Who’ll save the Tories from self-destruction?

At some point pretty soon, some highranking, thoughtful Tory — if such a thing is out there — has to step back, survey the Conservative landscape and call a halt to the party’s self-destruction. As in: “Hold on, what are we doing here? This is nuts. Let’s try again, from the beginning. All together now: who are we, why are we here, and what do we stand for?”

The alternative would seem to be an easy ride for Liberals and other rival parties, both in Ottawa and the provinces, for the foreseeable future. At present there’s only one elected government willing to have the word “Conservative” in its name — Manitoba Premier Brian Pallister, come on down! Saskatchewan’s Brad Wall is conservative in practice, but heads the Saskatchewan party because a previous premier turned “Conservative” into a dirty word. Wall could probably get himself elected federal Tory leader if he wanted the job and was willing to learn French, but claims a desire to do neither.

There’s no provincial organization to speak of in British Columbia or Quebec. In Alberta, Jason Kenney appears set to be chosen Progressive-Conservative leader on pledge to end its existence. There’s not a sitting Tory premier in any of the four Atlantic provinces. Only Ontario’s opposition leader, Patrick Brown, can boast a certain advantage, based mainly on Premier Kathleen Wynne’s deep unpopularity and the fact Ontarians know too little about Brown to hold it against him yet.

If anyone is looking to Ottawa to stir some enthusiasm, they’re living more on hope than good sense. Last week’s Tory performance in the debate on Islamophobia was a sad display of a party that’s not only lost its sense of self, but its political sensibilities as well.

The Tories had a good point to make: the term “Islamophobia,” as used in the Liberal motion, is so broad and ill-defined it could mean anything. If four people apply for a job and the lone Muslim doesn’t get it, is that Islamophobia? If a cartoonist depicts a mad bomber as vaguely middle eastern, is that Islamophobia? If an activist who self-identifies with Islam feels demeaned in a social setting, is that Islamophobia?

The motion was nothing more than a self-serving Liberal play for sympathy among the growing Muslim community, in much the same way the Conservatives worked diligently to win over ethnic and immigrant voters during their nine years in office. If the Tories had supported the motion, or just stayed home, it would have been quickly approved and forgotten, unnoticed by 99% of Canadians. “Are we against hatred? Yeah, we’re against hatred. Next order of business…”

Instead they decided to make a stand. To what purpose is unclear. To secure the votes of terminology fanatics? To confirm beyond all doubt that Liberals are slippery operatives? In making an issue out of hot air, they lobbed a great big softball to the government, inviting it to aim for the bleachers. Mélanie Joly, for one, couldn’t resist. “What are they scared of?” the Heritage Minister demanded. “They’re scared of denouncing Islamophobia and, by not denouncing Islamophobia, they are actually contributing to the problem.”

It was a specious claim, notwithstanding the possibility Joly may actually believe it. An alternative motion fashioned by the Conservatives was more definitive than the Liberal version. But it would still have been far better for the Tories to let the Liberals have their bit of fun and move on. No harm done.

It’s yet more evidence the Conservatives don’t know who they are, or what they’re about. The more rigid elements of the party probably thought it was fine to call the government on its cynicism, and give voice to the yahoo forces that lurk darkly in Internet chatrooms and commentary forums. Those are the last people the party needs if it hopes to connect with reasonable Canadians seeking a viable alternative to the Trudeau Liberals. The party already has one leadership candidate whose sole claim to credibility is a middling profile on American television, and a spunky way with a quote. And 13 other candidates who have trouble reaching even minimal levels of recognition among the bulk of the population.

They won’t return to respectability by pandering to the mob, the disgruntled or the most alienated elements of society. There may be a Bozo in the White House, but it’s unlikely Canadians are eager to have a clown of their own. The Conservatives need to sort out what they have to offer and present it in a responsible fashion. So far they don’t seem even reasonably close.

Just a few years ago the Liberals were in just as hopeless a situation. One of the realities of having two dominant parties is that when voters tire of one, they have little choice but to select the other. Having no guiding principles other than a yen for power, the Liberals needed the emergence of Justin Trudeau to give them a figure they could rally around. The Tories are in the same boat, but as yet their potential leaders have demonstrated little beyond an ability to criss-cross the country in a cloud of near-total apathy.

In the weeks after their 2015 election loss, party elders claimed to have absorbed the need to leave behind the anger and divisiveness of the final Harper months, and re-engage with more positive, higherminded supporters. If they knew it then, they’ve forgotten it since. They should go back and check their notes. They’re making it far too easy for the Liberals to get complacent about their prospects for a long, unthreatened run in power.