In the last days of this autumn’s election we saw a sudden shift by the Harper government in style that has continued so far in the early days of its second mandate, or Harper II.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper seemed flummoxed and perhaps a bit insensitive when he virtually dismissed the collapse of Wall Street as a good time to buy stocks. It was a flip remark that cost him in the polls.

But by the end of the final week of the campaign, both Harper and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty looked very much like they cared and were taking charge by announcing support for the banks.

In the Nov. 19 Throne Speech, Harper II was so conciliatory one might think Gandhi was suddenly in charge. The government invited the Opposition’s help in program spending review and even reached out to the U.S. and Europe to work on cap and trade systems. Yes, these are the same people who hated cap and trade last year, and wouldn’t have given the Opposition the time of day.

On tough economic questions like bailing out the auto industry, the second Harper government has been showing an issue management style that is quite different from Harper I.

Harper I would have kept this issue close to the vest before announcing a decision one way or the other that was bound to anger somebody. Harper II has been handling the auto issue much like the Liberals would have. (That would be help for the auto industry if necessary but not necessarily the help the industry is looking for.)

Harper II seems to be encouraging debate on the auto issue with ministers like Industry Minister Tony Clement speaking freely so that the voters will do some soul searching instead of encouraging a sudden, visceral reaction. Perhaps the change in style is due to limited fiscal maneuverability. The government has had to prepare the public for a coming deficit.

In the cabinet shuffle, the styles of Harper I and Harper II could not have been more different. When the last government swore in its first cabinet, it’s hard to imagine things being more controversial because of Jim Emerson crossing the floor and the appointment of party bagman Michael Fortier to the Senate so that he could sit in cabinet as public works minister.

This time, there was far more care about optics, with a larger cabinet designed to please more people. The result has been that the cabinet shuffle became old news quickly and disappeared from media coverage quickly, whereas the first cabinet selection was public controversy for weeks, and in B.C. for months.

Another example of new optics savvy is the health portfolio. Traditionally the Tories have not done well on health issues, while the Liberals have been feasting on them.

This is why Tony Clement, a former Ontario health minister, was careful to distance himself from wait times, electronic health records and doctor shortages in favour of bread-and-butter consumer issues like product labeling or regulation of natural health products.

The new health minister, Leona Aglukkag, former health minister of Nunavut, is raising everybody’s expectations that the tough health issues will be addressed this time. Whether she is able or willing is immaterial. Those are the expectations. This is why she is the minister to be endorsed by the Liberals.

Ultimately, Ottawa will wind up doing what Washington does on the auto bailout and a cap and trade system. But an environmental initiative proposed to the new Obama administration looks nice in your store window.

Clearly, this government has decided to ditch the Mike Harris school of belligerence for something closer to the Liberals’ style of talking left, governing right. Or as Mario Cuomo used to say, one campaigns in poetry but governs in prose.

Why the epiphany?

Perhaps the Tories have done an inventory on the things that kept it from a majority on Oct. 14. The irony is that Stephen Harper has proven once and for all that an election can be won in a hostile media environment. Ottawa media analyst Larry Welsh of Lifeline Communications Group Inc. has concluded in an interesting case study that the Liberals won the war for favourable coverage hands down.

It will be interesting to see how optic savvy this government remains in the coming months because there are some tough challenges ahead.

@page_break@Flaherty is on record as promising a corporate tax rate of 25% by 2012. Historically, deficits, like income tax, haven’t been very temporary. Will Flaherty be able to stay on top of a declining economy while thinking strategically enough for Canada to take best advantage of the recovery, when it does come?

Now that they will be running the White House, will the Democrats try to revive reimportation of prescription drugs from Canada, especially since Obama’s chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, was a leading proponent in Congress?

If that happens, consider Aglukkag’s agenda hijacked.

Whether the Tories succeed in becoming Canada’s natural governing party, it is clear they now are acting like the existing one. IE