A funny thing happened amid all the turmoil of the June G20 Summit in Toronto’s financial district. Although most of the local media was preoccupied with what was going on outside the security zone, foreign journalists were paying a lot of attention to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

The lead summit story in the Sunday New York Times dealt with how Harper had persuaded the 20 industrialized countries to go along with a commitment to cut government deficits in half by 2013. At the same time, U.S. President Barack Obama was pushing for continued economic stimulus.

The New York Times didn’t say so explicitly, but there was the clear implication that Harper was able to get the upper hand in the summit meetings while Obama was forced to make a strategic retreat as gracefully as he could. As for the public demonstrations and violence, the newspaper mentioned them only in passing.

That may have been the first time in U.S. presidential coverage that an American commander-in-chief has been seen by American journalists as a subordinate player to a Canadian prime minister — or to any other foreign leader, for that matter.

Had it not been for the shocking street scenes going on outside the summit, the communications strategists and spin doctors in the Prime Minister’s Office might have been high-fiving each other in celebration. The fact that the New York Times would give that kind of prominence to a Canadian prime minister probably would have been a story in and of itself for our media.

But all of that was not to be. As the Toronto Star noted: “Arrests, tear gas outweigh glory.”

Indeed, most of what Harper has been able to accomplish since the last federal election has been outweighed by some sort of distraction — be it a fake summit lake four blocks north of one of the largest lakes in the world or a silly decision to interfere with a national census system that had seemed to have been working just fine.

Harper can rightfully claim to be an able manager of the economy since the last election, considering that Canada has been able to navigate its way through a worldwide recession while continuing to have relatively low business taxes. As well, a national securities regulator is finally taking shape and this country has since become the darling of Wall Street.

Thus, Harper should be headed for a parliamentary majority this autumn on these perceived strengths alone.

As for managing political optics, however, it is a different story. Harper has a reckless streak and a heavy-handedness that is costing him. Although Harper’s well-publicized dislike of dissent is keeping many critics quiet — particularly in the business community — it may be repelling praise as well. Considering the economic issues of the day, large business groups such as the Chief Executive’s Council have had remarkably little to say publicly one way or another about this Conservative government.

You would be hard pressed to find a period in Ottawa in living memory when the business community has been so quiet. This is a silence that speaks volumes.

Although the Tories have maintained a steady lead over the Liberals in public opinion polls for almost a year, there has been serious deterioration in Harper’s personal numbers. Canadians don’t seem to like him much — even though they may think he is the better choice for prime minister.

A poll by Angus Reid in mid-July indicated that 48% of Canadians disapprove of Harper’s performance, as opposed to the 31% who approve of it. Secretiveness, arrogance, lack of caring and being out of touch were among the complaints lodged against him.

The prime minister’s trump card is, of course, the fact that the other guy — Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff — is doing worse in the personal approval numbers, which is why the Tories maintain a steady lead over the Liberals.

It is truly ironic that a government so obsessed with staying “on message” would allow so many needless controversies to cloud a very respectable track record.

There is an adage among political professionals that although polls may not matter, trends in polls do. Well, the current trend in polls is that they are trendless.

One week, the Tories are ahead of the Liberals by 11 percentage points. Then, little over a week later, another poll indicates the Tories’ lead over the Grits has shrunk to just two percentage points.

Whether this is the result of a volatile electorate or ambivalence about all politicians in general may be hard to determine. Certainly, the polls’ lack of a clear trend explains why no party is eager for an election this autumn.

There would be no guarantee that the Tories would win another election right now. Then again, the Liberals can’t seem to generate much momentum with the New Democratic Party nipping at their heels.

There must be more than a few Liberals and Tories quietly wondering what the standings would be like if one of the major parties suddenly got a new leader who could catch people’s imaginations.

In a business in which a week is a long time, the leaders of both major parties still have an opportunity to turn around their numbers in the polls.

IE