Harper’s legacy

It will be interesting to see how much of the pre-Harper Canada returns if the Conservatives’ hold on power ends after this year’s election. But one thing looks very clear: the game of power and influence inside the Ottawa bubble will never go back to what it was pre-Harper.

Before Harper, Canadian federal policy and legislation were governed by what was known as “the policy elite.” While Washington, D.C., was the place for open warfare, Ottawa was considered the place for quiet and diplomatic consensus building.

Today, literally everything is run through the Prime Minister’s Office, or simply “the Centre,” as it is known.

The former policy elite consisted of think-tanks, leading associations, academics, prominent civil servants, senators, members of Parliament who chaired prominent Commons committees, corporate directors, Rockcliffe A-listers, bankers and even a few journalists and authors, such as John Ralston Saul or Roch Carrier.

Members of the elite often were seated next to civil servants on government advisory committees. Governments used to circulate draft legislation to members of the policy elite or invite them to closed-door briefings because what they thought mattered.

MPs who chaired standing committees, such as for finance or health, had more prominence in Ottawa than most cabinet ministers did. The Senate often was used like a sort of unofficial royal commission to examine policy questions and issue thick reports to be read by a select audience.

In return for access to power, members of the policy elite never criticized the government publicly. Disagreements were dealt with quietly, either in a minister’s office or in a quiet corner at the Rideau Club. The policy elite probably grew to this kind of prominence because the Liberals were in power for most of the 20th century as Canada’s so-called “natural governing party.”

All that stopped soon after Stephen Harper was sworn in as prime minister. The Harper government picks and chooses which association or which expert from which to take advice. The Harper government views associations and other stakeholders as conduits to help get the word out on the benefits of legislation and for public support of federal policy. Organizations that don’t play along get their funding cut or don’t get their calls returned.

A case in point is the government-funded National Round Table on the Environment and the Economy, chaired by David McLaughlin, former chief of staff to the late finance minister, Jim Flaherty. As former Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird bluntly told the House of Commons, the roundtable wasn’t in sync with government policy. So, the organization was eliminated.

There were advantages and disadvantages to the policy elite system.

The elite too often were fixated on things that mattered to Ottawa. That’s why the country’s infrastructure was allowed to fall into disrepair and rural communities have had to wait so long for high-speed Internet service. Ordinary consumers didn’t figure into Ottawa discussions as much as they should have. Harper saw this and wasted no time in dealing with it.

On the other hand, the Harper government almost put credit unions out of business with some poorly drafted legislation. Legislation has had to be called back from the Senate because of accidents in the Commons.

The advantage of having friends is that they will tell you when something is wrong.

The current government doesn’t seem to care much about single mothers, health care and problems facing cities because it is preoccupied with keeping its base among well-off voters happy by using a Republican-style permanent election campaign.

One of the reasons that winning a majority will be difficult for the Conservatives is that they haven’t been able to expand their base. Some prominent friends could have helped them to do that.

© 2015 Investment Executive. All rights reserved.