OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper, intent on shaping the ballot box question for the next election, is adopting a strategy to gradually persuade voters they have a "stark choice" in the next campaign: a "stable" majority Conservative government, or a "coalition" government of Liberals, New Democrats and Quebec separatists.
The theme has emerged in recent speeches to the party faithful, and Mr. Harper is expected to ramp up the message as Parliament resumes later this month.
But why has Mr. Harper decided to directly ask for a majority after avoiding the word in past years? And why will he try to convince Canadians that his political rivals are bound to form a coalition?
Experts say the answer is simple.
"It's called framing the ballot question," University of Calgary political scientist Tom Flanagan said in an interview Tuesday. "I'm sure that's what he's doing."
Mr. Flanagan, a former Harper aide who managed his campaigns, said Harper's appeal for a majority is a clear shift in strategy and could carry a political risk. In the 2004 election, when Mr. Harper broached the subject of getting a majority, the Liberals insisted he would pursue a "hidden agenda" with such unchallenged power and his popularity dropped. Mr. Harper stayed away from talk of a majority in the 2006 and 2008 campaigns that delivered him a minority government.
"Any time you change strategies it's a gamble because you don't know if it will work," said Mr. Flanagan.
"He has had success ... saying he'd be happy to accept whatever the voters give him. So the gamble is that after four years of being in power Canadians would be more open to considering a majority government. It's kind of like you've been on probation for four years. It's a gamble. There's no question about it."
At the same time, it appears the Conservatives believe they are on strong footing as they try to persuade Canadians a vote for the Liberals is actually a vote for a coalition. They remember how support for Harper's Tories spiked to unprecedented levels in December 2008 when the Liberals and NDP attempted to form a coalition government with the parliamentary support of the Bloc Quebecois.
"You've got to persuade people that you can't take the Liberals at face value." said Mr. Flanagan. "There's a big payoff there. Of course, if you're going to do that, it's smart to start early."
The odds of a fall election appear low, and the next likely time for a campaign would be next spring. In two speeches this month, Mr. Harper began outlining his theme.
On Aug. 17 in Ajax, Ont., the prime minister said the Conservatives aren't seeking an election, but added: "The next election will be a choice between a coalition government of the Liberal, NDP and Bloc Quebecois, or a stable Conservative majority government for this country."
A week later, Mr. Harper delivered the same message in Whitehorse.
"We as Conservatives are not focused on an election," he said. "But, friends, when an election does come, Canadians are going to face a pretty stark choice. The next election will be a choice between a Parliament with a majority made up of a Liberal-NDP-Bloc Quebecois coalition, or it will be a stable majority for our Conservative government."
Pollster Darrell Bricker, president of Ipsos Reid, said on Tuesday that Mr. Harper realizes he has to find a different message than the ones he used in previous campaigns (getting rid of government corruption, managing the agenda well and providing solid leadership."
"Even though the last time he was up against the weakest Liberal leader probably ever (Stephane Dion), he wasn't able to get a majority. So he has to try something different."
The Tories' answer is to convince voters a coalition is in the works. It doesn't matter that Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff reluctantly followed Mr. Dion's lead in the plan to form a coalition in 2008, or that the Liberals now deny they want a merger.
Mr. Bricker said the Tories will be happy merely if Mr. Ignatieff is forced to talk about the issue.
"They want him denying. They want him to engage in that debate, because it's better than talking about the census, or the gun registry or whatever story of the day is. It's smart strategy. These guys, if anything, are smart and ruthless about how they campaign."
Nelson Wiseman, associate professor of political science at the University of Toronto, said Tuesday that he thinks a majority is within Mr. Harper's grasp.
"They know that their best card is playing the coalition. The strategy is to trap the other parties on that hook. You don't have to convince the whole electorate. What you have to do is swing over maybe one out of 20 voters."
Hom
9 comments:
This has been a good be for Ignatieff and the Liberals. Ignatieff sounds more confident now than before the summer. As for attacking the NDP over the long-gun registry. This is a brilliant move for the following reason: it weakens the NDP and helps frame the next election as being a choice between the Conservatives and Liberals. It also negates Harper's assertion that the next election will be a choice between a Conservative majority and a Liberal/NDP/Bloc coalition. If the Liberals are seen fighting against the NDP (and eventually against the Bloc), and if they are seen standing on their own two feet, then the coalition frame is negated.
Should read, "This has been a good week for Ignatieff and the Liberals."
Also, Ignatieff referred to Harper's autocratic style. A possible frame could be a choice between a one-man Harper autocracy and the Liberal team.
I guess the question is, why did the Liberals even think of a coalition with the Bloc and the NDP at the time? If you remember, Ignatief distanced himself from that fiasco as quickly as he could because he knew it was suicide. All major party's take liberty with the truth, but, the LPC may be paying for that blunder for a while. billg
Hi billg,
I do not want to be hogging James's blog. If the Liberals start opposing the Conservatives in the House of Commons en masse and force the NDP to decide on voting for or against the Harper Conservatives, I think fence-sitting voters will forget about the Liberal dithering before the summer.
Also, while Ignatieff reluctantly supported Dion's Liberal/NDP(/Bloc) coalition, again, I don't think voters will care that much if they see a very assertive Michael Ignatieff in the next election campaign. If Ignatieff can spin this as the Liberals wanting to work with all Canadians as opposed to Harper working with himself, this strategy might work for the Liberals.
One more to fill James's page:
Based on the UBC Election Forecaster, if the Liberals can take 20% of the vote from each of the other parties, then they may win 40% of the vote with a majority of the seats.
The whipped vote on the long gun registry will cost the Liberals 8 seats and the NDP 12 seats. That spells Tory majority. We didn't want to do it, but if it takes a Tory majority to get rid of the fascist long gun registry, then thats what we will give them. So long Jack.
It is clearly fair ball to attack the Liberal's on their "hidden agenda". Lord knows the Liberal's have gotten significant mileage out of it.
The big tent Ignatieff is now re-introducing, is one that works, as long as he is able to claw voters from the right. If he can't chip vote off the CPC then the whole thing is open to criticism of the hidden left wing agenda.
The vast majority (i.e. even many NDP voters) do not want an NDP government. If Ignatieff can't find separation with the NDP, he becomes open to a hidden agenda.
Further, he needs to somehow articulate his utter disdain for the BQ in a way that does not alienate new Quebec voters. Without doing this, once again, he slides into "hidden agenda" territory with respect to coalition partnerships.
But those things being said, I think he realizes this and is planning his words much more strategically then he has in the past.
His biggest weapon right now is his lack of fear of an election. He has to convince the public that he will pull the pin on this government. That obviously requires him to keep his powder dry until he is ready to lock and load. Otherwise he just comes across like a nagging fishwife. This little gem is something he may not yet know.
As long as the economy is rocky, he may want to be statesmanlike about all of this... unless the media begins chewing on a money scandal. Then, he can make his move.
counting the days until Harper is out of office. I still can't believe he was ever elected in the first place.
Post a Comment