Harperland

Following up on the last post, I think the politics of the Harper government are also interesting. I’ve been reading Harperland by Lawrence Martin and it is quite revealing about the temperament of the government.

Honestly though, the thing that keeps coming back into my mind is something John Ralston Saul said a while back, about how people who are motivated are the ones that drive change. You get the impression that Harper and the Conservatives, are bound and determined to do whatever it takes to implement their agenda. The problem is that our institutions are not designed for someone who doesn’t play nice with the rules.

The normal constraints of behaviour are not being followed, and they are undermining all the checks on executive power that do exist. You can see that it comes from a deep seated hatred for the existing arrangements. It is interesting to watch them undermine institutions and attack their legitimacy.
The scary thing , is that they seem to be getting away with it, and it’s going to be interesting to see what happens in the future, both in terms of whether it ends up hurting them, but also whether some of the constraints are permanently damaged. Will a future government be able to go back to the way things used to be? Will this force a more codified regime to be put into place? I think this may be the answer, as having clear rules can prevent abuses. It may provide an opportunity to do some actual thinking about the mechanics of how our parliament works. One might hope that this might be in the interests of the Conservatives who after all did come in on a “transparency” agenda, but they seem to be so short sighted these days that it’s unlikely.

In some ways it would be good for the Conservatives to have a majority, as it would give them some breathing space, hopefully make them less paranoid, and provide the time the Liberals need to rebuild. The danger is the long term damage the conservatives could do to the country. A recent Walrus article to me highlighted some of the increasing gulf between those who viewed Canada the way the Liberals do and those who see it the way the Conservatives do. [link]

In many ways this reflects the “small” Canada that Jeffrey Simpson wrote about in a recent article. For me it’s highlighted in the fact that you have negotiations with the EU, a block of 27 countries, where Canada brings more people to the table, from each and every nook and cranny of the country than the Europeans.

One thing I would actually like to see if there is a majority is a shake-up of the “machinery of government”. Not too popular, and quite disruptive, I think it could be a moment of confidence building between a Conservative government and the public service. They could rebuild government in a way that suits them, and could provide opportunities for the public service to better respond to their agenda. Particularly on the economic competitiveness side it might be worth rethinking the role of some departments, such as Industry Canada and HRSDC. It could be part of a big redesign, but again it creates turmoil.