September 24, 2005
No matter what, Canadians think Liberal rule is just fine

Henry Srebrnik, [Charlottetown, PEI] Guardian

The Liberal government approaches the fall session of parliament, which reconvenes on Sept. 26, in good spirits.

Prime Minister Paul Martin has reiterated his promise to call a federal election within 30 days of the final report by Justice John Gomery into the sponsorship scandal, due next February. Martin's chief strategist and pollster, David Herle, in August assured Liberal MPs they can win a majority government by adding seats in the West and Ontario, with or without gains in Quebec.

And why not? Despite an endless series of scandals, and the evidence of corruption at the highest levels of government uncovered by the Gomery Commission, polls show that the opposition parties seem to be making little headway against the Liberals, who have now won four elections in a row since 1993.

Perhaps it is due to the fact that the federal Liberal Party, that most wonderful of political machines, has cleverly managed to remain the "default mode" of Canadian politics.

Other parties, such as the Bloc Québécois, the Conservatives, and the New Democrats, are "niche" parties that appeal to a narrow class, ethnic, geographic or ideological base. But the Liberals are the ultimate "big tent" party. Though there have always been internal differences and individual rivalries within it, the pragmatic desire by Liberals to win and retain power has always ensured a tendency towards the political centre--after all, that's where the votes are.

In most other places, if you try to be all things to all people, you end up pleasing nobody. (Marxist used to call this "exposing the contradictions.") But in Canada the Liberal Party is at one and the same time able to accommodate anti-American leftists and pacifists who periodically condemn the United States and its policies, sometimes in very uncomplimentary terms, while at the same time doing all in its power to keep the Americans sweet by cooperating with Washington on issues of trade, defence, and counter-terrorism.

So, while rejecting American requests to participate in continental missile defence or the war in Iraq, the Liberal government still manages to sustain a fairly decent level of military collaboration with the U.S. armed forces, both in North America and abroad, especially in Afghanistan.

The Liberals seem able to articulate and aggregate the views and interests of both workers and businesspeople, men and women, immigrants and the native born. They even manage to appeal to English Canadian nationalists while also retaining the allegiance of many "soft" Québécois nationalists.

When Canadians demand more spending on social programs, the Liberals borrow ideas--liberally!-- from the NDP. When it becomes necessary to battle deficits, they steer to the right and govern like Conservatives. Their flexibility is legendary.

Indeed, as the "fulcrum" party along the political spectrum, they attract high-profile people from both their left and right. Two of Martin's cabinet members, Health Minister Ujjal Dosanjh and Human Resources Minister Belinda Stronach, were previously members of the NDP and Conservative Party, respectively.

The party also renews itself every few decades by selecting as its leader a prominent public intellectual rather than a professional politician. In 1968, it chose Montreal law professor Pierre Trudeau to succeed Lester Pearson, and Paul Martin may, according to some, be followed by the internationally-renowned academic Michael Ignatieff, who has taught at Harvard.

And the electorate, perhaps appreciative of this wonderful sleight of hand, rewards the Liberals by ensconcing them as our permanent governing party. The opposition parties, green with envy, remain relegated to the sidelines, their status reduced to being either critics (the Bloc and Tories) or accomplices (NDP) of the government. Such is political life in Canada today.