Now we find out if the Conservatives are a real party.
Replacing leaders is not a decision to be taken lightly. But if Conservatives are not at least seriously discussing the replacement of Stephen Harper before Parliament returns on Jan. 26, he truly has succeeded in creating a cult of personality.
Conservatives assuredly owe Harper a debt of gratitude for turning them from a messy coalition of old Reformers and Progressive Conservatives into a credible national government. But looking at his performance over the past few months, he's performed so badly that it's verged on the self-destructive.
This is a Prime Minister who called an early election to win a majority government, and failed utterly to make a case for what he would do with it. One who ran against one of the weakest Liberal leaders in history, while the Liberals were bleeding votes to the NDP, and had his campaign more or less match Stephane Dion's blunder for blunder. One who returned to Parliament with the consolation prize of a minority, and managed to almost immediately lose it based on a blunder that made Joe Clark look like a strategic genius by comparison.
Harper has, in many ways, put his party in position to win - not just a minority government here and there, but to be Canada's strongest federal party for a sustained period. But he now stands as the biggest barrier to that outcome. His personality is not conducive to either leading a minority government or winning a majority one. And he's so prone to tactical overreaches that it's only a matter of time until he puts his party further into a hole.
Conservatives, particularly caucus members, have placed a level of trust in Harper that goes beyond what most parties invest in their leaders. From ministers to backbenchers, they've effectively surrendered their voices to him. Solidarity is one thing; as anyone in my line of work can attest, getting any elected Conservative (with the exception of Michael Chong) to express a single independent thought is virtually impossible. Many of them won't even make themselves available to spout talking points, presumably because they're terrified of going off-message.
That's a bargain that may - may - be worth making if your leader is a strategic genius. Harper is nothing close to that. The Liberals were probably unwise to force out Jean Chretien, a leader who had led them to three straight majorities but was seen not to have enough respect for his party. But would anybody have faulted them for dumping him, as they surely would have, if he'd managed to win only a minority government against Stockwell Day and had then effectively lost control of Parliament to a Day-led coalition of Canadian Alliance members, Progressive Conservatives and Bloquistes?
The question is whether this party exists in anything approaching its current form without Harper at the helm, since he and a tight circle of trusted strategists and fixers control virtually all of its operations. But it's something Conservatives are going to have to test at some point, and Harper has made a very convincing case that they should do it sooner than later.
The Governor-General has, at considerable expense to parliamentary democracy, allowed Harper to basically shut down the government to save his own skin. That's a reprieve for him. It's an opportunity for his party.
