Skip to main content
The Globe and Mail
Support Quality Journalism.
The Globe and Mail
First Access to Latest
Investment News
Collection of curated
e-books and guides
Inform your decisions via
Globe Investor Tools
per week
for first 24 weeks

Enjoy unlimited digital access
Enjoy Unlimited Digital Access
Get full access to
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
Just $1.99 per week for the first 24 weeks
var select={root:".js-sub-pencil",control:".js-sub-pencil-control",open:"o-sub-pencil--open",closed:"o-sub-pencil--closed"},dom={},allowExpand=!0;function pencilInit(o){var e=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1];select.root=o,dom.root=document.querySelector(select.root),dom.root&&(dom.control=document.querySelector(select.control),dom.control.addEventListener("click",onToggleClicked),setPanelState(e),window.addEventListener("scroll",onWindowScroll),dom.root.removeAttribute("hidden"))}function isPanelOpen(){return dom.root.classList.contains(}function setPanelState(o){dom.root.classList[o?"add":"remove"](,dom.root.classList[o?"remove":"add"](select.closed),dom.control.setAttribute("aria-expanded",o)}function onToggleClicked(){var l=!isPanelOpen();setPanelState(l)}function onWindowScroll(){window.requestAnimationFrame(function() {var l=isPanelOpen(),n=0===(document.body.scrollTop||document.documentElement.scrollTop);n||l||!allowExpand?n&&l&&(allowExpand=!0,setPanelState(!1)):(allowExpand=!1,setPanelState(!0))});}pencilInit(".js-sub-pencil",!1); // via darwin-bg var slideIndex = 0; carousel(); function carousel() { var i; var x = document.getElementsByClassName("subs_valueprop"); for (i = 0; i < x.length; i++) { x[i].style.display = "none"; } slideIndex++; if (slideIndex> x.length) { slideIndex = 1; } x[slideIndex - 1].style.display = "block"; setTimeout(carousel, 2500); } //

Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer acknowledges supporters following a speech on election night at party campaign headquarters in Regina, Tuesday, October 22, 2019. Scheer is stepping down as a Conservative leader.

The Canadian Press

Vae victis. Woe, as the Romans said, to the vanquished.

That Andrew Scheer would have to resign as Conservative leader was probably inevitable, from the moment the results were known on election night. Canadian political parties are not kind to leaders in defeat, the price of the extraordinary power vested in them at other times.

It is not just the right decision, then, but the only one, not just for the party’s sake but for his. The alternative would have been another six months of brutal political infighting, of which the expediently timed revelation of Mr. Scheer’s use of party funds to pay for his children’s education was only a foretaste. Had there been any chance of surviving the leadership review, he might have risked it. That there was not became evident less from the loud attacks of his critics than from the silence of his supporters.

Story continues below advertisement

It wasn’t just that he lost, of course, but the way he lost: condemned in a winnable race by his own failings as a communicator, especially with regard to what should have been obvious vulnerabilities on social issues and his biography, coupled with the complacent campaign of warmed-over Harperism he signed off on.

But Mr. Scheer’s leadership, uninspiring as it was, wasn’t the only, or even the worst, contributor to the party’s defeat. Neither will his departure, in itself, fix the Conservatives’ deep and long-standing problems, especially the party’s continuing inability to break out of its existing demographic base – rural, elderly, male, white, less educated and, above all, Western.

The best that can be said is that it will clear the way for the party to focus on these, to debate its future direction, in the course of the coming leadership campaign, rather than dwell on Mr. Scheer’s personal strengths and weaknesses. But that assumes the party seizes the opportunity.

The temptation will be to do instead as the Liberals did, after suffering the worst defeat in the party’s history, and glom onto a saviour – someone who can win by the force of their own personality or name recognition, sparing the party the necessity to change or grow or rethink much of anything. That is a luxury the Liberals, with their long history of electoral success, can better afford than the Tories, with their long history of electoral non-success.

That, indeed, is part of the problem. Repeated defeats have instilled in the Conservatives an abiding insecurity, a conviction that the electoral odds are stacked against them – that, as more than one Conservative has told me over the years, Canada is fundamentally a Liberal country. As such, they insist, the party cannot hope to persuade the public of the virtues of an alternative, conservative governing philosophy. Either conservatism must be jettisoned, therefore, in favour of centrist mush, or it must be imposed, as it were, by force – or, in the Harperite formulation, both.

The first and most important step, then, is for Conservatives to develop some elemental self-confidence; to accept that they are in the persuasion game, and that the answer to electoral failure is not to ditch their principles but to find a way to make them more presentable to larger numbers of people. That’s not just a matter of messaging, but of applying conservative principles – limited government, markets, individual rights – to issues and concerns of relevance to today’s voters: the sorts of issues, like the environment, or inequality, that Conservatives have tended to duck.

Put that way, it sounds obvious. But the party will be unwilling to part with its base on these issues, perhaps out of fear that the base will part with the party, in favour of the still-kicking People’s Party or some other populist vehicle. I really don’t think the party needs to purge its social-conservative wing, as some have advocated. But social conservatives, like other elements of the party’s coalition, will have to understand the necessity of proportion, and respect for others’ opinions, and tone.

Story continues below advertisement

Politics, it is said, is a battle for the centre. But what most voters mean by moderation is not ideology but temperament. You can offer the most radical program you like, within reason, so long as you look like you have thought carefully about it, could be persuaded out of it by facts and argument, and grasp the necessity of persuading others by the same means.

Radicalism is not the enemy – medicare was a radical idea, as was free trade. Extremism is. The one is about ideas, the other about temperament. Donald Trump, to take an example at random, is hardly a radical ideologue; indeed, he has no convictions of any kind. But he is an extremist.

Success in politics, as in business or art, goes not to the party that simply gives people what they want, but that makes them want what it is giving them. It’s not about moving to the middle, but moving the middle to you.

Your Globe

Build your personal news feed

  1. Follow topics and authors relevant to your reading interests.
  2. Check your Following feed daily, and never miss an article. Access your Following feed from your account menu at the top right corner of every page.

Follow the author of this article:

Follow topics related to this article:

View more suggestions in Following Read more about following topics and authors
Report an error Editorial code of conduct
Due to technical reasons, we have temporarily removed commenting from our articles. We hope to have this fixed soon. Thank you for your patience. If you are looking to give feedback on our new site, please send it along to If you want to write a letter to the editor, please forward to

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff. Non-subscribers can read and sort comments but will not be able to engage with them in any way. Click here to subscribe.

If you would like to write a letter to the editor, please forward it to Readers can also interact with The Globe on Facebook and Twitter .

Welcome to The Globe and Mail’s comment community. This is a space where subscribers can engage with each other and Globe staff.

We aim to create a safe and valuable space for discussion and debate. That means:

  • Treat others as you wish to be treated
  • Criticize ideas, not people
  • Stay on topic
  • Avoid the use of toxic and offensive language
  • Flag bad behaviour

If you do not see your comment posted immediately, it is being reviewed by the moderation team and may appear shortly, generally within an hour.

We aim to have all comments reviewed in a timely manner.

Comments that violate our community guidelines will not be posted.

Read our community guidelines here

Discussion loading ...

To view this site properly, enable cookies in your browser. Read our privacy policy to learn more.
How to enable cookies