Like all Canadian political leaders, prime minister Stephen Harper must walk a tightrope between the hopes of his party zealots and the electoral need to appeal to a broader public.
The first Conservative majority government in 18 years was elected in 2011 by moving beyond the narrow party base of conservative policy dreams to appeal to more middle-of-the-road voters.
They were unimpressed by opposition leaders and willing to try the Conservative promise of responsible management without radical change.
Now, the party is beginning to develop its 2015 re-election platform and that same delicate balance will be needed.
Read Also
Crop profitability looks grim in new outlook
With grain prices depressed, returns per acre are looking dismal on all the major crops with some significantly worse than others.
Last weekend’s Conservative party convention that gave voice to party activists was a glimpse at how much of a balancing act it is. Convention resolutions are not binding but they reflect the opinions of the party activists who do the grunt work to win elections.
On most fronts, delegates showed themselves to be much more conservative than the party dares to be if it wants to fish in the deeper end of the political pool.
They voted to move to a “less progressive tax system by reducing the number of personal income tax brackets.” The government might agree in principle, but opponents will jump on the “less progressive” part of the resolution to call it a Magna Carta for the wealthy.
They called on the government to end rules that require union membership as a condition of employment in some workplaces.
“No one should be forced to join an organization,” said a delegate, despite an earlier vote to support supply management with its requirement that producers buy quota and sell through the marketing boards.
Delegates demanded that the government take a strong stand against public service unions in negotiations, reducing their pay and benefits to private sector levels. They demanded that public sector pensions be made less stable with required contributions but no guaranteed payments.
The government may agree in principle, but it will be difficult to achieve without major public service disruptions that could happen in an election year. They want to curtail the power of unions to use members’ dues for other than narrow job-related issues. They want the government to come down hard on the CBC, supporting radio services but targeting television.
They want the government to support the right of faith-based organizations to be able to exclude from their facilities those who disagree with their beliefs. As well, they want human rights legislation amended to say that “discrimination based on the beliefs of a faith based organization be excluded from the definition of disallowed discrimination.”
Delegates who showed a strong opposition to government intervention also voted strongly for a proposal that the government be forced to guarantee a job to anyone who leaves to be a military reservist and wants back, even as the government sheds civil servant positions.
For Harper and his conservative party policy entourage, many of these proposals may make perfect sense. But many of those proposals will not play well to uncommitted voters who could be persuaded to vote Conservative in 2015 if they are convinced the result will not be too radical.
Yet the party cannot stray too far from its base. Brian Mulroney and Kim Campbell discovered that in 1993.
