Tory race was a contest of ideas
Conservative race marked by change in tone
It’s easy to say what was wrong with the Conservative leadership race, and lord knows people have. It was too long. There were too many candidates. The voting process was too complicated. With none of the party’s biggest stars running, and without the theatre of a delegated convention to put a cap on it, the race lacked excitement, real or manufactured.
There is some truth in the complaints. In particular, the party would do well next time to find some way to winnow the field as the campaign wears on: perhaps a first round of voting some months before the last? Or even several rounds?
But as long as we’re talking about things the race was lacking, we might mention some other features of the typical leadership race that were missing this time out. There was, first, little sign of the sorts of divisions, regional, ideological or personal, that have proved lasting handicaps to parties in the past. A brief ruckus over ineligible voters aside, there was relatively little of the dirty tricks, offshore money and other shenanigans we have seen so often.
Thanks to recent campaign finance reforms, no candidate was able to scare everyone else from running by virtue of an overwhelming early fundraising advantage. Neither did pure celebrity or name recognition prove decisive. And while attempts of various kinds were made to tap into the sort of populist nationalism that propelled Donald Trump to power, in the end these appear to have failed: Kevin O’Leary is gone from the race, while Kellie Leitch’s star seems to have faded (although you never know: no predictions!). For that alone the party should get down on its knees and give thanks.
Rather, the race became, almost by default, what everyone professes to want: a contest of ideas, in which all the major strains of Conservative opinion were represented. Much of this can be attributed to the very things the critics complain about. The sheer length of the race provided ample time to stress-test attractive-sounding but ill-considered proposals — Leitch’s “values test” comes to mind.
The complicated rules — every riding allotted 100 points, allocated in proportion to each candidate’s share of the vote, using a ranked ballot — placed a premium on building a broad base of support, not only geographically but in other respects: absent a first round win that no one anticipates, second and third choices will be critical.
Even the unwieldy field of also-rans had its upside. Had the “big beasts” run, the Peter MacKays and the John Bairds and the Jason Kenneys, the race might have turned into a pitched battle between their respective machines: all organizational muscle, little discussion of the party’s direction. Instead, the lesser lights who did run, lacking any other means of attracting notice, were compelled to make their names on the strength of their platforms.
The most successful example of this, by far, is Maxime Bernier. A minor cabinet minister in the last Harper government with an unfortunate reputation acquired in the first, his seemed an unlikely candidacy at the outset. That he is now the presumed favourite is the result of a patient, disciplined campaign built around a series of bold policy thrusts, all of an unambiguously proconsumer, free-market cast.
But others also acquitted themselves well. Michael Chong’s reputation as a principled politician with a maverick streak preceded his entry into the race, but his unapologetic championing of a carbon tax, in the face of a membership for whom the very words seemed to excite hostility, will have cemented his position as a person of substance and a voice to be listened to.
Of the two candidates in what might be called the social conservative primary, Pierre Lemieux seems to have had the better of the race. Where Brad Trost came across as erratic and inflammatory, Lemieux advanced his cause with sincerity and thoughtfulness. A little-known MP before the race, he may surprise with his showing.
Then there was that group of candidates clustered in the middle, if by “middle” one means saying little of substance while signalling no discernible change from the course adopted under Stephen Harper — if “course” is the right word for aimless drift punctuated by the occasional wedge issue or carefully targeted distribution of goodies.
Andrew Scheer may prove the most successful of these, though not because he had the best race: with the most caucus endorsements of any candidate at the start of his campaign, he carried caution to the point of catatonia, offering little rationale for his candidacy but a shy smile and some dad jokes. By contrast Erin O’Toole seemed to have gained the most ground over the campaign. He may not have had much to say, but he said it very well, with an air of confidence and command.
As for the rest, only two are really worth mentioning. Lisa Raitt was both well-liked and well-respected at the start of the race; that she remains so at the end is about all that can be said about her inert, purposeless campaign. Chris Alexander, meanwhile, a person of some reputation before he got into politics, has seemed to shrink ever since. His attempted straddle, combining high-minded appeals to liberal internationalism — for example, his call to raise immigration levels — with rank pandering to the Ezra Levant crowd, was one of the more painful things to watch in the campaign.
We shall see soon enough who the winner is. For many of the candidates, the race was less about any realistic prospect of victory than it was enhancing their standing in the party. For several, it has proved a success in that regard — and their success is also the party’s. A front bench stocked with such agreeable figures as Bernier, O’Toole, Chong, Scheer and Raitt, to go with other rising stars such as Gerald Deltell and Candice Bergen, will do much to erase memories of the harsh partisanship of the Harper years.
All told, Conservatives have much to be thankful for. The party emerges from the race not only with a fresh sense of direction and a marked change in tone, but with significantly increased membership numbers and a regained lead over the Liberals in raising funds. It could have been worse.