There has been a lot of criticism leveled at Stephen Harper and the CPC over recent weeks: for example, from the so-cons, the neo-cons, and the permalinkless paleo-cons (actually I love John Robson–in a purely platonic sense–but I think he would agree with the paleo designation).

These critics are certainly entitled to their Monday morning quarterbacking, not to mention their peevish whimpering, negative nattering, and egocentric “if-only-they-would-listen-to-me”ism. However, we should stop to consider that Harper’s relative silence on the recent Big Issues Of The Day (BMD, Gomery, the budget) may actually be an intentional strategy.

How did the Liberals win the last election? By running against the Tories. I think it’s fair to say that if Paul Martin had run unopposed (as was said of Reagan in 1980) he would have lost. In fact, it’s fair to say that Jean Chretien won his last election victory by running against the Canadian Alliance and Stockwell Day, and that the policies Chretien will be remembered for (fighting the deficit, the Clarity Act) were basically lifted from the Reform Party playbook. Do you see the trend line here? If I’m a Liberal, and I want to win, I wait for the Tories to put forward a bunch of policy ideas. Then I take the ones that are popular, and I go into hysterical high dudgeon over the unpopular ones.

Maybe Stephen Harper has decided he doesn’t want to play this game.

It is almost a truism to say that most Canadians don’t pay a lot of attention to politics until election time, even in these days of supposedly high political drama (read: a minority parliament). So what’s in it for Harper to be Everybody’s Good Little Opposition Boy? Let’s say, for sake of argument, that he did exactly what John Robson and the Western Standard and (for all I know) Governor General Queen Clarkson think he should do: fight the Libs, tooth and nail, on every stinking proposal and rotting policy zombie they manage to disinter from the graveyard of Paul Martin’s panic. Harper would end up with both of the following:

(a) a nice pat on the head for his solid work as Opposition Leader

and

(b) an engraved invitation to be Opposition Leader again, after a general election (forced by Harper’s loud and proud defeat of the Liberal budget) which would be won (again) by Martin’s Liberals.

Harper doesn’t want to be Oppo Leader again. What’s the point? So he can ask the first question in Question Period? Be still my beating heart!

Say it with me now, all together, the lesson taught by Papa Chretien and nearly 100 years of Liberal rule over our fair Dominion: The Point Of Politics Is Winning The Election

Yes, yes, I know, what about the Idealistic Pursuit of Noble Policy Goals, the Advance of Conservatism/Libertarianism (choose one), the Defense of the Traditional Family, etc etc etc. The answer is: been there, done that, and it DOESN’T FREAKIN’ WORK!!!

Maybe–just maybe, because I’m not sure myself–Harper is the first Tory leader since whenever to ask: what will be the consequence of my behaviour? Did Preston Manning ask himself this, when he decided in his first response to the budget after the 1993 election to wait until the last day of debate to offer his opinions? Or his initial decision not to sit in the front bench? Did Stockwell Day ask himself that when he swaggered into the Commons like the new sheriff in town, and dared Chretien to call an election–which he did? Maybe Harper is asking himself: what happens if I strongly and vociferously oppose the budget? Answer: the Tories lose the subsequent election. What if I slam Martin every day about the Gomery inquiry? Answer: it becomes “old news” by the time the election rolls around. What if I become the Canuck poster-boy for Missile Defense? Answer: Martin gets to wrap himself in the flag during the next election, and claim the Tories want to Weaponize Space.

I’m not saying Harper should not be criticized: personally I like Tarantino’s suggestion from a couple of weeks ago that Harper should have played a bit coy with his support of the budget. There’s no question that Harper and the CPC could have done–and will have to do–a better job. But as for jumping all over the guy because he’s not play-acting the proper role in the Commons? Forget about it. The Commons is a largely irrelevant Kabuki theater, where the pre-assigned roles and boilerplate droning serve only to distract the bored scribes in the press gallery.

Harper should instead be commended, if sotto voce, for keeping his powder dry, for not serving as the Liberal Policy Trial Balloon, and for not giving the Libs a chance to be the anti-Tory government. Instead, he’s forced Paul Martin to try to govern as if he had his own agenda–which, as we have all discovered so forcefully in the last many months, is a mirage. Martin has no agenda. Even the Lib-friendly press knows that now. And by not giving him a sparring partner, Harper has made Martin’s mis-steps more frequent and more obvious.

If I were Harper, I think I would step softly softly until the Gomery inquiry finishes. Then, if the results are as damning as they should be, given the patently obvious corruption and self-dealing of the Liberal Party, Harper should move a Non Confidence motion in the government of Paul Martin. He will likely have the support of Duceppe and the BQ in this task, and the Martin Libs will fall. Then, an election, which Harper can fight on the grounds that A New Broom Sweeps Clean–the old Throw The Buggers Out campaign, which he tried to run in 2004 until he got derailed by the anti-Tory attacks.

Hmmm… a strategy. For winning. Ha. Stupid Harper. What could he be thinking?