Discord in the ranks

by Werner Patels

The famous Québec singer Céline Dion divides the world. There are those who love her and her songs, and then those who would rather see her silenced for good. The number of her present and future fans is limited, as she will not gain any new ones among those who are ready to cut her vocal chords. If she did anything to upset her fan base, therefore, it could do serious damage to the number of records she sells.

In politics it is hardly any different. Each party has its base supporters that provide the steady votes it needs to keep the lights on. Discord in one's own ranks, therefore, is something that any party leader will try to avoid, as it could very well spell the end of the party. This is what happened to the former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada when disgruntled Tories marched off in a huff to create the Reform Party.

In the 2009 world of Canadian politics, similar chasms are opening up. Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper is losing support among his base, while some “Liberals” are greatly dissatisfied with the prospect of having a “classical liberal”, Michael Ignatieff, as their leader. It is one thing for a party to fail to win over swing voters, but quite another when it cannot hold on to the base it has.

Harper has frustrated many conservatives. First, after taking office, he turned out to be a “tax-and-spend liberal”, rather than the fiscal conservative people had always thought he was. Then, he made a number of tactical mistakes, such as when he let his disdain for the opposition parties show a bit too much, almost triggering a revolution and a coup d'état. Now, conservatives have more or less given up on him, as he prepares to table a budget that would probably do any statist or socialist proud.

Free speech is a non-starter

But there is more: In a recent magazine interview, Harper thwarted the hopes of many conservatives when he said that he would not tackle any reform of the Canadian Human Rights Act and the rules governing the federal and provincial human rights commissions. With several publications, bloggers and other individuals having been investigated for “hate speech” by those commissions in the last two years or so, certain conservatives have made “free speech” their number-one concern and cause.

One of those “free-speechers”, Jay Currie, was so unhappy with Harper's statement in the interview that he has started work on “Plan-B”, a new, not-yet-registered party with a single issue: free speech. Currie's Plan-B, according to his own words, is meant as a threat to Harper. Under his original Plan-A, Harper was to be lobbied for the abolition of the relevant statutory provisions and the closure or reorganization of the human rights commissions. Having thus failed to comply, Harper must now face the wrath of Currie – at least, that is what he would like to think.

No single-issue party will ever amount to much in Canada. Apart from that, the whole “free-speech thingy” does not concern the vast majority of Canadian voters. The current law is a threat only to those who regularly print or blog heinous and hateful articles aimed at certain identifiable groups (such as Muslims or gays). Currie may gather about a hundred supporters for his “Plan-B” across Canada, if he is lucky.

Harper's brush-off to the free-speechers is not a big problem for him (or anyone else in Canada). What could pose a much more serious predicament for him is his lack of fiscal conservatism and prudence. In a recent poll among 3,000 conservatives done by Conservative blogger Stephen Taylor, the economy and tax relief were shown to be among the top three issues for conservatives. So, any missteps on economic and fiscal decisions could cost Harper a lot of grassroots support.

The Big Red Machine is kicking into gear again

Rather than a new protest party created to bring down Harper, an even bigger threat is coming Harper's way in the “new” party that Michael Ignatieff seems to be building right now. A liberal in the classical sense, Ignatieff has surprised many in recent weeks. He has mentioned that he would like to see tax cuts in the upcoming budget and economic stimulus program, and in the current Mid-East conflict, he has come out in clear and unwavering support of Israel.

But Ignatieff's apparent attempt to repair the ailing Liberal Party, pull it back from the far left and return it to the centre has upset some “Liberals”. That should not worry him, though, as those “Liberals” are really leftists and socialists who have been hiding in the Liberal Party for too long. This has become glaringly obvious over the Israel-Gaza conflict, a war that has also extended to the Liberal blogosphere. Several bloggers have left the group or been removed from it, because they, being radical leftists, sympathize with the Hamas terrorists, and that was more than the management of the Liberal group blog was willing to tolerate. One of those disgruntled leftists has now created his own “Liberal” aggregator (nothing liberal or Liberal about it). While Harper has every reason to fear any diminution of his grassroots support, Ignatieff must be positively thrilled at the prospect of getting rid of some who really never belonged in the first place.

That those leftists are now being purged from the party and its blogosphere is a good sign. For the Liberal Party, because it will help to restore the party's liberal roots, and for Canadian voters, who may finally have a real alternative to the Conservative Party. If Ignatieff performs as he is expected to, his remodelled Liberal Party may become the kind of party that small-c conservatives and small-l liberals alike can easily vote for, without having to close their eyes and hold their noses.

Since most Canadian voters are “centrists”, such a reformed Liberal Party could become extremely popular. Those on the very fringes outside of what is considered normal and reasonable, that is, right-wing extremists and those on the left, will be the biggest losers if Ignatieff can pull it off. It might also instil some much-needed civility into politics again, as even certain conservative journalists have begun to praise Ignatieff for being the first “adult in charge of the party” in a very long time.