[fblike]
Last Monday, Canadian voters delivered a stunning victory to the Liberal Party, a result deemed unthinkable several weeks ago. Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party lost its governing majority, losing sixty seats. Meanwhile, the Liberals gained an amazing 148 seats due to the impressive campaigning of its young leader Justin Trudeau, the oldest son of former Canadian Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. Observers noted that the Liberal victory was due to Canada’s faltering economy as well as perceptions that Harper’s government was inconsiderate toward the plight of Syrian refugees and neglectful of Canada’s proper place in global affairs. A Trudeau-led government has promised to change Canada’s fiscal policy and reform the nation’s drug laws. The Liberals are also poised to alter Canada’s foreign policy, especially with respect to environmental and security issues. What is certain is that the Liberals will have to contend with a new Conservative Party, as Harper announced his resignation as party leader following the announcement of the election results.
This topic brief will provide a summary of the 2015 Canadian elections, discuss the top domestic and international priorities of the Trudeau government, and then analyze what Stephen Harper’s legacy as Canadian prime minister might be.
Readers are also encouraged to use the links below and in the related R&D to bolster their files about this topic.
The 2015 Canadian Election
The Canadian election lasted eleven weeks and was a three-way contest between the Conservative Party, the Liberal Party, and the New Democratic Party (NDP). Canada has a parliamentary system and the party with the most seats in the House of Commons, which is located in Ottawa, is the party that governs the country. The nation is familiar with minority governments, which are those formed by parties that do not have an overall majority in the House of Commons but still have a plurality of seats, and in fact, Stephen Harper’s reign as prime minister began in such a government in 2006. The reason minority governments have occurred from time to time in Canada is because voters that lean to the political left have a smorgasbord of parties to choose from. The Liberal Party can be deemed centre-left as it tends to favor expanding Canada’s social safety net and enhanced government spending, but has typically supported free trade agreements and fiscal austerity. Meanwhile, the NDP is farther to the left as it favors a peacekeeping foreign policy, the expansion of human and civil rights, a larger national safety net, and increased corporate income taxes. The Bloc Quebecois, a party that has stood for the secession and independence of the French-speaking province of Quebec, also leans left as it favors same sex marriage, environmentalism, opposes Canadian military intervention in the Middle East, and the decriminalization of marijuana. In contrast, Canadian voters that are libertarian or socially conservative tend to vote for the Conservative Party, thereby giving it sufficient numbers to be one of the largest parties in the nation.
The recent elections were called by Harper in early August and the eleven-week campaign was the longest in Canadian history and the longest since 1872 (past campaigns were typically five weeks long). In fact, voters complained about the length of the campaign season, which was somewhat humorous when compared to how long the 2016 presidential contest has been going on in the United States. Harper was seeking a fourth term, which would have made him the first prime minister since Sir Wilfrid Laurier in 1908 to win four consecutive elections. The Canadian Constitution mandates that a parliament can serve no longer than five years and Harper’s government was in its fourth year, having won a governing majority in 2011. Part of the timing of the election was a gamble by the Conservatives that they could use their massive electoral war chest against the NDP and the Liberals since electoral reforms passed by the Conservatives lifted spending caps on each political party.
When the election was announced it appeared that the primary competition would be between the NDP and the Conservatives. The Liberals were an afterthought. Despite governing Canada for 80 of the 110 years between 1896-2006, Time reports on October 20 that Liberals only won 10% of the seats in the House of Commons in 2011. Some political observers began writing the Party’s obituary, arguing that its centrism was losing out to other parties of the left and that the Conservative Party had displaced it on social and economic issues. The party’s loss in that election led to the ouster of Michael Ignatieff as party leader and the rise of Justin Trudeau, the eldest son of former Liberal Party leader and Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau, who governed Canada from 1968-1979 and 1980-1984. Newsweek reports on October 20 that Justin Trudeau has an interesting resume, having taken jobs as an actor, snowboard instructor, and drama teacher prior to entering Parliament in 2008. The UK Independent writes on October 21 that Trudeau helped his national profile by delivering a powerful eulogy at his father’s funeral in 2000 and in 2012 he found himself at the head of the Liberal Party, winning 80% of the vote in the party’s leadership election.
Observers dismissed Trudeau as a lightweight and someone that would not be able to fight effectively with political veterans such as Harper and NDP leader Tom Mulcair. However, Trudeau found a message that quickly resonated with voters. The Economist points out on October 24 that the NDP made several mistakes in an election that it could have won. Poll showed that 66% of Canadian voters wanted Harper out of office, partly due to the nation’s economic problems (more on this in the next section), so the election was shaping up as a contest of whether Mulcair or Trudeau could convince voters that they were a better alternative. According to The Economist, the NDP squandered its advantage when it promised to continue the Conservative Party’s policy of seeking to balance the Canadian budget. This reflected the NDP’s fear of being labeled as “tax-and-spend socialists” by the Conservatives, but it allowed the Liberals and Trudeau to argue for greater infrastructure spending despite the fact that doing so would create three consecutive years of deficits. In other words, the NDP wedded itself to a status quo that Canadians were in the process of rejecting and handed the mantle of reform to Trudeau. Similarly, Trudeau’s campaign echoed a lot of Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign in the United States. Trudeau dismissed the “negative, divisive politics” of the Harper years and promised to create change in the nation. For example, The Toronto Star reports on October 24 that he promised to have a cabinet that would give equal representation to men and women. Also, Trudeau courted indigenous communities and Canada’s Muslims, some of whom were offended by the Conservative push to prevent Muslim women from wearing the niqab – a veil that partially covers the face – during citizenship ceremonies. The Liberals also promised to allow more Syrian refugees into the country, something that Conservatives said was foolish and dangerous. However, the Liberals stuck by the idea, alleging that Harper’s lack of action on the refugee issue was mean spirited and rejected Canada’s traditional values of multiculturalism and openness.
Just days before the election it appeared as if the outcome was still in the balance. Polls showed the Liberals in third place, but it appears that undecided voters broke for them in the end as election night gave the Liberals a sweeping victory. Election night started off poorly for the Conservatives as they lost provincial votes by significant margins in Eastern Canada and Liberals also captured victories in Western Canada that are traditionally places of Conservative strength. Within several hours the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation projected that the Liberals would have a governing majority and the final tally gave them 184 seats in the House of Commons, a gain of 148 seats. The Conservatives lost sixty seats and their governing majority, but the true losers were the NDP, which lost fifty-one seats and went from being the party of primary opposition to the third-largest party in parliament. The Liberal victory was historic in that no party in Canada’s history went from having so few seats in a previous parliament to a governing majority in the next.
The reasons for Trudeau’s stunning triumph were ascribed to several phenomenons. The first is that Canadian voters were seeking an alternative after nine years of Conservative governance and Trudeau and the Liberals made the best case for change. Whereas voters initially thought of empowering the NDP, Trudeau’s ability to present himself as a viable alternative not only to Harper but the NDP peeled off votes. In addition, Trudeau’s upbeat message contrasted with Harper’s campaign, which The Toronto Star on October 24 likened to a farewell tour rather than a campaign that wanted to perform yet another encore in Ottawa. The Conservatives tried to run their campaign on their stewardship of the economy, national security and family values, but as the BBC explains on October 20 some of these issues backfired. Canada’s economy, despite weathering the 2008 financial crisis, is weakening due to low energy prices as that is the nation’s primary export, and many Canadian voters cited stagnant wage growth and problems in the housing market as a reason to vote for non-Conservative parties. Similarly, Harper’s decision to push through stringent security legislation, called Bill C-51, that resembled the USA Patriot Act in the aftermath of last year’s attack on government buildings in Ottawa alienated civil libertarians, who endorsed Trudeau’s call to reform the legislation. Finally, Canadians were not happy about Harper’s inability to secure a position for Canada on the UN Security Council and they worried that he was not getting along well with President Obama. In some ways, Trudeau benefitted from a series of forces that made a Harper fourth term difficult, but he did do a good job framing his message in such a way to be unique, different, and more powerful than his opponents and this was a major reason for his victory.
A Future Trudeau Government
Now that Trudeau has shown that he can win an election, he has to show the Canadian people that he can govern. Trudeau made several progressive promises on the campaign trail, but implementing them may prove difficult. An example of this was his pledge to decriminalize marijuana. Admitting on the campaign trail that he once smoked the substance, which earned him political attacks from the Conservative Party and the NDP, Trudeau framed his argument for legalization by saying that many Canadians have criminal records as a result of indulging in a substance that is not a significant risk to public health. This was in stark contrast to Harper, who argued that marijuana was worse than tobacco. However, a problem with legalizing marijuana, something that Trudeau said that he would move to do immediately, is that Trudeau lacked a specific plan for doing so and simply legalizing a drug is not easy. The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) on October 25 explains that U.S. states such as Washington, Colorado, and Oregon are showing the difficulties of legalizing marijuana. For example, there are questions about how to regulate edibles laced with THC, the primary ingredient in marijuana. The CBC notes that 50% of marijuana poisoning calls last year in Washington were about children, so Canadian officials must determine how to regulate edibles and their sale. Also, there is a question of how to handle drivers that are using marijuana and Washington has also seen the number of drivers in crashes testing positive for THC double from 6% in 2010 to 12% in 2014.
With regards to foreign policy, Trudeau has already ruffled some feathers in the U.S. by deciding to end Canada’s bombing mission against the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS). Under Harper, Canada was using six F-35 stealth fighter jets in the 12-nation air campaign against ISIS, but Trudeau pledged to halt that effort and concentrate Canada’s energies on humanitarian assistance and other forms of military training. An October 20 article from Reuters explains that American officials are disappointed with Trudeau’s decision, but the Liberals do not seem to be backing down from it. According to The Toronto Star on October 25, Trudeau is being encouraged by former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien to embrace other world leaders, including pariahs such as Russian President Vladimir Putin. A Liberal government holds out the possibility of reopening the Canadian embassy in Iran, especially after Iran’s deal with Western powers over its nuclear program. This would put Canadian policy more in line with the U.S., whereas under Harper Canada was moving to cut its ties with Iran back in 2012 on the grounds that Iran constituted “the most significant threat to global peace.”
Where a Liberal government will make a more immediate impact is environmental policy. Energy-rich Western provinces, typically Conservative bastions, had led Harper to withdraw Canada from the 1997 Kyoto Protocol on global warming and he had moved to loosen the nation’s environmental regulations. The Reuters article previously cited explains that Trudeau has promised to alter the nation’s climate policy by convincing provincial heads to institute a national emissions target within ninety days. Exploring carbon taxes is another idea that Trudeau is contemplating, but he may want to be careful of such an idea as it eventually hurt the Labour Party in Australia. Climate change activists were thrilled at the election result, though, as Canada is bound to be a strong supporter of a major climate deal in Paris this December.
On economic policy, Trudeau is planning on running three years of deficits to the tune of $10 billion in order to stimulate the economy through infrastructure spending. The conservative Cato Institute on October 20 warns that this deviates from the policies of the Liberal governments between 1993-2006 and the Conservative governments of Harper that emphasized spending cuts, privatization of governmental activities, paying down the national debt, and reducing taxes. It warns that the “Santa Claus” economics that Trudeau will emphasize, which mirror those of his father, could send Canada’s federal spending higher and by proxy make its national debt burden worse. However, the deficit spending that Trudeau is advocating for is being embraced by investors that think it is long overdue for the Canadian government to increase spending to generate economic activity. Also, the Liberals have pledged to restore a balanced budget by 2019-2020, which helped to offset some Conservative criticisms that they would not be good stewards of the nation’s finances. Extempers should not simply be caught up in Trudeau advocating Keynesian economics, though, as the World Economic Forum points out on October 20 that Canada needs to find ways to encourage more innovation since the nation lacks “innovative, globally competitive companies” and trails other developed nations such as Switzerland, the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and Japan in research and development, information technology investment, patents, and productivity. As Canada’s manufacturing sector has shrank and its energy sector is weakening, a Trudeau government must find a way to fix these problems as well as finding ways to shift the economy away from the backs of consumers, who are facing record-levels of debt that some economists estimate to be as high as 165% of disposable income. The Bank of Canada is especially worried about the latter problem, with the World Economic Forum reporting that Bank of Canada Governor Stephen Poloz has said that consumer debt is “a key vulnerability for the financial system.”
The biggest weakness that Trudeau faces is obviously inexperience. He is the second-youngest Canadian prime minister and he will have to rely on more experienced members of the Liberal Party for guidance and policy implementation. The Economist warns that Trudeau has never been in charge of a government ministry and is now tasked with running a nation with the eleventh largest economy in the world. Still, this not necessarily a bad omen because, as The Economist also notes, Trudeau’s inexperience will lead to a more collegial governing style. This will be in contrast to Harper, who tended to lead more autocratically and made centralizing power in his office a priority. The Guardian writes on October 25 that Harper’s behavior included shutting out the press, refusing to engage his critics, and muzzling dissident cabinet members. Canadians may find an inexperienced prime minister that has to loosen the reins on subordinate cabinet officials refreshing, but the danger is that Trudeau runs too loose of an administration, relies on people with ulterior motives, and proceeds to implement policies that could harm Canada’s interests on a domestic and international level. Thus, extempers should carefully follow Trudeau’s cabinet selections, which are due to be announced by November 4, and should take note of who he seems to be getting advice from as those people will probably guide him during his first couple of years in office.
The Legacy of Stephen Harper
Stephen Harper leaves office with a mixed legacy. He overcame the political odds by restoring Conservative rule in Canada and survived much longer than many pundits thought was possible, especially after difficult elections in 2006 and 2008. Whereas Liberal rule over Canada was deemed as automatic prior to his ascension, Harper proved that Conservatives can appeal to Canada’s various interests and build a coalition that could muster a majority in the House of Commons. The CBC reports on October 20 that this coalition included immigrants, Jewish voters, and social conservatives. In addition, Harper was the Conservative Party’s first leader, having played an invaluable role in melding the right-wing populist Reform Party of Canada with the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party in 2004. The Australian reports on October 24 that despite losing the election many of Harper’s policies will be difficult for Trudeau to change as the Conservative infrastructure that Harper built among the provinces may resist some Liberal initiatives, especially on climate policy. Other analysts note that Harper was willing to take a tough line against Islamic extremism and attempted to bolster Canada’s muscle in the world at a time when the United States has suffered from the perception that it is weak in both of those areas.
However, there were some negatives aspects of Harper’s tenure that may reflect poorly on him. For example, his behavior that put his interests and thoughts before those of other cabinet members did not build a collegial atmosphere within the Conservative Party. It is notable that his successors, according to the CBC on October 23, are promising a more collaborative atmosphere in the Opposite Office that will become their new home. Also, the CBC explains that Harper did not always live up to his promises. For example, he once bashed China and said that Canada would not chase after Chinese investments and yet he did later pursue China as an economic partner. Also, he promised to keep Canada’s budget balanced and while the Conservatives kept federal spending down, they ran six deficits in the nine years that Harper ran the country. Furthermore, Harper wanted Canada to play a stronger role in the world, but failed to significantly increase Canada’s defense budget, which remains less than 1% of its gross domestic product (GDP) and below what the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) wishes Canada would contribute, and several defense projects such as new Arctic patrol ships and new fighter jets are behind schedule. Therefore, the image that Harper tried to portray did not always meet expectations, sometimes among members of his own party or among the Canadian population at large, and the BBC argues that this hurt him in the election because 85-90% of Canadians tell pollsters that they do not trust politicians.
It is still uncertain where the Conservative Party will go after Harper. The party is likely to assess its performance in the recent election and conclude that it needs to reinforce its outreach to immigrants and other communities that turned against Harper four years after giving him a third term. Female Conservative legislators such as member of parliament (MP) Diane Finley of Ontario have said that they do not believe the party is lacking in its appeal to female voters since women care about national and financial security as much as men. However, the Conservatives must find a way to argue that they still have the better economic and social policies that Canadians need. The inherent weaknesses of the economy may give them an advantage when Trudeau seeks re-election in four or five years, but just hoping for a Liberal fall from grace is not enough to create a new Conservative governing majority.
By casting their lot with Trudeau, Canadian voters showed that they wish to turn away from some of Harper’s conservative nationalism. Canada is bound to play a strong role in global humanitarian and climate efforts moving forward, but Trudeau’s first priority should be the economy. If he fails at that task, a Conservative re-emergence within the next five years is a distinct possibility.