BY ALL accounts and from all appearances, Stephen Harper loves being prime minister.
During his 15 months in the job, Harper has grown into it (in more ways than one, as his tailor would attest). Unlike his somewhat morose and unsteady performance as opposition leader, he exudes the sense of someone who is, and loves to be, in charge.
Still, there must be days when Harper is nostalgic for his carefree days as a conservative thinker and analyst as president of the National Citizens’ Coalition. There must be days when he envies his one-time leader Preston Manning even though the two did not see eye to eye when Manning was Reform party leader and Harper was a member of his caucus.
Read Also
Agriculture needs to prepare for government spending cuts
As government makes necessary cuts to spending, what can be reduced or restructured in the budgets for agriculture?
These days, Manning is a respected former senior politician with time to write and reflect on his conservative views and how to make them more mainstream in Canada.
These days, former-politician Manning has a platform and the freedom to write the policy prescriptions that he thinks are correct, rather than the views that he thinks will sell.
These days, politician Harper is forced to view many issues through the prism of how he can appeal to urban, suburban and rural voters in populous Quebec and Ontario to try to secure the majority he would so enjoy.
These days, prime minister Harper cannot say many of the things he has believed through most of his adult life. Manning can.
Last week provided an example of that.
Manning and former Ontario Conservative premier Mike Harris published a research paper that NCC president Harper would have embraced.
It calls for deeper economic and political integration with the United States and on the agricultural front, the elimination of supply management protections as an anachronism of history, protection for losers at the expense of winner-exporters.
Economist Stephen Harper surely would have embraced that analysis. Opposition to supply management protectionism was an article of faith in the Reform party that Harper helped build.
Politician Harper sat in the House of Commons May 8 and listened as his agriculture minister reacted to the Manning/Harris report by scoffing at Liberal claims to be the party of supply management. Why, Conservatives have been far tougher in protecting and even trying to expand the protectionist tariff regime.
It is inconceivable that in his gut, Harper could agree.
He is no Lorne Hehn or Ken Ritter, Canadian Wheat Board monopoly critics who got inside the organization and discovered the error of their ways. Harper knows what he thinks and likely has not changed his views on protectionism. It’s just that his circumstances have changed.
In fact, last week’s report was a striking example of how the Conservatives have altered their public stance to reflect political needs. More than half of caucus members have roots in the Reform party and its years of criticizing supply management as a protectionist drag on western export interests.
These days, mum’s the word. Quebec and Ontario love supply management? We love supply management.
Yes, there must be days when Harper envies his former leader and looks forward to the day when he is a former leader and prime minister able to say what he means and mean what he says.
