Bloody, But Unbowed

A humiliated but unhumbled Prime Minister Stephen Harper - in the wake of his surprise come-uppance at the outrage recipients of his scornful mission to further weaken the already-feeble strength of his political opponents in the House of Commons - received the relief of a brief reprieve from Canada's Governor General. His ego-led, nastily ill-timed presumptuousness that he could get away with prodding his adversaries at a time when he should be formulating common-cause policies to help Canada through its pending financial difficulties gave him a much-needed reality check.

He has now recovered his form and aplomb, determinedly setting about to make his case for the electoral legitimacy of his government, post-shock and shrill denunciations. Using all the tools at his disposal, from succeeding in persuading Michaelle Jean to allow prorogation of the House, to dipping into flush Conservative Party funds to launch a public relations counter-offensive to that of the 'coalition' of the bitterly brittle three opponents in Parliament equally determined to bring down the Harper government so recently re-installed.

The prime minister is now launching a charm offensive at the same time that he has launched an accusatory offensive against the triumvirate of Liberal-NDP-Parti Quebecois determination to unseat him. Where he scorned their invited suggestions a week ago, he now invites their co-operation, offering them the opportunity to make recommendations in the creation of a financial stimulus package to ensure the health of the Canadian economy. His newly-discovered conciliatory tone is aimed as much at the perceptions of Canadians, more than a trifle upset at the antic madness that has taken place in Parliament.

But Stephen Harper remains who and what he is, a capable and highly intelligent administrator, with a broad authoritarian streak, seemingly incapable of compromise or consulting with his peers. The trouble is, he does not recognize the leaders of the other parties as his peers. He has little patience for their strutting and demands, which fairly well reflect his own ego-driven presence. On the other hand, he is prime minister, albeit of a minority government, and it behooves him to consult, to ensure usefully civil relations with the opposition parties.

For the well-being of his continued governance, certainly for the greater good of the country which essentially requires at this time, more than most, a stable government. It's his own personal tragedy that his character is devoid of even a minuscule amount of humility. In this way, however, he is well matched by Stephane Dion, likewise not invested by a genetic inheritance of humility. Each man will not gladly suffer the presence of fools. As a result, they detest one another. Both foolishly impervious to a recognition of their faults. Among them, fierce, no-holds-barred partisanship.

Of the two, Mr. Harper is clearly given the advantage of a proclivity for a sharp mind and sound administration. Which would be far more effective were he to loosen his distrust of the capabilities of others, particularly those to whom he must entrust Cabinet positions. His penchant for inflicting wounds on his adversaries tends to minimize his effectiveness, also. He must struggle a little more convincingly to restrain his baser instincts to continually go for the jugular.

For Mr. Dion, alas, there is no solution to his self-defeating ineptness, his inability to communicate lucidly and inspire confidence in his feeble administrative skills. Under his stewardship an already-faltering Liberal party has stumbled ever deeper in the public's esteem. His own caucus would prefer to disown him. His overweening personal political ambition to govern is simply unmatched by his lack of promise and ability.

The question now is, will a chastened Stephen Harper be able to rally the support he requires in Parliament to carry on? The composition of a workable and inclusive budget to be presented at the end of January may be successful in persuading his political detractors that they can, after all, work with him and his administration, but given the grim-faced determination and high-pitched accusations of late, perhaps not. What Canada badly requires is that he be successful in persuading his political opposites that they can work together in a modicum of harmony for a decent period of time before dissolving Parliament again.

This will obviously not happen while the Liberals are led by Mr. Dion whose visceral antipathy to Mr. Harper has been made abundantly clear. Nor under leadership candidate Bob Rae whose spite-filled diatribes inveighing against the prime minister for whom he expresses a pure and shining hatred, marks him unfit to lead any Canadian political party. Mr. Rae has taken a deep draught of the poisoned goblet of failure to inspire the kind of trust he accuses Mr. Harper of disappointing. He most definitely is no exemplar of the skill of compromise himself, prepared to tamp down his personal prejudices to the greater good of serving the country's needs.

Whereas, reasonable Liberals of the ilk of Irwin Cotler, Keith Martin and Jim Karygiannis and others in the now-worried caucus; flexible, co-operative and well-balanced thoughtful people who deserve the respect of the House and most particularly of the prime minister, could be depended on to work for the greater good of the country, setting aside the rigidity of ideology for patriotism. For that to happen, the current government's head must also be prepared to set aside his own hard-edged partisanship.

The prime minister is now inviting dialogue and co-operation among the opposition parties. The coalition's disproportionate response to a juvenile provocation has not enhanced the reputation of Parliament in the minds of Canadians. The very obvious harm being done to the country at home, and to the country's reputation abroad is a testament to the dysfunctionality of the current Parliament. The prime minister must take ownership of a great portion of that sad state of affairs. And take decisive steps to turn it around.

The members of parliament that Canadians invested their trust in have seen fit, in large part, to fritter that trust away through maladroit cut-and-thrust games. We thought we were voting for mature, intelligent adults to represent the best interests of the country. Instead, the country has been witness to a collapse of civility, in a toxic atmosphere of antagonistic ideologies, each determined to prevail in representation of their disparate values and priorities. Their priorities should have been the good governance of Canada.

Tellingly, among the premiers pressed by the coalition of Liberal-NDP-Bloc, to express support, only Danny Williams descended to the bait. The others, some grimly mute, others critical of the unsettling effect of the coalition's trajectory, urgently speak to the need for stability. Urging the Liberals and the NDP to change tack, to work with the government, to keep the country sound. To no avail, as yet. Jack Layton and Stephane Dion remain resolutely defiant, spitting invective at the Conservatives.

Ekos Research recently revealed statistics indicating that some 22% of Canadians would vote for the coalition government. Far more would not. In fact, 44% of Canadians indicate now they would vote Conservative, should an election be called anytime soon. Marking a shift in public perception. Effectively giving the Conservatives a majority government, were the writ to be dropped.