As the saying goes, six

months is a very long time in politics. And Stephen Harper’s first cabinet is a prime example of that.

Back in February, all of the new ministers saw their swearing-in ceremony as a new beginning. And for most, it was. But for others, it was really the beginning of the end of their political careers.

Let’s get those with declining career prospects out of the way first.

Whatever the Conservatives expected to gain in return for enduring all the controversy about David Emerson’s hopping from one party’s front bench to another, it has not materialized.

Sure, Emerson delivered a treaty to end the softwood lumber dispute with the U.S., but this settlement has turned out to be a poisoned political asset.

When Emerson was a Liberal, he was widely seen as a voice for the future — someone with an accomplished business career who could lead Canada into an era of continuing prosperity.

This fall, the government is expected to announce that Canada’s competitiveness will be a priority file as the House of Commons goes back to work. But it is now apparent that Finance Minister Jim Flaherty will be driving that file — not Emerson.

Environment Minister Rona Ambrose started off well enough, but her 15 minutes of fame is fast running out. She has become an object of ridicule in the media. However, this is not entirely her fault. After all, this government’s policy on the environment is ambiguous and will stay that way until it can articulate to the public an alternative to the Kyoto protocol.

That alternative will be another priority this fall, and it will be interesting to see how much of a role Ambrose will play — even if she continues as environment minister. (In June, Ambrose’s chief of staff was abruptly fired and replaced by an apparatchik from the Prime Minister’s Office — “temporarily,” of course.)

Other losers include most of those who served on the front benches during Harper’s years as Opposition leader. Anyone contemplating giving up a career for the House of Commons should be mindful of former household names such as Monte Solberg, Chuck Strahl or even Peter MacKay, who has not won the stature that most foreign ministers do. The exception to all this is Vic Toews, who has made a good transition from Opposition to justice minister.

Now for the winners.

As expected, former Ontario cabinet minister John Baird has emerged as a major asset after successfully marshalling the Federal Accountability Act through the Commons. Baird is showing signs of having the political instincts of Jean Chrétien, and maybe some of the little guy from Shawinigan’s ruthlessness, too.

With the economy still growing, unemployment low and a well-received federal budget that included a 1% GST cut, it has been an easy ride for Jim Flaherty as the feel-good finance minister. Just the same, Flaherty has been showing signs of strong leadership.

First, there was his trial balloon in support of a national securities regulator. Sure, the provinces — with the exception of Ontario — were quick to shoot this one down, but Flaherty has shown he is willing to put what he believes to be best for the country ahead of sure-win political tactics.

Flaherty has also been busy making productivity an articulate issue that voters will understand, just as Paul Martin was able as finance minister to develop public consent for deficit elimination in the 1990s. So, all signs point to Flaherty emerging as the next powerful force on the government front bench as the Conservatives tackle the competitiveness file.

Two ministers are in a special category — Michael Fortier, the invisible and unelected minister of public works; and Gordon O’Connor, our not-so-cuddly defence minister.

Fortier, a long-time party bagman, was appointed to the Senate and elevated to cabinet as public works minister — to keep the business of government contracts out of the House of Commons and out of the Opposition’s line of fire during question period.

The Conservatives remember from the Mulroney years that a government elected on the ethics issue will have its own morals under a constant microscope. The strategy has worked. Like any government, this one has had its ethical issues. But the Opposition must have a target in question period.

In the defence minister’s case, O’Connor is a hawkish former defence industry lobbyist and looks like one. He is visible and will continue to be as the war in Afghanistan escalates, thereby distancing the prime minister — just in case public support for the war declines significantly.

@page_break@Even though nobody seems to think O’Connor is a good defence minister, he will probably stay in the portfolio as long as Harper needs a buffer.

The wild card is Indian Affairs Minister Jim Prentice. So far, he has looked good in question period. But how he handles growing tensions between the government and the Native community over the next few months will be a major career test. IE