While Jean Charest is about to announce his candidacy for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada, Stephen Harper gives himself the air of emperor.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
Remember: Roman emperors once had to decide the fate of gladiators. Thumbs up meant a gladiator would survive.
Canada’s former Conservative prime minister, for his part, quickly gave his thumbs up.
According to Stephen Harper, “Jean Charest is not a true Conservative”.
This is what our office manager in Ottawa, Joël-Denis Bellavance, reported recently.
We also learned that the former prime minister “will not sit idly by” if Jean Charest applies.
It wouldn’t be surprising. In 2020, Stephen Harper himself had taken care to telephone certain members of the party to warn them against Jean Charest.
Many have doubts about the idea of seeing Jean Charest run for the leadership of the Conservative Party and we understand why. He drags a lot of saucepans. His rivals are sure to point this out.
But there is something disturbing in seeing a former prime minister turn into a kingmaker trying to determine the ideological purity of this or that candidate.
With all due respect to Mr. Harper, allow us to backtrack. Because history illuminates the present.
And in the case that interests us, it reveals the bad faith of the approach of the former Prime Minister.
Stephen Harper still wields real influence over the Conservative Party, for several good reasons.
First, he contributed to its foundation. He was one of the main architects of the merger between the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party in 2003.
Then, he was the only one to become Prime Minister at the head of this political formation. He triumphed three times. In 2006, 2008 and 2011.
Let us now recall how he was able to rise to the head of the country. It is fundamental.
Both the Canadian Alliance and its ancestor, the Reform Party (led by Preston Manning), were virtually unable to win seats east of Manitoba.
Stephen Harper tasted victory when he brought progressives on board his party and gave less power to the populists, reactionaries and social conservatives who were already there.
From the moment, in short, when he decided to campaign inspired more by Brian Mulroney than by Preston Manning.
Moreover, when the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party merged, the agreement provided that the first of the founding principles that would guide the new party was to strike a “balance between fiscal responsibility, progressive social policy and individual rights and responsibilities”.
However, today, by wanting to block the way to the most progressive candidates (Jean Charest will probably not be the only one), Stephen Harper finds himself favoring Pierre Poilievre.
That is to say, a worthy representative of the conservative faction of the party which has never been able to defeat the liberals.
A faction currently flirting with the reactionary ideology of Maxime Bernier’s People’s Party, as demonstrated by the support offered to the demonstrators who besieged Ottawa.
A faction that is unable to admit that climate change represents an existential threat since it does not… believe in climate change!
It is hard to see how the Conservatives could stand out in Quebec with such a program. Note also that no Conservative MP elected in Quebec has so far offered his support to Pierre Poilievre. It is not a coincidence.
The truth is that Stephen Harper has a grudge against Jean Charest.
In particular because the latter, in 2008, attacked the federal conservatives when they had slashed culture and promised to abolish the gun registry.
Of course, it is not wrong to say that the leadership race of the Conservative Party is a battle for the soul of this political party.
But the question of ideological purity should not be on the agenda of this struggle.
It is rather Stephen Harper’s intentions which, in this whole affair, have nothing pure about them.