Post-Mulroney, the Conservatives’ brand is ‘loser.’ It’s time for an overhaul - The Globe and Mail


AI Summary Hide AI Generated Summary

The Conservative Party's Post-Mulroney Struggle

The article examines the Canadian Conservative Party's performance since Brian Mulroney's leadership ended in 1993. It highlights the Liberals' significant electoral advantage (27 years in power versus the Conservatives' 9 years since 1993), emphasizing the Conservatives' repeated losses.

Analyzing the Conservatives' Losses

The analysis suggests that the party's rightward shift, particularly its embrace of populism, has alienated many voters. The article notes that even Stephen Harper's victories came against weak Liberal leaders, while defeats came against stronger ones.

  • Two of the three Conservative wins were against weak Liberal leaders (Dion and Ignatieff).
  • Defeats were against stronger leaders (Chrétien, Martin, Trudeau).

The success of Ontario Premier Doug Ford, a more moderate conservative, serves as a contrasting example of electoral success through a more centrist approach.

The Rise of Mark Carney and the Need for Change

The article discusses the election of Mark Carney as Prime Minister and the implications for the Conservative Party. Carney's more centrist platform and global reputation are presented as evidence of a shift away from populism in Canadian politics.

The article argues that the Conservatives' current populist brand, embodied by leader Pierre Poilievre, is damaged by the global perception of populism, especially under the influence of Donald Trump. This image is seen as a significant hurdle to electoral success.

Poilievre's Shortcomings

Pierre Poilievre's low approval ratings and lack of global experience are criticized as significant weaknesses, contrasting with Carney's strong global presence and reputation.

The Path Forward

The article concludes that while the Conservatives might see temporary gains from economic challenges faced by the Carney government, a fundamental change in approach is necessary for long-term success. The party needs to move beyond its current populist identity to regain wider appeal.

Sign in to unlock more AI features Sign in with Google
Open this photo in gallery:Since 1993, the Conservatives – led by Pierre Poilievre – will have been in power for nine years, compared with the Liberals' 27 (including the years to come in Mark Carney's term).Justin Tang/The Canadian Press

How have Conservatives fared since making the big swerve rightward in the early 1990s?

We recall that under Brian Mulroney’s Progressive Conservative banner they won majority governments in 1984 and 1988. Then along came the dividers, the ideologues of the Reform Party, who grabbed 52 seats in the 1993 election and then proceeded to swallow the old Tories whole.

And the rest is history – a primarily painful party history. Since the late Mr. Mulroney’s departure from the party leadership in 1993, the Liberals have won eight elections to the Conservatives’ three.

The question now is whether the party will continue on its Liberal gift-giving track or clue in and opt, like the Liberal Party has just done, for a change of course: in the Conservatives’ case, a change that broadens their identity beyond their Prairies-driven populist brand.

Lawrence Martin: Why the Conservatives should dump Poilievre – but won’t

To be sure, the Conservatives’ tradition is to lose most of the time. But in being bracketed further on the right in recent decades, they’ve lost even more of the time. If we count the four years (or so) to come under Mark Carney, the Liberals will have been in power for 27 years since 1993. The Conservatives? Nine.

Their three victories came under Stephen Harper, who also lost two elections. Whether the wins were on account of ideology is doubtful. Two of the three wins came against Stéphane Dion and Michael Ignatieff, arguably two of the weakest leaders in Liberal Party history. As for the Conservatives’ defeats, three came courtesy of Jean Chrétien, one from Paul Martin, three from Justin Trudeau and one so far from Mr. Carney.

In the meantime, a more moderate form of conservatism, as practiced by Ontario Premier Doug Ford, has resulted in three straight majority victories in the province. On that more centrist side is where the federal party has been most successful, as exemplified by multiple election winners John A. Macdonald, John Diefenbaker and Mr. Mulroney.

More bad news for the Conservative Party in its current form is the advantage the collapsed NDP gives the Liberals. Their plight, and Mr. Carney’s shift away from left-leaning Trudeauism to the centre, means Liberals’ available real estate has significantly expanded. It is especially the case if the Conservatives are cocooned on the right.

Another factor that suggests the Conservatives need a big rethink is the plight of the populist brand. Leader Pierre Poilievre, who joined the Reform Party as a teenager, is an embedded populist. What Donald Trump is doing to the image of populism is ghastly. Under him, it is authoritarian, xenophobic, demagogic, vulgar, imperialist ... and I’ll stop there.

Lawrence Martin: How the Conservatives can save themselves: Changing Canada’s image as the great white weakling of the North

With the election of Mr. Carney – a big banker, an establishment man, a globalist respected for his knowledge – Canadians have signalled a turn away from populism. They’re fed up with the politics of polarization. Mr. Carney might even bring back a modicum of respect for elites.

His Liberals are popular in Quebec. As Mr. Mulroney argued, without Quebec the Conservatives’ chances of winning a majority are scant. Post-Mulroney, the party has scored low in the province.

A political party’s deficiencies can be overcome with a popular leader, but the current Conservatives are saddled with one who lost his own seat and who, according to a new Nanos poll, is almost 25 points behind Mr. Carney in approval ratings.

In the election campaign, many of Mr. Poilievre’s economic policies were welcome enough, so much so that they were copied by the Liberals. Policy was less his problem than personality, likeability and his concocted look. Having been an MP for 20-plus years and party leader for almost three, that image is ingrained, hard to change.

There’s an old saying about all politics being local. That is not the case now. With foreign threats on the rise, with the country being bludgeoned by Donald Trump’s tariffs, with Big Tech and AI posing new challenges, politics is becoming more and more global.

The Liberals found a man of global stature to meet the times. Ironically, given all his political experience, Mr. Poilievre looks unseasoned by comparison. He has spent precious little time abroad. He gives no sense of having an informed global perspective.

Hard economic times are ahead for the country. The Carney honeymoon will likely end before long. How he hopes to pay for all his wide-eyed promises is a mystery. There’s a good chance the Conservatives will benefit in the polls, thus dampening momentum for bold change.

But that would be folly. The trajectory Conservatives have been on since being overtaken by the Reform ideologues has been predominantly a failing one. They need put this phase of their history behind them.

Was this article displayed correctly? Not happy with what you see?

Tabs Reminder: Tabs piling up in your browser? Set a reminder for them, close them and get notified at the right time.

Try our Chrome extension today!


Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more

Facebook

Save articles to reading lists
and access them on any device


Share this article with your
friends and colleagues.
Earn points from views and
referrals who sign up.
Learn more

Facebook

Save articles to reading lists
and access them on any device