CANADA FOCUS A VOTE FOR CANADIAN EQUILIBRIUM. Christopher Sands

Transcription

1 Page 1 CANADA FOCUS Volume 1, Issue 2 September 2000 A VOTE FOR CANADIAN EQUILIBRIUM Christopher Sands OVERVIEW Two recent by-elections and a deal to increase federal funding for Canadian health care signal the real beginning of the next Canadian general election campaign a vote likely to take place next spring (2001). The coming election has the potential to shape Canadian politics for a decade or more, even though the Liberals remain heavily favored. All five major parties Liberals, Alliance, Bloc Québécois, New Democratic Party (NDP), and Progressive Conservatives hope to gain in this election, but the strategy chosen by the Liberals (to run to the left, or hew to the center) will largely determine the others prospects. Three scenarios encompass, in the broadest sense, the potential outcomes of the next election: a shift to the left, a shift to the right, or a return to partisan equilibrium. The return to a stable equilibrium in which the Liberal Party occupies the center-left and the Alliance moves to the center-right is the most likely scenario and would be healthy for Canadian good governance. Election on the Horizon On September 11, the long preelection period ended, and the next Canadian parliamentary election campaign season began. No, you didn t miss the writ the election has not yet been called, and Prime Minister Jean Chrétien s government is only beginning the fourth year of its five-year term. But Canadian general elections have a number of features that make them easy to see as they come up on the horizon. First, despite the five-year mandate won by each governing majority in Parliament, prime ministers who can call elections when they choose (unless their governments are defeated in no-confidence votes, which is rare in Canada) usually do not wait to call elections in the fifth year. Doing so would be risky if the government s popularity took an unexpected nosedive, because the government would be forced to call an election when its fortunes were grim. Instead, most prime ministers begin testing the waters for an election in year three, laying the groundwork for an election call in the fourth year of the mandate with policy announcements designed to bolster the ruling party s popularity. The Chrétien government was elected on June 2, 1997; thus it spent the latter half of 1999 and all of this year doing just that.

2 Page 2 Second, Canadian conventional wisdom holds that there are only two seasons appropriate for a general election: spring and fall. Canada s legendary winters would make an election then hazardous to public safety, particularly in rural areas and for the elderly. The all-too-brief summers, meanwhile, are spent at the cottage by the lake or camping in a national park. Canadians tune out the media, enjoy a break from political news, and are far from their neighborhood polling places. The prime minister who drags them back to vote can hardly expect their gratitude. Third, and most important, Canada s general election campaigns are now just 36 days long, from the issue of the writ (officially ordering the election) to the actual vote. In this presidential election year, many Americans would look enviously at such a short election season, and Canadians clearly hoped to spare themselves the long barrage of rhetoric and attack ads by adopting this timetable. But the effect of such a short campaign period is that a party that is unprepared when the election is called is doomed, particularly because the incumbent party presumably called the election when its poll numbers were favorable. Fundraising, candidate recruitment and selection, platform drafting, advertising and campaign material preparation all these tasks have to be under way well before the actual election call. As a result, the parties are on an election footing from the third year of the government s mandate. Off and Running This accounts for the frenzy of activity in the past year, as the opposition parties hammered the Chrétien government on a number of scandals and charges of mismanagement to forestall an election call and, at the same time, made sure that they were ready when it did come. The leading opposition party, the Reform Party, even voted to disband and form a new party, the Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance (generally referred to as the Alliance), in an attempt to repackage its conservative program to win wider popular support (as well as to win over members of the near-dead Progressive Conservative Party, its rival on the right). On September 11, Canada held two by-elections elections to fill seats rendered vacant by a resignation or death. In these two cases, the Member of Parliament (MP) who held the seat resigned to allow his party leader to win a safe seat in the House of Commons. Stockwell Day, the former treasurer in the Progressive Conservative government of the Province of Alberta, was selected as leader of the new Alliance in June and ran in the British Columbia riding (Canada s term for a constituency or district) of Okanagan-Coquihalla. Joe Clark, a former prime minister ( ) who came out of retirement to lead the ailing Progressive Conservative Party in 1998, chose to run, not in his native Alberta, but in the Kings-Hants riding in rural Nova Scotia. Both men won easily and will take their places in the House of Commons when it resumes sitting in October. Where in the United States, candidates seek to appear presidential, in Canada, prospective prime ministers seek credibility by performing in parliamentary debate, particularly in the regular question period that gives party leaders the chance to face off on the issues before a national audience. An even more telling sign that the election season has begun was Prime Minister Chrétien s announcement on September 10 that he had reached an agreement with the provinces to spend an additional $21 billion (Canadian dollars) on health care restoring funding cuts made by his government earlier in its mandate in order to achieve balanced budgets. Polls for more than a year have shown that Canadians number one concern is the state of the health care system; thus the announcement of major new funding is certain to be well received. Moves such as this by the government will energize the pre-campaign activity of the opposition parties. With the fall 2000 window for an election closing rapidly, a general election in spring 2001 is nearly certain.

3 Page 3 Five Parties, Five Strategies Canada has five main political parties that hold 12 or more seats in the House of Commons (the minimum necessary for official party status in Parliament). Each approaches the next election with its own strategy, based on its hopes and fears, for the campaign ahead. The Liberal Party of Canada, led by current prime minister Jean Chrétien, has formed the government since It has had the good fortune to be in power while the economy improved year after year, reducing unemployment, boosting tax revenues, and leading the OECD countries in economic growth for most of those years. The government has been more than a bystander during these good times it has balanced the federal budget, adopted the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Uruguay Round agreement, and worked hard to promote Canadian trade. But, just as many voters in the United States give credit for economic prosperity to market forces (including themselves) rather than to government, in Canada many voters believe that the U.S. economy deserves more credit for the turnaround in Canada s economic prospects than do Chrétien and the Liberals. In fact, many blame the Liberals for the brain drain of talented young people to the United States, for the high taxes that help drive them away, and for the cutbacks to health care and other social programs that have measurably worsened the quality of life in Canada. Chrétien himself is also an issue. At 67, he is the oldest of the current party leaders and has been a member of Parliament almost continuously since He is a tough political street fighter whose acerbic comments about his opponents and his own party caucus have often rankled the public. Many thought he was too complacent about national unity when the 1995 Quebec referendum came within a percentage point of starting the process of Quebec secession but his scorched-earth campaign with tough, new legislation to deny the separatists as easy a time in the future has won praise. In recent years, he has faced several behind-the-scenes challenges to his leadership within the party, with his finance minister, Paul Martin, the favorite to replace him. Although Martin is 62, he is seen by many as more in touch with the new economy and the challenges of government in the twenty-first century. To win, the Liberals must unite behind a leader Chrétien unless he steps aside and demonstrate that they have not become arrogant or complacent after so long in power. Chrétien, himself, hints that the next Liberal campaign will focus on social policy and that he will lead the party to the center-left with promises that the fiscal surplus will be spent to strengthen health care, education, and regional economic development in parts of the country that have not enjoyed the current boom, such as rural areas in Atlantic Canada. The Alliance, led by Stockwell Day, has generated a great deal of positive momentum from its organizing convention in January, to its leadership race (which culminated in Day s victory in July), to Day s by-election victory this month. Throughout this period, senior members of the Progressive Conservative Party have been announcing their defections to the new Alliance, reinforcing the new party s image as the main conservative opposition party and the only party capable of mounting a credible challenge to the Liberals. To make good on this potential, the Alliance must win seats in Ontario in the next election. Already, it has made inroads with Ontario voters, who supported Progressive Conservative provincial governments led by Premier Mike Harris in the past two provincial elections. And the Alliance scored an important coup when it recruited federal MP Jim Jones, who was kicked out of the Progressive Conservative Party for suggesting that he might seek the nomination of both his party and the Alliance in his riding in the next election. Much of the conservative platform of the Alliance would qualify as moderate in American politics, where tax cuts and social program reform are mainstream issues. But in Canada, Day s Alliance

4 Page 4 is a radical departure from the norm, and the party will be criticized as offering American-style solutions to Canadian problems (not a compliment in Canada). This will be particularly true on social issues. Day is a former Pentecostal minister who speaks publicly about his faith and does not shy away from expressing his religious beliefs concerning the immorality of certain behavior, from homosexuality to abortion. While religion and politics have become fashionably intertwined in the current U.S. presidential race, Canadians have historically had far fewer references to the Almighty in public life, and evangelical Christians are far rarer in Canada, where most Christians remain Anglican, Methodist, or Roman Catholic. Perhaps the most difficult issue for the Alliance will be health care reform. As Alberta s treasurer, Day is on record supporting the province s attempt to improve the level of health care services by permitting private health care providers to operate outside the government-run system. This proposal, known as Bill 11, has become controversial across Canada; many pundits have declaimed it as the beginning of the end of Canada s noble public health care experiment. Day will be forced to defend this reform in parts of the country where it is known only by the caricature painted by critics and, at the same time, will need to rebut charges by the Liberals that there is nothing wrong with Canadian heath care that more money cannot fix and Day cannot spend more money on health care and keep his promise of a tax cut for Canadians. If these arguments seem familiar, it is because the Americanization of Canadian politics did not begin with the Alliance. The Bloc Québécois, led by Gilles Duceppe, is in many ways a fading force. The party was formed by Lucien Bouchard, who had been a Progressive Conservative MP from Quebec and a member of Cabinet in the government of Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, until the failure of Mulroney s constitutional reform program prompted him to resign from the government in protest. Bouchard assembled a group of similarly discontented MPs from Quebec to form a pro-separatist caucus in the House of Commons that won seats in subsequent elections and was even, during the first Chrétien government (from 1993 to 1997), the largest party in opposition (making Bouchard, an avowed separatist, leader of the Loyal Opposition ). Following the 1995 Quebec independence referendum, Bouchard moved to Quebec City to become the provincial premier, and the Bloc Québécois has been in decline ever since with lackluster leadership that has not been able to effectively answer the question of what secessionists will accomplish in the federal parliament. Bouchard, whose charisma and effectiveness as a speaker are substantial, was able to gloss over this question more effectively than his hapless successors. Still, Chrétien is not very popular in his home province, and the Bloc may be able to win seats from voters who blame Ottawa, in part, for the poor economic performance of the provincial economy in recent years. The New Democratic Party, led by Alexa McDonough, is Canada s social democratic conscience party. While it has governed provinces and cities, it has never formed the federal government. This has done little to diminish the party s support among Canadians who want a progressive alternative expressed in national politics. The party has historically contributed important ideas, such as on public health care and pensions, that were subsequently co-opted by parties in power. The Chrétien governments have hewn to the center-right in attempting to control spending, and this has left room on the left for the NDP to increase its support beyond its base of union members, public-sector employees, activists, and university professors. With social programs likely to be central to the coming election campaign, the NDP will stake out important ground in the debate over how to heal and safeguard these popular programs. The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada, led by former prime minister Joe Clark, limps into this election with one objective: survival. The party that produced Canada s first prime minister, and the only party other than the Liberals ever to form a federal government, is now a shadow of its former self. Canadians reduced the party to just two seats in the House of Commons in the

5 1993 election that followed Mulroney s retirement from politics, and the party has never fully recovered. In each subsequent election, the Progressive Conservatives have predicted a comeback, but have been able to make only modest gains. With just three seats more than the minimum needed to remain a recognized party in the House of Commons, the gain of even a handful of seats would be welcomed by Clark. Three Scenarios Considering the objectives of the parties and the near certainty of an election in the spring of 2001, it is possible at this point to suggest three likely election scenarios based on possible outcomes: a shift to the left, a shift to the right, or a return to a stable equilibrium. Because all three are possible, if not equally probable, the next Canadian general election will be pivotal in establishing the direction of Canadian politics for a decade or more. Page 5 Scenario 1: Shift to the Left. Chrétien chooses to lead his party back to the center-left ground that it occupied under prime ministers Pierre Trudeau and Lester Pearson, promising to spend the surplus on social programs old and new. The NDP, energized by the support of anti-globalization activists (a significant and well-organized force in Canada), builds on its strength in western and Atlantic Canada and regains seats it once held in Ontario. The Bloc, charging that Chrétien is merely the arsonist helping to put out the fire caused by his own party s social program cuts, also accuses the Liberals of trying to insert the federal government further into areas of provincial jurisdiction, deliberately weakening Quebec s mastery of its own house. Meanwhile, the Alliance is undermined by fighting within its ranks between Reform Party members and new converts to the Alliance, while Day is placed on the defensive over his socially conservative views and American-style policy proposals. The Progressive Conservatives make few if any gains, but draw enough support in Ontario to cause vote splitting on the right between its candidates and those of the Alliance, helping the Liberals (and, in a few cases, the NDP) to win seats there. The result is a House of Commons to the left of the current membership, with a Liberal government committed to a socially progressive agenda. Having failed to deliver a knock-out blow to the Progressive Conservatives, the value of the Alliance is questioned by some of its own members, raising the possibility of a leadership review challenging Day. Facing the prospect of another term as the rump party in the House, Clark may resign in favor of a younger and more dynamic leader, perhaps paving the way for a rapprochement with the Alliance. Scenario 2: Shift to the Right. Momentum for the Alliance builds so that, by the time the election is called, Chrétien has given up any hope of leading the Liberals to the left. Instead, the Liberals promote themselves as the party of balanced budgets and free trade and work to hold on to the 101 of 103 seats currently in their possession in Ontario (of only 159 held by the Liberals Canada-wide). The Alliance fights hard to gain ground in Ontario, and does indeed break through in as many as 40 ridings. The Liberals, however, as insurance against losses in Ontario, run all out to pick up seats in Quebec where Liberals tend to be more conservative than in Ontario further reinforcing the party s overall shift to the right. The Progressive Conservatives rally in Atlantic Canada, capitalizing on the rightward shift of the Liberals (not likely to be popular with Maritimers) and anti-incumbency sentiment in a region where the Alliance has no roots. The Bloc continues its slide to obscurity, punished somewhat unfairly by voters for the Bouchard government s economic policies. It hangs on to some of its seats but is isolated in the subsequent House of Commons. The NDP benefits in overall voter support as the only progressive alternative outside Quebec, but makes modest or no gains, possibly even losing one or two seats. Scenario 3: Return to Equilibrium. For most of Canada s history, national politics has been dominated by two centrist parties that alternated in power: on the center-right, the Conservative Party (later the Progressive Conservative Party), and on the center-left, the Liberal Party. The Liberals moved toward the center-right when necessary to retain power (and when allowed to by the electorate), demonstrating the enduring centrism of Canadian political tastes. In this scenario, Chrétien leads his party to the center-left, where he is personally most comfortable. By keeping

6 Page 6 the Alliance on the defensive and winning seats in Quebec, the Liberals are able to remain in power. The Alliance, however, is able to move during the course of the campaign from its base on the right to occupy the center-right ground abandoned by the Liberals (to the inevitable chagrin of Martin, the finance minister, who leads the Liberal s more conservative wing). This allows the Alliance to become a credible centrist alternative to the Liberals and vastly improves the party s position in the public s eyes, in the eyes of party fundraisers, and in the reporting of the news media, thus significantly realigning Canadian politics. The remaining parties become marginal players in Parliament, but do not disappear. The NDP remains a conscience party on the left, the Bloc becomes a conscience party for Quebec separatists, and the Progressive Conservatives become a protest party for Atlantic Canada sadly increasing the marginalization of this region in Canadian political life. Canadian Equilibrium? These three scenarios do not capture all the possible outcomes of the next Canadian election by any means. Between now and the actual vote, unforeseen issues, scandals, and other variables will emerge to shape the real outcome in ways impossible to predict this far in advance. The reason for considering these scenarios is to begin to cluster the possible outcomes in order to anticipate the implications of the coming vote. The least likely scenario, in my view, is the shift to the left. Canada is constrained by its close relationship with the United States and pays a heavy price for its higher tax rates and lessefficient public sector compared with its neighbor. Many Canadians do appreciate compassionate, progressive rhetoric, but, in the largest provinces (Ontario, Quebec, British Columbia, and Alberta), the risk of widening the gap between U.S. and Canadian economic policies, particularly when it comes to taxes, will not seem practical. The Liberals, above all a very pragmatic party, will sense this and moderate their campaign rhetoric accordingly. The NDP may surge, but it is too weak organizationally to make major gains. The Bloc has shown no signs of revival since Bouchard left Ottawa for Quebec City, and the separatist option had the support of only a third of Quebec voters in recent polls. The momentum of the Alliance, and recent defections of Ontario Progressive Conservatives who now support the Alliance federally, makes vote-splitting in Ontario less likely, and in such a large province with expensive media markets like Toronto, Hamilton (which overlaps with the Buffalo market), and Windsor (which overlaps with the Detroit market), it will be hard for the cash-strapped Progressive Conservatives to mount a competitive challenge to the Alliance, let alone the Liberals. The second scenario, involving a shift to the right, is therefore more likely. But the Canadian distaste for U.S.-style Christian conservatism will turn many voters against Day and the Alliance, some out of devout secularism and others out of unfortunate religious bigotry. This will place a cap on the ability of Day to lead the Alliance to a larger majority in his first national campaign, when he will still be relatively unknown and therefore more easily caricatured by his opponents. The NDP core vote is strong enough to hold its own in this scenario, particularly as it gains support from voters disappointed by the more centrist Liberals. A Liberal campaign on the centerright would prepare the party for Martin to take over when Chrétien retires, which could come soon after the next election, and the prospect of the popular Martin as Liberal leader and prime minister would win the Liberals support in Quebec (from voters who dislike Chrétien) and elsewhere (from voters who are moderates or conservatives but are nervous about the new Alliance). Martin s shadow would be bad news for the Bloc and could prevent it from realizing major gains in this election. But this scenario provides the best news for the Progressive Conservatives, who could gain in Atlantic Canada as disaffected Liberals swing over to support their candidates. Although Atlantic Canada, as a regional stronghold of Progressive Conservative support, is hardly the national party restoration that Clark is hoping for, it is still in my view his best chance for survival in the next election.

7 Page 7 Yet, the most likely scenario is the third one, in which Canadian political parties realign to a traditional position of equilibrium. Such a realignment, if it occurs, would bring to a close the period of instability that followed the collapse of Progressive Conservative Party support in the 1993 election. Since then, with four parties squabbling with one another in opposition, the Liberals have seemed confident of governing forever none of the opposition parties seemed to have the strength to form a government or to challenge the Liberals in their Ontario political base. This situation has been unhealthy for Canadian democracy overall and, ironically, for the Liberals themselves. Without a credible challenger, the Liberals have been a bit too comfortable in government. The best Liberal governments in Canada have always had to compete for support, which has forced them to innovate in policy and become highly responsive to voter concerns. Under Chrétien, decisionmaking has been consolidated in the Office of the Prime Minister, and the only competing power center has been Martin, in Finance. The Alliance is a new party with a new leader, and so it would be a stunning upset for Day, in his first attempt, to lead them to form the next government. In fact, in all three scenarios described above, the Liberals are likely to form the next government. Yet, the Liberals have provided an opening for the Alliance through the smug, highly centralized management of the economy and the business of government that has developed under Chrétien. Canada s constitution does not hold out the aspiration to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for Canadians. Tellingly, it promises only peace, order, and good government. The Canadian election of 2001 may mark an important step toward good government if it does indeed restore an equilibrium among Canadian parties that includes a party to govern and a credible opposition that allows for parties to alternate in power. About the Author Christopher Sands is a fellow and director of the Canada Project in the Americas Program at CSIS. He has recently returned to CSIS after spending the academic year as William J. Fulbright visiting fellow at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University in Ottawa.