Runner Debate: Was Harper a Force for Good or Evil? (Pro Side)

Hopefully the last time I’ll have to defend Harper

Click here to see the other side!

While I certainly didn’t vote for the Conservatives in 2015, I certainly don’t think Harper is as bad as everyone says he was. It should go without saying that Harper wasn’t the best Prime Minister we’ve ever had, but he definitely wasn’t the worst by any stretch of the imagination.

When you look to other Western democracies, Harper was easily one of the most cerebral, intelligent politicians around, though he was also one of the most unlikely. While Justin Trudeau is a clear extrovert, Harper came off as a man who dreaded the campaign season and simply wanted to get back to Ottawa to do his job. This difference was especially visible after the election, with Trudeau taking selfies in the Montreal subway, while Harper didn’t announce his resignation as Conservative leader in public, and generally stayed away from the media.

I still rank environment, social issues, and the economy as my highest ranks of importance when it comes to government, but there are some less exciting things that Harper’s Conservatives did over the last year. As the federal government, they got out of the way of the provinces and gave them greater freedom, though this is obviously a problem if you’re a federalist. He also laid the groundwork that ensures that the Conservatives stay united in their defeat, and pragmatic in their rebuilding as a party. Unless you’re over 30 years old, you might not know that right-wing parties in Canada once had a tendency of falling apart after failed elections.

This is important, because while the Liberal party has existed for almost 150 years, every other party has come and gone. The NDP was founded in 1961 and has never held government. If there’s a conservative political party that’s unlikely to splinter, it’s the one that Harper created.

The Harper-led Conservative party struck me as riding the ideological line between the former Progressive Conservatives and former Alliance. They would keep taxes low, but they certainly won’t touch abortion or gay marriage. Stuff like this is why I was always bothered by people who would conflate them with the American right-wing. While the Conservatives didn’t do a great job with climate change, you didn’t hear any ministers denying its existence.

Generally speaking, the Conservatives were the party you voted for if you put a high value on good economic stewardship, and the numbers would certainly suggest that they accomplished that. Under their leadership, Canada was performing the best out of all G7 countries during the 2008 credit crunch, losing the lowest amount of jobs—proportional to population—and having no bank failures. However, I would concede that some aspects of our excellent banking can be attributed to the Chrétien Bank Act of 1993 rather than Harper’s decision-making.

Canada also had the lowest debt-to-GDP ratio among G7 countries during the same period. This is crucial because it implied the lowest amount of risk to foreign investors, which meant more money coming into the country.

Many people also forget about the political climate that led to the Conservatives’ power in the first place. 1993 to 2006 saw 13 years of consistent Liberal governance, mostly under Chretien. This long reign came to a halt with the sponsorship scandal, which rendered the Liberal government at the time to be completely untrustworthy. While Harper had the Duffy trial, Liberal MP Ralph Goodale was being investigated by the RCMP for insider trading related to an income trusts announcement. Harper did a good job of characterizing the Liberals as Ontario and Quebec centric and ignoring the will of the Western provinces, which were frequently getting less attention at the time.

I also have a feeling that some might have forgotten how pathetic Michael Ignatieff looked standing next to Stephen Harper during the debates, which surely turned off the large swath of swing voters consistent in Canada’s body politic.

Regardless, while Harper should be remembered for putting a half-hearted effort into climate change and social issues, he ought to also be remembered as cerebral and Machiavellian. Well, as Machiavellian as a Canadian politician can be.