Since Monday's election, Andrew Scheer's continued leadership of the Conservative Party has become an open question. Chantal Hebert writes:
Since election night, Scheer has tried to cast the result as a first step back to federal power for the Conservatives. To listen to him, an electoral rematch would be too imminent for his party to consider a leadership change.
But he is really clutching at straws in the hope of consolidating a potentially untenable leadership position.
Scheer’s days as leader may be numbered, but a change at the top will not alone fix the Conservatives’ post-election woes.
It is the Conservative Party itself that is in trouble -- mainly because it has been enthralled by William F. Buckley's definition of a conservative as someone who "stands athwart history yelling stop." That definition is driving politics in Alberta and Saskatchewan. Jason Kenny and Scott Moe believe they are in a life and death struggle. But each man refuses to recognize an inconvenient truth. Energy no longer has to come from out of the ground. And they refuse to recognize the multi-party consensus that has developed in the rest of Canada:
On Scheer’s watch, the Conservatives have deliberately broken away from what has evolved into a multi-party consensus.
The party’s base in the Prairies has come to equate the drive to more seriously address climate change with an existential threat to their region’s aspirations.
Scheer and his provincial allies have fostered that perception every step of the way. That stands to come back to bite the federal party.
If the Conservatives are to expand their narrow base, they will have to find a way back to the climate change mainstream.
Scheer said that his first act as prime minister would have been to scrap the carbon tax. It was simply the wrong message. And the majority of Canadians didn't buy it. Doug Ford says he will continue to fight the carbon tax in court. He still hasn't figured out why he's booed at public events. And Scheer hasn't figured out why he lost the election.
Image: CTV News
10 comments:
I read the column this morning, Owen, and Hebert is spot-on. However, I think it will be a long time efore the current incarnation of the Conservatives take the lesson to heart.
Back when the party still had "progressive" in its name, it also went beyond "standing athwart history yelling stop." Mulroney opposed apartheid, something neither Thatcher nor Reagan was willing to do. He brought in environmental legislation and fought for a ban on CFGs. To be sure, his championing of the ideas of Hayek and Friedman was a bad thing, but at the time, these ideas were new and innovative.
Today's Cons are entirely reactionary and the epitome of Buckley's definition. They have blind and unwarranted faith in "free markets" despite the fact that these have never existed beyond theoretical economic models. They propose tax cuts and deregulation as solutions to any and all problems. A significant portion of the party wants a Christian theocracy to turn back 50 years of women's and LGBT rights. In short, the Cons have become a GOP branch-plant, completely detached from reality. To predict the Con future, look to the GOP present.
Cap
Small victory indeed, but some cause for hope in the fact that, finally, the environment seems to have swung an election.
The central problem that the party faces, Lorne, is that they are focused on the past. When the ditched the word "Progressive," they stopped looking to the future.
Precisely, Cap. The Conservatives are GOP wannabes. And there is vivid proof these days of what happens to a party when it dedicates itself to that right wing agenda.
It remains to be seen, Brian, whether we will deal with the crisis. But, at least, the environment is now at the top of the agenda.
Nikiforuk's latest column in The Tyee puts paid to the idea that the environment is now the top priority. When Team Trudeau breaks ground for the new, expanded TMX that myth will be shattered. Nikiforuk points out that a good many Liberals and New Dems have bought the absurd notion that you can build pipelines, ramp up production and export of bitumen while fighting climate change at the same time. We remain committed to the pursuit of perpetual exponential growth when we need to retreat. It's not that most of us aren't well intentioned. As our mother's told us, the Road to Hell... The majority may be turning green, or a bit greenish, but they're still willing to follow leaders for whom the climate crisis is a political matter, not a scientific challenge. The Tories are unquestionably an order of magnitude worse than the Libs and New Dems but we can't overlook the narrative those two parties are spinning because it ensures we'll fail.
I've read Nikiforuk's piece, Mound. His central thesis -- that all the parties are blowing smoke -- is pretty solid. I'm probably too optimistic; but it seems to me that people -- particularly the young -- are beginning to make their mark.
If they continue their campaign, the powers that be may be pushed to go where, so far, they have refused to go.
.. in my opinion
We need to see 'Green Indy' candidates elected.. that's right.. not a Party yet getting traction and attention for local (riding level) or localized, regional issues. They can soon assume the 'balance of power' .. Will think on this..
We need MP's who are Green at their roots -- regardless of their party, sal.
Post a Comment