Harper's Ottawa

A nice synopsis of what it's like in Harper's Ottawa....

PM needs to show respect on the job

May 22, 2006. 01:00 AM

SUSAN DELACOURT

OTTAWA BUREAU CHIEF

OTTAWA—Prime Minister Stephen Harper will be out on the road for much of this week, just as his government seems to be entering a new, tougher period.

Harper will travel to London, Ont., Vancouver and Victoria, B.C., by week's end, putting distance between himself and an increasingly nasty climate on Parliament Hill.

The Commons isn't sitting this week. But last week has been largely written up as one of the roughest for Harper since he took power on Feb. 6, featuring several less-than-positive displays of his leadership style — particularly his lack of tolerance for dissent and setbacks.

Harper reportedly made a tactical decision between the 2004 and 2006 elections: rather than trying to be liked, he would look for Canadians' respect.

Some of the developments last week open up questions into that all-important value of respect, not so much whether Harper is receiving it, but whether he and his team have any respect for those they see as mere obstacles to getting their way.

It's also a timely issue in light of a new book out this month by noted U.S. political writer Joe Klein, titled Politics Lost: How American Democracy Was Trivialized by People Who Think You're Stupid. Klein appeared on CBC Radio's The Sunday Edition yesterday to talk about what he sees as the sad state of political debate in his country.

Some of what Klein is lamenting — politicians speaking down to the public through numbing repetition of "message tracks," focus-group-tested policies and avoidance of probing questions — are hallmarks of the Harper communications style, as well as the Liberal regimes that preceded it.

Equally toxic seems to be the "permanent campaign" mode that Klein also blames for the degeneration of political debate, in which leaders preside over a constant state of us-against-them. This was on display across partisan lines all over Ottawa last week, and no party covered itself in glory. But Harper in particular seemed to be on the pre-electoral warpath.

Facing a precarious Commons vote on the future of the Canadian mission in Afghanistan last Wednesday, Harper angrily pre-empted the result by announcing in advance that he would unilaterally extend the troops' mandate for a year, with or without Parliament's support. (He won the vote, as it turned out, with the help of some Liberals.)

Confronting the Commons committee defeat a day earlier of Gwyn Morgan, his chosen candidate for a new public appointments chief, the Prime Minister declared he'd just put the whole reform on hold until he had a majority government, when he could force it through Parliament.

What's more, the government announced it was beginning to wind down the long-gun registry without putting that decision to a parliamentary vote. As well, news emerged over the weekend that the Harper government is in the midst of withdrawing from the Kyoto air quality protocol by 2012 — again, without putting that decision to Parliament.

And then there was another public dustup with the parliamentary press gallery, which featured Harper cancelling a news conference because journalists would not go along with PMO's insistence on deciding who asks the questions at these events.

As a result, the PMO had to ask lobbyists and consultants to phone reporters and put out the "lines" Harper had wanted to convey for a midday news cycle.

Later in the day, it was an angry Harper who came out to witheringly disparage those who would oppose his public appointments commissioner or the Afghanistan mission. He said: "You know we're playing bigger games here," he said.

The problem, though, is that some of the "bigger games" don't look big at all when viewed close-up.

Though Canadians outside Ottawa may have a limited appetite for tales of power struggles between politicians and the press, this tension in the capital is quickly building to an unworkable situation for Harper, as evidenced by the fact the PMO communications team is no longer able or willing to impart even the most basic information to the media.

The press-relations job in Harper's Ottawa has been reduced to that of a low-level security guard, limited to shielding the Prime Minister and imparting little more than partisan banalities or "no comment" type of remarks. Cabinet ministers and caucus members are reined in, too, forced to scuttle out of the back doors of meeting rooms to avoid the waiting press pack.

Harper has also started literally speaking down to reporters from a perch on the stairway by the Commons when he does pause for the microphones. This blatant mimicry of former prime minister Brian Mulroney's style is curious, if Harper's goal is to keep his disdaining nature in check. Mulroney was not known at the end of his term as a prime minister in touch with the people.

If this was just an issue of inconvenience for the media, it wouldn't be worth noting at this point. But it's highlighting a Conservative obsessiveness about control that could backfire in the larger electorate if it revives fears about Harper's "hidden agenda." Or, in Klein's analysis, it could be an impediment to Harper's majority hopes if it begins to be seen as a tactic designed around the contention that people are too stupid to know anything beyond staged, scripted announcements and "priority" lists.