DEN TANDT: BAIRD’S EXIT LEAVES BIG HOLE
Ottawa: Former foreign affairs minister leaves Tories with few star performers in Ontario
Whatever John Baird’s reasons for walking away in his prime from the second-most prestigious job in Canadian government, we can say this: His exit puts the Conservative party in a jam. Prime Minister Stephen Harper may believe he can make do without Baird, or someone like him, but the party as a whole will be less sanguine. The reason is Ontario.
Here’s what we know so far about the affable, voluble, energetic and now former foreign affairs minister’s motivation for making this rather drastic move now, even as his portfolio takes on primary importance ahead of the coming federal election: precious little.
It may be, as some have speculated, that he and Harper have been at odds over how to deal with the Ukraine crisis. It may be that he wants to earn serious money while he can. It may be that he’s tired of travelling, or just tired. He may be sick of the fishbowl, the corrosive partisanship (at which he has in the past excelled) and the vitriol. Maybe he doesn’t think he or his party can win again. Possibly he’s reluctant to play kingmaker in the Conservative leadership succession battle to come. It may be all of the above, in part or in whole.
Regardless, there is no papering over this loss, from the government’s point of view, coming as it does on the heels of former finance minister Jim Flaherty’s resignation and sudden death last year. It leaves the Conservatives deficient of star performers in the region of the country they most need to retain, if they’re to have any hope of winning another majority. Baird’s impact extends beyond the political portfolios he has held because he’s been a voice for compassion and fairness in a government deemed by many to suffer from a lack of both.
Wait, can this be John Baird about whom we’re speaking? The megaphone? The mouth that roared? The man who shuttered the embassy in Iran, declared undying fealty to Israel and drove the august-former-diplomat community mad? In his farewell speech in the Commons on Tuesday, Baird referred to his early days as an attack dog in the Ontario Conservative governments of Mike Harris. Laughter all around: Even in Ottawa, until the day he became foreign minister, Baird was the PM’s go-to pugilist in any partisan donnybrook. He could be articulate and scathing at will.
But Baird has another side, known to his constituents in Ottawa-West Nepean, to his colleagues, and to his political foes. That’s why the tributes rolling in Tuesday from figures such as former Liberal leader Bob Rae, NDP foreign affairs critic Paul Dewar, NDP development critic Helene Laverdiere (herself a former diplomat), and Liberal foreign affairs critic Marc Garneau, were unreservedly warm. Baird is well liked in Ottawa because he is known to be friendly, decent and approachable, even to his critics.
As Flaherty did, Baird reflects a particular Ontario sensibility, more libertarian than traditionally Conservative. He’s long been a social progressive voice within the government. As foreign minister he spoke out against the persecution of gays, lesbians and transgender people overseas. If that raised hackles among the party’s social-conservative wing, none expressed it publicly. Baird has been and remains one of the most popular figures within his party, and has fended off suggestions he should run for leader when Harper goes. Add to that his ability as a campaigner and speaker, and you have a big Tory vacuum in Ontario — which, of course, holds close to 40 per cent of the seats in the new parliament.
But the final piece may be the kicker. Speculation has emerged since Monday night that Baird is pulling a Chretien or pulling a Martin, that is to say leaving in anticipation of an eventual return and run for leader. Though anything is possible, I have never heard from a single Conservative source that Baird has been anything but genuine in his assertions he has no interest in the job. And I have heard the opposite repeatedly. Indeed, one of the reasons Baird has been so effective for so long, in such highprofile jobs, is likely that he harbours no such grand ambition.
Indirectly, that has had a moderating influence on others who may — a list that includes Jason Kenney, James Moore, Tony Clement and perhaps Lisa Raitt, among others. Foreign is the plum of plum cabinet posts. International Trade Minister Ed Fast is a dogged soldier but no star, and has been named as a stand-in only. Therefore his colleagues, Kenney in particular, will be vying for the permanent job.
All of which brings us back to the $64,000 question: Why? Beyond all the other reasons already mentioned, perhaps it’s as simple as this: The Conservative ballot question in 2015 is foreign affairs, specifically Harper’s putative strong leadership in opposing Islamist terrorism, Islamic State and Russian strongman Vladimir Putin. That makes Harper, de facto, the government’s minister of foreign affairs. Perhaps Baird did not relish being reduced to an understudy.