BOOK: Wells: The Longer I'm P.M.

[Oscar]

REVIEW by Collison - The Longer I'm Prime Minister by Paul Wells

[ http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/bo ... eview.html ]

The Harper endgame is the replacement of the onetime Liberal culture with a conservative one — that can’t be dismantled

By: Robert Collison Published on Wed Oct 23 2013

- - -

QUOTES: "In the hegemon-replacement game, patience is the name of Harper’s game. The prime minister practices what Wells terms “arch incrementalism.” Don’t scare the public with big gestures on politically divisive programs or policies — banning abortion, threatening universal health care, etc. — but rather transform society by the hundreds of smaller decisions that a prime minister makes, daily. So inevitably the sacking of “enemies” like the nuclear lady eventually pay-off. “Our crowd has their hands on the levers of power — not theirs. So there,” gloats Mr. Harper."

"He is an incrementalist to the bone. . . a diligent student of how Liberals win and make change, not by revolution or even really by evolution, but by erosion.” "

- - - - -

It strikes me as perversely appropriate that veteran Maclean’s political writer Paul Wells’ thoroughly absorbing and intensely readable book on the Harper years in power — The Longer I’m Prime Minister, Stephen Harper and Canada 2006- — arrives on the scene as the Senator Mike Duffy affair continues to fester. And that’s because this Senate scandal deftly illustrates what Wells believes are the lengths to which our prime minister will go to achieve his single most abiding strategic goal: survival.

Much of Harper’s take-no-prisoners reputation stems from his crisis management style, or as Wells notes, “He was ruthless in damage control, as in much else, because he was convinced that an unscheduled bit of trouble, a careless remark or an unexpected move could threaten his hold on power.”

This visceral need to retain power at all costs — clearly anyone that threatens it will be thrown under the bus, no ifs, ands, or buts — speaks to the central thesis of the Wells book. For Harper to achieve his goal of transforming Canada into a small government Reaganesque-style society he must retain power for a very long time. After all it took Ronnie’s two terms, Ford and two Bushes for America’s right-wing makeover to be complete. Can’t expect Steve to do it in just seven years.

Simply put, the Harper endgame is the replacement of the onetime Liberal hegemon with a conservative one, so even if the Liberals regain government — perish the thought — they won’t fundamentally tamper with Stephen’s Brave New World, in much the same way that Mulroney didn’t dismantle small-l liberal Canada when he was in power. Courtesy of tax cuts and federal transfers there won’t be any dough left in the Treasury for Ottawa-spawned spending initiatives in any case.

That the Harperites may already have executed their counter-revolution is illustrated by one of Wells’ more telling anecdotes. In La Presse not long after becoming new Liberal leader, Justin Trudeau said he wouldn’t have to raise taxes to fund a more activist Liberal agenda because “Canada has lots of money at the federal level.” As Wells rightly notes, “[Trudeau] was talking the talk of Conservative hegemony.” But was Justin right? In a word, No. “The federal government has less revenue as a share of the economy than it has ever had at any point during Pierre Trudeau’s time in power,” notes Wells. “Harper’s goal is to hobble not just his government but any federal government that will come after it.”

For Paul Wells, however, what is most striking about Harper’s grand strategic plan is the prudence of its execution. Stephen Harper has a reputation in some quarters as an extreme right-wing politician. Perhaps, deservedly. And Wells documents many of the political excesses that roil his opponents: “He called Stephan Dion a terrorist sympathizer, questioned Michael Ignatieff’s loyalty to Canada, fired the nuclear safety lady for worrying about nuclear safety and stacked the Rights and Democracy Board with clowns from the Shriner circus but, by and large, he has put the long game ahead of the instinct to scratch whatever itched.” . . . .

Robert Collison is a Toronto-based writer and editor.

MORE:

[ http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/bo ... eview.html ]

= = = = = =

REVIEW by Blinch: The Longer I'm P.M. by Paul Wells
The One Book You Must Read to Understand Stephen Harper

[ http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/russ-blinc ... 12865.html ]

Russ Blinch Chief Scribbler, CopyCarbon.com 12/09/2013 12:33 pm

Follow: Climate Change, Conservatives, TransCanada, Conservative Party Of Canada, Stephen Harper, Canada Politics News

- - - -

QUOTE: "That is why the book is so useful: It's a lifting of the curtain on a government seeking to do things in secret rather than in an open. So, the Liberal leader's words at the beginning of this review are prescient: "Why do we have to put up with this?" Rise up, Canada -- at least to read this book so you can decide for yourself whether one man's rigid adherence to conservative philosophy, nursed by a regional grievance, will lay waste to our environmental heritage and to some of its least protected citizens."

- - - - -

(This story was cross posted with De Smog Canada and CopyCarbon.com)

It was April, 2011 and Michael Ignatieff, then leader of Canada's opposition Liberal Party, was addressing an election rally in Sudbury, Ontario. "Why do we have to put up with this? Rise up! Rise up! ... This goes beyond partisan politics! This goes beyond the Liberal Party! This is about our country! This is about our democracy! Rise up! Rise up!"

The scene, as penned by Paul Wells in his new book, The Longer I'm Prime Minister, captures all the futility of battling the quiet juggernaut of Stephen Harper, possibly one of the most confounding prime ministers ever to inhabit the dull, grey landscape of Ottawa. Ignatieff led the Liberals to the party's biggest ever defeat that year while the Conservatives under Harper secured its first majority government.

It's easy to underestimate Harper, or resort to caricature as Wells notes in his book. It is obvious Harper is deeply conservative; he loves the oil industry and all things oil sands. He doesn't seem to give a fig about the environment. Harper is all that, but in his book Wells, a veteran journalist, brings clarity to the 'why' of it all.

At first glance, Harper looks very much the accountant he was trained to be: dull and lacking in passion. But don't be fooled, he has a determined, even subversive, vision for the country. Harper is bound to American-style conservatism, yet his battles are not fought in the open. He is no Ronald Reagan making the charming speech, cajoling Canadians along a brave new path. He instead moves with "arch-incrementalism," as a Harper aide tells us in the book.

The very title of the book, The Longer I'm Prime Minister, refers to his plan to shift Canada to the right through small steps that are achieved over time and under the radar. In one of the most telling parts, Wells writes how Harper edits his own speeches to dull them down. "He works at removing memorable turns of phrase and identifiable ideas from his speeches," Wells writes. "He puts great effort into flattening the prose."

Have you ever known a politician who didn't love to draw attention and even exaggerate his policies? It's all part of the penetrating picture the author draws of Harper who first took power in 2006. "His goal was to ensure that Conservatives governed as frequently and as durably in the twenty-first century as Liberals had in the twentieth." He wants to "re-legitimize" the right and obliterate all traces of so-called leftish thinking. The plan includes tax cuts to de-fund the government and an all out effort to gut environmental protections to ensure rapid expansion of Canada's tar sands reserves.

So how did Harper, the man who helped unite Canada's two conservative parties -- the Reform Party and the Progressive Conservatives -- get to this point? While the book is a little skimpy on early biographical details, Wells pens an important chapter on Harper's major influences. Early on, Harper embraced a 1986 book called The Patriot Game, which argued that Canada's successive Liberal governments were not only far to the left politically, they also worked to serve central Canada, at the expense of the resource rich west. That, in part, goes a long way to explain Harper's drive to right the wrongs of the past and to free up the west's resource riches.

While Harper is often cast as the brilliant tactician, Wells illustrates how the prime minister could be his own worst enemy. After the Conservatives won in 2011 there was a period where both opposition parties were in transition to new leaders, theoretically giving Harper even more room to maneuver. But, alas, no. "The strange interlude during which Harper faced no real opposition had come to an end. And not a moment too soon. He had spent months slapping himself silly."

Many of the mistakes Harper makes in his current term revolve around the lack of concern for the environment. Since 2011, Harper has been aggressively promoting the Keystone XL pipeline, which aims to sharply increase the flow of tar sands oil to the big U.S. Gulf Coast refineries. Yet in his aggression, he has made mistakes, including not knowing how to deal with the more green-minded Obama Administration.

"But his instincts, including a deep suspicion of anyone who challenged the resource-producing base of Alberta power, would often get in the way." Wells wrote. "Affecting a blasé attitude toward greenhouse gas emissions seemed a cost-free position to Harper. And then the bill came due."

Harper was furious with Obama's decision to delay the approval of Keystone. But after seeing the writing on the wall, Harper realizes he must take decisive action. Energy exports were the government's new top strategic priority and Asia, specifically China, was now the most important region to target. Harper moved to open up markets at all costs, deciding that environmental reviews must be streamlined and roadblocks by aboriginal groups obliterated. Henceforth, environmentalists were now seen as opponents, even redrawn as traitors under the influence of American money.

MORE:

[ http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/russ-blinc ... 12865.html ]