Farewell, Mr. Harper

Stephen Harper took the stage Thursday for what will probably be the last major address of his public life. The last time Canadians saw him speak, it was Oct. 19, and the Conservative majority government he led had just been defeated by Justin Trudeau’s Liberals. Harper’s remarks that night were emotional, by his standard, but brief. He resigned as Conservative Party of Canada leader, but only announced it via a press release.

There has remained considerable public interest in Harper’s comings and goings since that night. Citizens would report on social media their encounters with the former prime minister at Calgary bookstores and shops in Las Vegas, looking relaxed and happy. His every appearance in the House of Commons (he has voted regularly, but not spoken on the record) was scrutinized. Some media outlets made something of a sport of it, as if acknowledging his defeat and quietly going about his business were odd.

But Thursday in Vancouver, where the Tories have gathered for a post-election convention, Harper took the stage again. He joked that he had rather enjoyed his time away from the spotlight, and gave a short speech that was, in many ways, familiar. He avoided rhetorical excess, and spoke proudly of his government’s accomplishments. He thanked his wife, Laureen — “my best friend, my closest counsellor and the love of my life” — and those who’d supported him over the years. He urged Conservative supporters not to dwell on the past, but to be ready for the election to come in 2019 when, he said, Canadians will be ready for a change and the Conservatives must be ready to offer it. And that was it. Harper’s farewell was typically understated. Though he is fully capable of rousing a crowd, his speech was gracious and brief. It was, in many ways, a microcosm of his years in power. Yes, he was a polarizing politician, and some of the criticisms he and his party earned over the years were warranted. Under Harper, the Tories treated some of our democratic institutions with unnecessary roughness. Like most governing parties, they became increasingly averse to criticism. In the latter stages of their third mandate they adopted a tone that alarmed and upset many Canadians and which, ultimately, cemented their defeat.

But, on balance, Canada did very well for the Conservatives’ time in power. The economy remained strong and Canadians were largely sheltered from the turmoil that shook other countries. Our international reputation, contrary to partisan ravings, remained solid, a token of particular pride for Canadians tired of being consigned to the quiet corners of international diplomacy. The size and role of the federal government were not reduced to the degree true-blue believers had hoped for, but remained contained within realistic parameters. The “hidden agenda” his detractors so boldly predicted was so hidden, apparently, that Harper himself was never able to find it during his almost 10 years in office. Major trade deals were signed. Life, in short, remained good.

As a leader, Harper was, as columnist Michael Den Tandt noted in Friday’s National Post, a “smart, basically decent, hard-working guy.”

Admittedly, he did not crave the spotlight to the degree exhibited by his successor, nor did he feel the need for emotional public displays or serial selfies. He was of a different generation and temperament, more the quiet Canadian who felt action said more than words.

His distaste for the press and reluctance to share his thoughts directly with Canadians often perplexed and frustrated supporters, who knew him to be a skilled and powerful communicator when he chose.

At times he was his own worst enemy. But he was also, in his own way, quintessentially Canadian. He did not seek undue attention and disliked it when it came. He put hard work ahead of high profile. He may have insisted on making the big decisions, but he wasn’t interested in hogging all the glory.

The public often suspects, and often with good reason, that politicians are a vain bunch, in it for themselves. It’s not a criticism that can be applied to Stephen Harper. He didn’t seek power for the perks of office or magazine profiles, but because he believed in what he was doing. He won’t miss the perks and profiles now that he’s gone. In time, in that regard and others, Canadians may come to appreciate him.