As this astonishing federal election spins in unexpected directions -a gloriously democratic reminder that ordinary voters are the true movers and shakers -Edmontonians and all Albertans are driven to re-examine what outcome would be best for our province and country.
As entertaining and empowering as it is, watching political elites spill coffee on themselves in the current polling earthquake is ultimately a transient pleasure. With a cold, calculating eye we must ask ourselves what we need from Ottawa, and what mix of MPs in Parliament is most likely to deliver it, during what is likely to be a watershed four years for our economy, for the environment and for Alberta's vital resource industry.
And today, The Journal's contribution to that conversation is that a Tory majority spiced with strong local opposition representation would be the best way forward.
It is true the Harper Conservatives have their flaws. The contempt finding against them in the last parliament was more than the empty opposition ploy the prime minister claimed. And then there's the recent disturbing episode in which a key -now fired -Tory strategist sent media outlets a photo falsely purporting to show Michael Ignatieff in combat gear in 2003. Surely this suggestion, that the former Harvard professor was somehow involved in planning of the Iraq invasion, undermines the Harper narrative that only his team has the appropriate values to steer us through difficult times.
But for several reasons, the electorate should look beyond such things to the bigger picture: First, the Tories' record on the vital core issues facing the country -the economy, health care and military spending -has been moderate and sensible. No -not perfect, given the deficit, but not at all bad compared to what we are likely to get if Liberals and New Democrats compete to deliver unrealistic campaign promises.
Second, even when you set aside their policies, a government dominated by New Democrats would feature ministerial rookies. Is this the time to take such a leap into the unknown? It is common these days to attack the NDP by pointing to (now Liberal) Bob Rae's failure in Ontario in the early 1990s, but many critics miss the point by laying blame on left-wing policies. In fact, what brought Rae down was tough economic times, initial naivete and anger from the party's electoral base when it started taking small-c conservative steps to combat economic woes.
Third, the Harper Conservatives can be counted upon to defend and nurture Alberta's energy wealth. They understand it, for one thing, and for another, only a federal government with strong Alberta representation will have the political leverage to confront the threat of climate change, and the need to develop the resource in a sustainable and internationally acceptable way. Already a Conservative Ottawa has done more to mesh the two agendas than the Liberals would ever have managed without stoking new waves of Western alienation.
Fourth, speaking of Western alienation, a few more years of Conservative government will be good for national unity. For far too long, Canadian conservatives have thought of "Ottawa" as "they," not "we." For far too long, westerners have been driven by the Liberal ascendancy, and by flexible Quebec voters' canny ability to keep the politicians' attention, to feel relegated to national afterthought. Having a government rooted in western Reform party politics has changed that in a valuable, necessary way.
Indeed, the NDP's rise in Quebec is actually proof of how healthy this western/Conservative shift has been. Quebecers are now shifting to a federal party with genuine national roots because they are tired of being on the outs, and tired of waiting for Ottawa to come back to them as has always happened in the past.
Now, some of the roughly 45 per cent of local voters who have voted against the Conservatives in the past will wonder: If they are to stay in power, wouldn't another minority be best?
And the majority of Edmontonians who back the Harper Tories will wonder: How does a call for a majority square with support for the election of some local opposition MPs?
Well, on the first point, a minority of any sort is likely to see the opposition parties take power. In a healthy European multi-party system, the natural thing would be for centrist Liberals to support the Conservatives if they win the most seats -but after the way the Conservatives have demonized the Liberals and Ignatieff personally, it's hard to picture them working together.
Also, it's time we were able to judge the Conservatives by what they actually do with a majority, rather than by what opponents say they'd do. The betting here is that a wish to be re-elected in four years would keep the "hidden agenda" hidden. But either way, in four years we'd be able to vote based on reality instead of supposition.
Finally, let's turn to the question of local MPs. With respect to local Tory incumbents, some of whom are very impressive and would make excellent cabinet ministers, a little unpredictability in local races would make the federal government more attentive to their opinions.
Who knows if campaign swings nationally are thawing the ice in the two most competitive Tory seats -Peter Goldring's Edmonton East and Laurie Hawn's Edmonton Centre? Who even knows if Linda Duncan has become more secure in Edmonton Strathcona?
But if the ground has shifted left, Stephen Harper will be less likely to assume his decision on Expo funding, for example, has neither risk nor potential reward. And should Jack Layton's longshot bid for power actually succeed, local NDP members would guarantee that no matter what, Edmonton wouldn't be forgotten.