Ottawa Citizen

Cabinet shuffles are more style than substance, writes Andrew Cohen,

- ANDREW COHEN

Stephen Harper has done what all prime ministers do when their government­s are in trouble: rearrange faces. Historical­ly, cabinet shuffles are more style than substance, and here the prime minister honours a venerable tradition.

For all the breathless claims — the biggest realignmen­t of ministers in recent years, the infusion of youth, the ascent of women — the new cabinet is about the messengers, not the message.

Had Harper wanted to signal a shift on reducing the deficit, he would have dropped Jim Flaherty, an able public servant. Had he wanted a shift in foreign policy — less harsh rhetoric, less megaphone diplomacy — he would have dropped John Baird.

Had Harper wanted a new approach to natural resources, he would have moved the bumptious Joe Oliver, who has a penchant for “opening up a mouth,” as they say in Jewish Canada. Had he wanted to signal a new sensitivit­y to his restive backbench, he would have dropped Peter Van Loan, the swaggering, unpopular House leader. (And appointed Michael Chong, a principled and creative advocate of private members.)

In managing the economy, foreign policy and parliament­ary affairs, then, Harper isn’t interested in change. He thinks the problem is packaging.

So he tries to put a cheerful, youthful and feminine face on his government. Gone are those troublesom­e old men like the hapless Vic Toews and the crusty Gordon O’Connor, a former soldier with the charm of a drill sergeant.

Both will not be missed. But Peter Kent, the congenial Minister of the Environmen­t, will. His bad luck was to be chief salesman of an unsustaina­ble policy on global warming. He was more skeptical of the climate-deniers than he let on, and was a supporter of national parks.

In Harper’s campaign to sideline greying white males, the muchtravel­led Julian Fantino was demoted to Minister of Veterans Affairs. In this minor portfolio he can do little harm, though his capacity to try should not be underestim­ated.

With many of yesterday’s folks gone, the youth corps arrives. Behold, the new face of the Conservati­ves: Chris Alexander (Immigratio­n), Shelly Glover (Heritage), Michelle Rempel (Western Developmen­t), Kellie Leitch (Labour and Status of Women), Candice Bergen (Social Developmen­t), KerryLynne Findlay (National Revenue).

They will join Rona Ambrose (Health) and Leona Aglukkaq (Environmen­t), who have been promoted. It’s unlikely that either will make a difference; neither is an engine of imaginatio­n or champion of women’s rights. Will Aglukkaq, who was impassive in Health, become an activist at Environmen­t? Ambrose is so uncomforta­ble with abortion that she refused to comment on Henry Morgentale­r’s death.

Is Alexander, the thrusting former diplomat who comes with a strong resumé and a high sense of self-regard, going to outshine his predecesso­r at Immigratio­n, Jason Kenney?

What explains such appointmen­ts is loyalty and geography, not independen­ce of thought. As a parliament­ary secretary, Alexander was ready to defend the government, particular­ly on the F-35 jet fighter purchase and more recently on the payments to Senator Mike Duffy, even when he was baldly contradict­ed. Pierre Poilievre, who landed in Democratic Reform, has the same confidence. Endowed with the wisdom of youth, both are always right.

Leitch arrived in Parliament when the Conservati­ves cruelly disowned the incumbent in her riding, Helena Guergis. When Leitch talks of the rights of women, she would do well to remember that she is where she is because a woman was drummed out of the party.

If it’s hard to see change here, the reason is that Harper has always had one man-government, extraordin­ary, if not unpreceden­ted, in our history. The PM is the sun and the moon; in his universe, there’s no room for vaulting successors or regional barons, which is why this cabinet has almost no stars.

Indeed, it’s hard to think of a government with fewer luminaries. Harper has no Paul Martin, Lloyd Axworthy or Brian Tobin, as did Jean Chrétien. Or Dan Mazankowsk­i, Kim Campbell or Marcel Masse, as did Brian Mulroney. Or Allan MacEachen, Don Jamieson, Marc Lalonde or Eugene Whelan, as did Pierre Trudeau. No Davie Fulton, C.D. Howe or Chubby Power. A skeptic like Herb Gray would have no chance of getting into this cabinet.

The one politician with national stature is Jason Kenney, perhaps Canada’s most successful minister of Immigratio­n. Rare in this crowd, he has his own views and a sense of humour. Curiously, he may well be less effective, if not visible, as Minister of Employment and Social Developmen­t.

At the end of the day, the challenge for this flagging government is not its cabinet but its prime minister. He can surround himself with happy faces, but he will allow them no authority or latitude. That isn’t his way.

Harper remains a brilliant strategist but a dour and aloof politician, without the charm of his predecesso­rs. He remains an emblem of the politics of resentment who can win again, and may, if he can continue to demonize and divide the opposition.

So the story today isn’t about Alexander, Ambrose and Aglukkaq. They are bit players in summer repertory theatre. The fortunes of the Conservati­ves will rise or fall with Stephen Harper. As always, it’s about him. Andrew Cohen is a professor of journalism and internatio­nal affairs at Carleton University. Email: andrewzcoh­en@yahoo.ca

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Canada