Would Tories be better off without Stephen Harper?
Would the governing Conservatives be better off motoring into Election 2015 without Stephen J. Harper at the wheel? And, if so, who would replace him?
Tories adore scoffing at this question, so unlikely is the prospect of a prime ministerial resignation deemed to be. Rumours flew last fall, as the Senate scandal raged, that “The Boss” might be on his way out. This was quashed by insiders who insisted that, short of a smoking gun showing the PM had personally approved of former chief of staff Nigel Wright’s famous $90,000 payment to Senator Mike Duffy, Harper’s position was unassailable.
It still is, for all intents and purposes. As the founder of the modern Conservative party and the winner of three consecutive elections, Harper’s hold remains firm, the occasional backbench flare-up notwithstanding.
No one that I am aware of within Conservative circles is fomenting for his ouster. No potential successor wants to be perceived as a backstabber, on par with the Liberals who engineered a palace revolt against former prime minister Jean Chrétien in 2002. And, many Tories simply believe they’re still stronger with Harper than without him.
That said, there’s this: Duffy, on suspension from the Senate, now faces 31 charges in connection with some $200,000 worth of alleged misspending.
His trial is to begin Sept. 16, as Parliament resumes. We know, based on the former broadcaster’s incendiary testimony last year, that his defence will consist of putting the Conservative party, the Prime Minister’s Office, and the Prime Minister himself, on trial, in the court of public opinion. Duffy is guilty of nothing, will go the argument; but if he is guilty of something, then they’re all guilty of it.
A decade into the Harper era, with the PM’s personal approval numbers weak, and the Liberals under Justin Trudeau holding a persistent lead in the polls, the looming trial could provide a tipping point. If it gets bad, from a Conservative standpoint — “bad” being defined as any new evidence or testimony, perhaps from Nigel Wright himself, that Harper knew of the machinations to pay off Duffy’s improper housing expenses — then a change in leadership becomes plausible. Were defeat to become a foregone conclusion, Harper would have to be a fool not to consider stepping aside. He is not a fool.
Who would be best placed to run to succeed him, in that event?
Jason Kenney: Now employment and multiculturalism minister, Kenney is far and away the most consistently successful figure in Harper’s cabinet. In 2011 he delivered large numbers of votes from immigrant communities in the Greater Toronto Area, while the government simultaneously moved to tighten the refugee system. That feat of prestidigitation earned him a reputation as Harper’s “go-to” minister for tough files. He has continued to burnish that rep by defusing the temporary foreign workers issue, as a national political problem, by effectively crippling the program.
Lisa Raitt: Formerly the labour minister, now heading up Transport, Raitt has an ability to handle potentially explosive files with frankness and aplomb. Her forays in the House of Commons tend to be matter-of-fact, intelligent and free of rabid partisanship. This combination brought her name to the fore in discussions of the Conservative succession in Ontario. Should she run in a future federal leadership race, she will be a formidable contender.
John Baird: Baird acquired a persona as an ideological brawler in the Harper government’s early years, but as foreign minister has spoken out consistently about human rights around the world, including gay rights, which has given him a diplomatic sheen. He’s popular with colleagues and is believed to be trusted by Harper partly because of his lack of interest in the leadership.
Peter MacKay: The justice minister is the Progressive Conservative standard-bearer in the party, and a co-founder, and has served in high-profile ministries. He’s also youthful and athletic, which could serve him well in a contest with Trudeau. Weighing against that is his propensity for repeatedly stumbling into open-pit political deadfall traps, most notably the F-35 procurement mess.
James Moore: Bilingual and bright, Moore consistently acquitted himself well in the House of Commons when he was running interference for the prime minister. Like Raitt, he seems to avoid the nuttiest of the ritual partisanship that infects the Commons. As heritage minister he managed to avoid making an enemy of the CBC. As industry minister he has tried to make himself a champion of consumers, with mixed results.
Michelle Rempel: Young, ambitious and smart, junior minister Rempel has not yet held a full cabinet post. At the height of the Senate spending scandal she proved more adept at riding the storm, expressing disapproval without appearing disloyal, than many more experienced colleagues. She would be an outrider in any leadership race but could significantly strengthen her position with a view to another run, further down the road.