Ignatieff vs Harper: "god that failed," ; too funny

Harper's ideological past fodder for Liberals
The Canadian Press
OTTAWA (Feb 1, 2007)

Stephen Harper's history of outspoken, hard-edged statements provided plenty of campaign grist for his political opponents in the last two federal elections.

Now, as the Conservative prime minister attempts to move his minority government to the centre on the hot-button environment file, his ideological past is once again being resurrected.

In 2002, in his previous role as leader of the Canadian Alliance, Harper sent a fundraising letter to followers that panned the Kyoto Protocol on reducing greenhouse gas emissions as "a socialist scheme to suck money out of wealth-producing nations" based on "tentative and contradictory scientific evidence."

It's the sort of punchy, declarative stuff that makes a great rallying cry for the converted, but can leave those outside the fold uncertain, if not downright alarmed.

Political analysts aren't sure whether recycling such old material actually hurts Harper or just further polarizes an already divided electorate.

For Liberals, it was evidence not just of Harper's hypocrisy on climate change but of a well-worn Grit campaign theme: Harper's alleged "hidden agenda."

"The reality is people are prisoners of their past beliefs," said Michael Ignatieff, the party's deputy leader.

"This is a man with ideological opposition to the scientific reality of climate change. Now if that's the case, it's very difficult for this old leopard to change his spots."

Harper, who served four years as the head of the right-wing National Citizens Coalition, has a rich history of statements that abrasively challenge political orthodoxy -- as Liberals have repeatedly reminded voters.

He once called for a "firewall" around Alberta, spoke of a culture of defeat in Atlantic Canada, described official bilingualism as the "god that failed," and pronounced Canada "a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term, and very proud of it."

Almost exactly four years ago, during the Commons debate on whether Canada should support the impending U.S.-led war in Iraq, Harper summed up his political world view this way:

"This party will not take its position based on public opinion polls. We will not take a stand based on focus groups. We will not take a stand based on phone-in shows or householder surveys or any other vagaries of public opinion."

Opinion polls now suggest that while Conservative party support has stalled nationally, support for Harper as prime minister runs far ahead of any other contender.

"The biggest worry for the Liberals is precisely that feeling where people are coming to trust (Harper) as a manager ... even if they're not quite sure what church he worships in," said Peter McCormick, a political scientist at the University of Lethbridge, Alta.

He said the Conservative ad campaign targeting Liberal Leader Stephane Dion's environmental record and the Liberal counterattack are "the next election campaign in embryo."

The Tory slogan will be that Harper gets things done; the Liberals will counter that he's outside the Canadian mainstream.

Pollster Bruce Anderson of Decima Research has seen evidence of both a split in perceived values between Harper and the majority of Canadian voters, but also respect for the man as prime ministerial material.

The unresolved issue, said Anderson, is whether voters whose own attitudes toward the environment have demonstrably changed will believe that Harper can also personally make the shift.

Don Desserud, a political scientist at the University of New Brunswick in Saint John, suggests the tempest over the Kyoto letter will quickly die.

"First, Harper's used to these attacks now, and he's learned that if he says nothing, people move on.

"Second, the more the Liberals look to the past, the more the Conservatives will remind the public the Liberals 'failed' even though they were in power for 13 years."