and won a leadership race that served largely to unite the two rival clans. Then he launched immediately into an election campaign that he nearly won. Since last year's national ballot, Mr. Harper has out-fundraised the Liberals, built a stronger national party structure, orchestrated a successful policy conference that filed off the roughest edges of his party's platform, worked hard at finding new local candidates and committed himself to building a base in Quebec -- a task he almost succeeded at earlier this spring when, for a time, the Conservatives appeared set to surpass the Liberals' support in that province.
Still, for all he has accomplished, we cannot say with confidence that Mr. Harper is the man to take the Conservatives to power. With all the Liberals' troubles, the Conservatives should be far ahead of the ruling party in the polls. They are not, and have not been, even at the height of the Gomery commission's revelations.
The problem lies not, as Red Tories would have us believe, with the party's socially conservative roots, or its alleged failure to create a "big tent." Mr. Harper has moderated the party's stance on the most contentious issues. Indeed, as his feeble postures on health care, missile defence and the Iraq war demonstrate, his party is, if anything, too similar to the Liberals.
Rather, we imagine the trouble lies with how the message is being delivered. Mr. Harper is a glum, moody figure who has shown little enthusiasm for the rituals of mass-media politics and for the simple glad-handing expected of party chiefs. And instead of hiring communications staff who make up for these weaknesses, he has hired glum, clannish people who reinforce them.
Mr. Harper should think long and hard this summer about how badly he wants his job. Is he prepared, or even able, to do the things necessary to win at retail politics? If the answer is yes, Mr. Harper should return this fall a man transformed. If it is no, then he should consider bowing out.

© National Post 2005

michael mccafferty comments:

The National Post is dead wrong ! I have been involved in Canadian politics for 40 years and have seen leaders come ands go. I can say without a doubt that I believe Stephen Harper to be a very remarkable and outstanding Canadian political leader.

Stephen Harper has great integrity. He has a positive conservative vision of Canada. Stephen Harper is well qualified to become Prime Minister of Canada.

Yes, the National Post is dead wrong.