Published on Thursday, January 26, 2006 by The Nation  

Don't Cry For Canada  

by John Nichols  
  
After the 2004 presidential election in the United States, a lot of liberal
Americans looked longingly to the north. Canada, the theory went, was a social
democracy with a sane foreign policy and humane values that offered a genuine
alternative to the right-wing hegemony that the U.S. was about to experience. 

But, this week, U.S. television networks and newspapers declared: "Canadians
Tilts Right" and "Conservatives Capture Canada." 

As shorthand for the election results that saw Canada's Conservative party
outpoll the governing Liberal Party for the first time since Ronald Reagan
served in the White House, those headlines may be useful. 

But the claim that Canada has lurched far to the right is anything but accurate.


Of course, that has not stopped conservative spin doctors in Washington, and
their echo chamber in the U.S. media, from announcing that last Monday's
election results from Canada represent a seismic shift to the right for the
North American continent. David Frum, a former speechwriter for President Bush,
was peddling the line that Canadians had rejected "anti-Americanism" --
fostering the lie that the Liberals, who had worked closely with the U.S.
government on issues ranging from the occupation of Afghanistan, in which Canada
is a major player, to free trade, which the Liberals support, was somehow at war
with the U.S. Equally disingenuous was Bob Morrison of the Family Research
Council, a Washington-based group that opposes reproductive freedom and gay
rights, who announced that: "We are glad to see that Canadians have
values-voters too. We can be optimistic about the end of the social engineering
as driven by the (Liberal) government." 

U.S. conservatives, who can point to little in the way of positive political
news from around the world these days, are entitled to their fantasies. But no
thinking American should buy into them. 

As is the case with most right-wing "analysis" coming out of Washington these
days, the truth is a lot more complex than the right-wing spin doctors would
have Americans believe. 

In fact, the Canadian results ought to be read as a warning signal for U.S.
Republicans. 

Here's why: 

* The Canadian election was held early because the Liberal Party government of
Prime Minister Paul Martin had been rocked by a major corruption scandal, which
involved the misuse of public funds to promote the government's position on
issues involving the relationship between the province of Quebec and rest of the
country. All of Canada's major opposition parties ran anti-corruption campaigns,
and the first promise of the Conservatives was not a rightward shift in public
policies, but rather the restoration of honest and accountable government. In
the United States, where corruption scandals have shaken the Republican
leadership in Congress -- forcing indicted House Minority Leader Tom DeLay,
R-Texas, to surrender his position of power -- Canada's vote-the-bums-out
response to government wrongdoing ought to be heartening to progressives who
would like to see a similar response in November to the corrupt practices of
this country's governing party. The results from Canada indicate the power of a
reform message. According to a poll conducted for the Canadian Broadcasting
Corp., 54 percent of Canadians who voted Conservative did so because they
thought it was time for a change, while only 41 percent said they favored
Conservative policies. 
* In order to achieve viability in a country that has repeatedly rejected
social-conservative policies, Conservative leader Stephen Harper radically
restructured the message and the manifesto of his party. He deemphasized issues
such as abortion and gay right, and promised to protect and improve popular
social-welfare programs, including Canada's national health care system. As
Arthur Cockfield, a well-regarded commentator of legal and political issues who
teaches law at Queen's University, noted, "Stephen Harper has moved closer to
the center of the political spectrum to broaden support for his party. With
plans to help working families, promote access to day care, and bolster the
public health-care system... Harper no longer proposes any truly radical
changes, but has signalled that he plans to tackle a number of policy priorities
that could benefit lower- and middle-income Canadians." In the days following
the election, Harper moved quickly to assure Canadians that his Cabinet would
include leading moderates, and that his policy agenda would reflect the promises
he made during the campaign to govern from the middle rather than the right. 

* Harper and the Conservatives kept U.S. conservatives at arms length. Harper
repeatedly emphasized his independence from the Bush administration, and his
differences with the American right, during the course of the campaign. And,
according to reports published in a number of Canadian newspapers, Conservative
activists asked U.S. conservative leaders not to cheer their campaign on. A
headline in the Calgary Sun read: "SSH! U.S. conservatives asked to keep mum." A
pre-election email circulated to conservative activists in the U.S. by
right-wing firebrand Paul Weyrich's Free Congress Foundation warned that,
"Canadian voters have been led to believe that American conservatives are scary
and if the Conservative party can be linked with us, they perhaps can diminish a
Conservative victory." 

* Even with their move to the center, the Conservatives did not win anything
akin to a majority of the popular vote. Infact, the Conservatives won only 36
percent support. Almost two-thirds of Canadians cast their ballots for more
left-wing alternatives. In democracies with proportional representation voting
systems, which better represent the sentiments of the voters, the Conservatives
would not be in a position to form a government. Because Canada, like the U.S.,
maintrains a single-district, "first-past-the-post" voting system, the
Conservatives prevailed over a divided opposition. But Canada has a multi-party
political system at the federal level; the U.S. does not. If only 36 percent of
American voters back conservative Republicans this fall, Democrats will dominate
Congress more thoroughly than they have at any time since the Watergate era and
perhaps since New Deal Days. 

* The Conservatives did not win a governing majority. Of the 308 seats in the
Canadian Parliament, the Conservatives will hold only 124. The remainder will be
held by Liberals, with 103; the social democratic Bloc Quebecois, which is the
dominant party in the province of Quebec, with 51; and the social democratic New
Democrats (NDP), with 29. An independent from Quebec holds the final seat. Thus,
a Conservative government will have to rely on parties of the left to get
anything done. A Toronto Star analysis provides the honest assessment that,
"This precarious situation raises real questions about which of the Conservative
policy priorities... could realistically get through the Commons... That leads
to the bigger question too of how long this government could last and when
another election could be unleashed on the country." 

* Two parties made sighificant gains in Monday's voting: the Conservatives and
the New Democrats. While the Conservatives increased the size of their
parliamentary delegation by around 25 percent, the New Democrats increased the
size of their delegation by more than 33 percent. In fact, for the first time in
years, the New Democrats won more seats in the western province of British
Columbia than the Liberals, and the NDP made significant inroads in urban
centers such as Toronto. Even though they were operating in a political system
that tends to drive voters toward the larger parties, the New Democrats
dramatically improved their position by running as an explicitly anti-war,
anti-corporate free trade and anti-corruption party. NDP leader Jack Layton
explained after the election, in which his party achieved its best showing in
decades, that: "While Canadians asked Stephen Harper to form a minority
government, they also asked the NDP to balance that government."

The bottom line is this: Canadians have chosen to remove a scandal-plagued
government that went by the name of "Liberal." But they only did so because the
"Conservatives" promised not to be too conservative. And they voted in a team of
left-wing watchdogs to assure that those promises are kept. If that gives U.S.
conservatives some small measure of comfort, so be it. But U.S. progressives
need not be traumatized by these results. Indeed, they can look forward to the
day when voters in their country might choose to throw out a scandal-plagued
government that goes by the name "conservative." 

John Nichols began covering Canadian politics in 1984, and has regularly
reported since then on national and provincial elections for U.S. newspapers and
magazines. His articles comparing U.S. and Canadian politics have appeared in a
number of Canadian publications.  

C 2006 The Nation
 http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0126-23.htm









                                   Serbian News Network - SNN

                                        [email protected]

                                    http://www.antic.org/

Reply via email to