Voter Alamac:

You are here: Home > Voter Alamanc > Federal Election 2004 > Election Report Card

Tom Bateman - Week Four Grades

Political Parties

Bloc Quebecois

Giles Duceppe conducted himself well in both leaders debates and surely impressed many Canadians outside Quebec on Tuesday night’s slugfest. Here was a man who posed clear questions, stated his party’s interests candidly and directly, and who actually let his interlocutors answer his questions. He got some zingers in against Martin. Some Albertans, I understand, have asked pollsters why they could not vote for the Bloc Quebecois in ridings outside of Quebec.

It is true, however, that Duceppe’s position in this election is the easiest to maintain. Duceppe’s constituency is small, its issues are more straightforward, his position on Canada simple and coherent.

Conservative Party

Harper had two good debates and demonstrated intelligence, poise under pressure, an ability to think on his feet, and firmness in the face of criticism. Two exchanges stand out. One was in the context of Paul Martin’s categorical defense of the Charter against the use of the s. 33 notwithstanding clause. Harper’s reply was that in defense of the children against Supreme Court-fashioned kiddy-porn loopholes protecting producers and possessors of works with artistic merit from criminal conviction, he would indeed use s. 33. Martin appeared bested on this one. News coverage later in the week of the convictions of a major Belgian pedophile and of a Toronto child-killer who admitted consuming child pornography only concentrated public attention on the problem.

The other exchange was on another point of the Tories’ social conservative platform. The Liberals include in their electoral coalition immigrant communities and socially liberal constituencies like feminists and homosexuals. Like most coalitions, this one is not entirely coherent. Many immigrant communities are socially conservative. While Martin was waxing eloquent about the Charter and the sanctity of same-sex marriage, Harper replied that many immigrant communities are closer to his party on social issues Martin identifies with the Charter. This was an artful attempt to put cracks in what has been a solid bloc of Liberal support. Harper was obliquely probing the meaning of multiculturalism in contemporary Canada and casting doubt on the trinity of multiculturalism, Charter politics, and big-L Liberalism.

The Conservative campaign ran into heavier seas later in the week when a press release came out of the Tory war room suggesting the Liberals – in the person of Paul Martin, who earlier voted against an opposition motion limiting defences to charges of possession, production, and distribution of child pornography – are weak on the protection of children against this smut. Martin got a break he was waiting for, declaring that this was dirty pool, and that Harper should apologize for the scurrilous attack. To his credit, Harper did not back down. He conceded that the title of the release (phrased in the form of a rhetorical question) was perhaps strong, but stuck by the substance of the charge that Martin did not do enough to contain the proliferation of child pornography. Child pornography has to be a winner for any party that says it is against it. The Tories won’t suffer damage on this one.

On the matter of a secret plan to alter regulations governing Air Canada operations, things may be different. Here the Tories have a plan to relax legal requirements affecting AC operations but the plans are not in its election platform. Previously the Tories said the platform is their comprehensive list of policy ideas. Harper has from the beginning been described as a wolf in sheep’s clothing, a right-wing extremist Bob Roberts-type playing the moderate to get elected. Now the Liberals and NDPers have a little bit of evidence for that view. Mind you, going to the wall in defence of Air Canada will not stir the hearts of anyone who has recently traveled on “Canada’s national airline.”

Senate reform was once the top plank in the Reform Party platform, but it steadily dropped as the prospects of major formal constitutional reform reduced to nil in post-Charlottetown Canada. But at a time when seven Canadian jurisdictions are examining reform to the democratic process, the Conservatives’ plan for federal appointment of nominees elected in provincial contests no longer provokes ridicule and derision. The Tories’ plan in fact got a boost from New Brunswick Premier Bernard Lord who said he would arrange the popular election of a Senate nominee if the Conservatives are elected. Over the long term this stealth Senate reform process would become a bit of a time bomb, but it says something about the prescience of the Conservatives and the mood of the country.

On the negative side, former PC party president Bruck Easton left the party, saying it is neither fiscally conservative nor socially progressive.

Liberal Party

In the debates Paul Martin seemed to project some energy and feistiness lacking to that point. He suffered no death blow from the others. But his constant badgering of Harper became grating. And his big line – that the reduction of acute medical care waiting lists is the cause of his life – is both uninspiring and less than credible. Getting a hip replacement in one month instead of four as a vision for Canada? Yikes.

And what is the gun ad all about? Is this not negative campaigning? Do the Liberals suggest that Tories would shoot women sitting in clinic waiting rooms? Another Liberal ad warned voters to “think twice.” Someone pointed out that this was Kim Campbell’s line in the 1993 election. Not good optics.

Liberal attacks on the Tories’ hidden agenda of extremism now has some traction. When Harper said he did not particularly care if provinces experimented with private health care delivery, the Liberals had their health care wedge. Liberals have helped focus critical attention on the Conservatives. They have also helped to shake loose some NDP support by claiming that the Liberals are the only realistic party to block the Conservatives.

Martin has also played to his experience as a successful finance minster, saying he will devote the energy to health care renewal that he previously devoted to fiscal reform.

There remains dissent within the Liberal camp. David Herle had to apologize publicly to Michael Marzollini for implying that the latter had intentionally released information to sabotage the Liberals’ campaign. Not a happy Liberal household.

New Democratic Party

Layton had to play for attention in the debate and got it, but not all of that attention was salutary. He often appeared like a second rate toothpaste salesman flogging a “positive”, “progressive” alternative to the other brands, then smiling like a marionette. He seemed to smile even when intoning that the Tories would deliver to the country completely to the forces of darkness. When Duceppe asked him directly about his party’s position on the Clarity Act, Layton avoided the question as completely and brazenly as any experienced, old-line politician. Toronto Liberal candidate Ken Dryden said that the winner of Tuesday’s debate was Dennis Mills, Layton’s Liberal opponent in the Toronto riding in which both are running.

But Layton’s main objective in the debates was to be visible, and that he was.

NDP support has appeared to stall in the high teens and some of this may drain away in the inevitable strategic calculus many voters will make to block a Tory victory. The NDP should have been prepared for this.

The Green Party

Grade: B-

The Greens continued to benefit from the favourable, free media attention that goes to the party that is not taken terribly seriously. Also the networks, especially our public broadcaster, are a little embarrassed about excluding the Greens from the leaders debates and so have compensated with some gratuitous coverage. Otherwise the Greens have done little to break into the public consciousness.

Past Political Party Grades

© 2001-2006 Maple Leaf Web.
All Rights Reserved

This page was last modified: August 10, 2007