Parliament returns this week with a heightened sense of drama as the main players retake the stage: while it may have been a longer journey than initially anticipated—from Ottawa all the way to Alberta for a by-election—Conservative leader Pierre Poilievre is back in Ottawa with a new seat in the House of Commons and ready to face off against Prime Minister Mark Carney.
The drama of how we got here is well-documented. Poilievre, the “common sense conservative,” somehow lost a 20-plus point lead over an unpopular incumbent Liberal government and led Canada’s Conservatives to yet another defeat in the last federal election. There’s a lot of talk about what (if anything) he needs to do differently.
The federal leader’s many defenders argue Conservatives faced “a perfect storm” and are quick to point out significant, positive takeaways from this loss: a high 41.3 percent share of the popular vote, a strong performance among newer Canadians and younger Canadians, as well as notable gains in traditional working-class regions such as Windsor and Hamilton. Detractors highlight concerns about the campaign leadership’s inability to pivot in the face of a changing strategic landscape, as well as failings in the leader himself (notably a perceived lack of maturity relative to the new Liberal leader and a general perceived “Trumpiness” in a market recoiling from that style of leadership).
Last fall, I wrote two articles on strategic and operational lessons from the Mike Harris Common Sense Revolution, which I hoped might be of use to Poilievre’s Conservatives in the run-up to the federal election. But, while much of the Poilievre campaign’s marketing was flatteringly derivative of those legendary Harris campaigns—including the punchy, one-syllable-word slogans, the critique of “a lost decade,” and the “Common Sense” and “For a Change” mottos—the campaign manifestly abjured detailed policy commitments or discussion of any structured transition plan, both of which I had argued were also essential ingredients in the winning Harris recipe.
When compared to the shiny resume of newcomer Carney, Poilievre’s sloganeering style and limited work experience—coupled with an apparent refusal to profile star candidates or showcase a credible transition team of former Harper-era ministers—made the Tory alternative look both amateurish and threadbare. It’s easy to think about what might have been.
Common sense isn’t dead yet
We “common sense conservatives” are stubborn souls, and I thought I might (also) try again. Why? Because some might conclude that the disappointing outcome of the last campaign for victory-starved Conservatives is proof positive that “common sense conservatism” is a political dead-end. That seeking to appropriate the Harris “common sense” brand was a political mistake. But, I would like to remind Hub readers of a perhaps forgotten historical fact: Harris lost his first election, too!
How he and his team recovered from that first loss, built upon the lessons learned from that defeat, and built out the victorious Common Sense Revolution campaign strategy of 1995 are critical elements of the Harris Legacy. I believe they offer significant potential lessons for Poilievre and Canada’s federal Conservative Party.
