From The Cupboard To The Cabinet

As I spent the past weekend halfway across the province in what is renowned as the Honeymoon Capital of the world, the series of ironies of ironies were unfolding before me. While Ipsos Reid's' recent survey found favour for Stephen Harper and, at least, a willingness to let him govern, Nik Nanos' SES findings were being collated to reveal what most (namely: MEDIA) were determined to purvey all along: The honeymoon was over before it began.

As the separate circumstances of irony revealed themselves over the weekend, I was (and still am) of little motivation to jump into the fray at every little knee and jerk of a new government's growing pains and a young party's inexperience with the notion of success and the requisite behavioral responsibility it commands. I prefer to let dust settle and approach matters with a more sober contemplative approach. This is not to say that I'm indicisive to fault. Indeed, when matters require immediate resolve, my historic nature of media, deadline and productivity kicks in to ensure my rite of survival. But crying Chicken Little one day in and weeks before the sitting of the 39th parliament is just what I feared, yet expected, from the very support base Stephen Harper enjoyed and employed in his successful ouster of the worst led government in Canada's history. This is not an irony that I'm referring to: It's just a disappointing observation.

A couple of weeks back, a gentleman that I know, who runs a non-partisan (intended yet not realized) breakfast discussion group under the banner of Peace, Order and Good Government, had posed the topic of Harper's appointments of David Emerson and Michael Fortier for discussion. After witnessing not only my fellow media feast on the fresh carcass of this dying quail of public opinion but fellow conservatives screaming at the site of blood, I decided to seriously study the motives, opportunities and precedents before I drew a final conclusion for myself.

Admittedly, my initial reaction was "Whoops. That won't be taken well." yet I couldn't help but be taken with curiosity at the acquisition of someone of Emerson's industrial strength and Fortier's horsepower and influence base in the birthplace of our first policy document and a region where Conservatives need a strategic hold. I wound up presenting my findings and my argument to my friend as I extended my regrets that I would be in Niagara Falls for the Ontario PC Conference and would miss a stimulating debate on this issue. After reading my submission, he asked my permission to circulate this "thoughtful piece" among the group. I reluctantly agreed as this "thoughtful piece" was indeed rife with weaknesses due to time and space restraints. Complex issues require much more discourse than I had given even after a full week of analysis (an irony I take great pleasure in pointing out in the wake of the Great Partisan Jump-Ship from the SS Harper).

As the ironies of my conference weekend presented themselves one by one, I felt the strongest surrealness.

I fought along side my campaign mates to ensure a stronger federal party by electing John Baird, now a haunting pair of size 10's to fill. I found myself elbowing by and sharing a warm exchange with my friend who is now the new President of the Treasury Board, only to share a bittersweet handshake with Finance Minister Jim Flaherty moments later. As Conservatives, it seems, we help our cause by taking from our own cupboard.

"Argument for Stephen Harper's Cabinet appointments of
David Emerson and Michael Fortier.

As the dust settles and the emotions ebb, let's first
look at the issues objectively.

There have been 86 Ministerial appointments from
outside parliament since 1867 - not exactly an
everyday occurance but hardly something new.  It's no
secret that when it comes to assembling a cabinet, the
Prime Minister must do this delicately in providing
for not only loyalty but regional representation and
practical experience.

Alexander MacKenzie appointed William Richard Scott as
a Minister without portfolio in November of 1873 and
to Secretary of State of Canada in early January of
1874 and it wasn't until the spring of that year that
Scott was given a Senate appointment.

As Prime Minister after John Abbott's resignation due
to health problems, John Thompson appointed
Auguste-Real Angers as Minister of Agriculture a week
before giving him a Senate position in December 1892.

Wilfrid Laurier made Oliver Mowat Minister of Justice
and Attorney General before a Senate appointment days
later in 1896.

Joe Clark did the same thing with Industry Trade and
Commerce Minister Robert De Cotret in 1979.

Many cabinet appointees ran in by-elections or general
elections soon after these appointments, some of them
even losing.

Having Senators in cabinet is also not unheard of,
although the majority through our history have been
limited to Government Leader in the Senate.  But
several have been appointed Ministers of State for
various portfolios and some even Ministers without
portfolio.

What remains to be seen from Mr. Fortier, in addition
to his role in providing a voice for Montreal, is
whether he can do the job as Minister of Public Works.
The same, then, can essentially be said for every
other cabinet appointee since this will be their first
term as minister.

David Emerson is only the 240th sitting member to
cross the floor in parliament so we should all be
shocked and stricken with awe at this blindsiding
maneuvre.  As with recent occurances, more criticism
has been thrown at the member who crossed the floor
for opportunism and political wealth than at the Prime
Minister of the day.  Thus, Emerson will have to
reconcile that with his own
constituents come next election.  (A gamble he surely
will have carefully considered - a payoff hopefully
reflected in his accomplishments for the VGA, the
riding of Vancouver-Kingsway and all of BC.)

As for Prime Minister Harper, though the optics of the
move are not favourable (primarily through the
partisan lense), he is neither hypocritical nor out of
bounds by approaching someone of Emerson's calibre and
geographic convenience.  Harper is not only
demonstrating his innate comprehension of
constitutional boundaries and precedent, he's
exercizing their full potential while continuing to
exhibit his obvious proclivity for getting done what
needs to be done.  While his actions suggest a painful
reality that existing MP's were not cabinet material,
his vision far out-distances even his closest of peers
and short-term reward for the mere sake of loyalty can
very dangerously lead to short-term life for any
government.

While such events as have occurred in the past few
weeks indicate the imperfections within our democratic
fabric and our constitution, they also represent the
flexibilities inherently woven since confederation
because our founders possessed the wisdom and the
vision that all things change, all things evolve and
all things are possible in a democracy.  Thus, as with
all discussion regarding democratic and constitutional
reform, we must always ask "what if" in determining
cause and effect of our critical decisions affecting
the future of Canada.

Stephen Harper, through his efforts in setting the
table for Canada's 39th parliament, is no longer
acting as merely the Leader of the Conservative Party
of Canada.  He's performing and executing his official
duties as this country's Prime Minister.  We must
allow him to do that."

NOTE: Originally posted 2/22/2006 on Woody's Blog