Heading for a Harper dynasty?

After election victories in 2006 and 2008, Stephen Harper's Conservatives appear entrenched in power. Though not in a majority situation, Harper's party shows consistently in polls as the most popular, and would likely win another election if one were called today. Has he established the basis of a Harper dynasty?

If so, it would be a feat achieved by only a few of Canada's prime ministers. As documented in our new book, Dynasties and Interludes: Past and Present in Canadian Electoral Politics, only five of Canada's most politically successful prime ministers built electoral dynasties that endured for long periods of time. John A. Macdonald, Wilfrid Laurier, Mackenzie King (followed by Louis St. Laurent), Pierre Trudeau (preceded by Lester Pearson), and Jean Chrétien (with Paul Martin) were the only political leaders who managed to create such sustained political dominance.

This group of leaders was certainly not unique in winning resounding electoral victories. Alexander Mackenzie, Robert Borden, Richard Bennett, John Diefenbaker and Brian Mulroney, despite opportunities to build on their election victories, ultimately presided over interludes between the dynasties created by other political leaders.

And some others, like Arthur Meighen and Joe Clark, lost power after even briefer periods at the helm.

Canadian federal politics has repeatedly followed this pattern -- long periods of political hegemony under successful political leaders, punctuated by short, sharp interludes that disrupted what seemed at the time to be a one-dimensional political success story.

Whether the Harper period will turn out to be a dynasty or an interlude is yet to be determined. Here, we consider some of the factors that might contain the answer to that question.

The dynasties achieved their pre-eminence and longevity not by the personal appeal of their leaders, though this often played a part, but rather by their ability to capture public trust on the three main issue areas that are nearly always present in Canadian electoral politics.

These three "keys to victory" have been: to be perceived by the public as the leader and party best-positioned to solve the key economic questions of the time; to have the ability to ensure national unity; and, at least since the mid-20th century, to gain public confidence on the issue of expanding or preserving the social safety net -- e.g. health care, pensions, unemployment insurance -- on which large numbers of Canadians depend.

In the first Canadian dynasty, John A. Macdonald combined his ability to bridge the interests of the different regions of the country with his National Policy of industrial protection and railway construction.

On Macdonald's death, Wilfrid Laurier assumed the mantle of French-English harmony, and pursued economic policies of freer trade and economic growth in a period of industrial expansion.

Mackenzie King and his successor, Louis St. Laurent, likewise established the Liberal party as the champion of national unity, the stewards of economic growth, and added to these the early building blocks of the Canadian welfare state through pensions and unemployment insurance.

Pierre Trudeau, although he ended as a divisive figure, embodied national unity by promoting bilingualism and extended social welfare measures introduced by Lester Pearson. It was Trudeau's struggles with the economic downturns, inflation and unemployment of the 1970s and 1980s that ultimately ended the Trudeau dynasty.

Finally, Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin restored economic stability, concentrated on preserving social welfare measures, and struggled to establish their credentials on national unity, helped immeasurably in that area by the inability of the Conservative opposition to hold together the Quebec-West coalition that had been constructed by Brian Mulroney.

Can Stephen Harper capture these three pillars of Canadian electoral success and thereby establish a second Conservative dynasty?

After the 2004 failure, his successful 2006 Conservative campaign seemed to point in that direction. Helped by the collapse of the Martin regime and the sponsorship scandal, the Conservatives made short-term but realistic commitments in the economic realm (GST cuts) and the welfare area (money to cut hospital wait times and support child care), and put forward an opening to Quebec that elected 10 members in that province and promised to position the Conservatives as the party of national unity.

In 2008, however, despite winning more seats, the Conservatives fell back in their mastery of all three issue areas. At the moment, only the economy seems to be falling in their direction, and this depends in large part on continued recovery from the damage wrought by the recession.

Canadian voters have weak party attachments and have not been constrained by ideological commitments from opting for parties that acquire credibility on the economy, national unity and social policy.

The Harper Conservatives may still be able to manoeuvre to seek this position. The extent to which they do so will determine whether we have a Harper dynasty or merely a Harper interlude.

Lawrence LeDuc, Jon H. Pammett, Judith I. McKenzie, Andre Turcotte are the authors of Dynasties and Interludes: Past and Present in Canadian Electoral Politics, (Toronto: Dundurn).

Republished from the Winnipeg Free Press print edition December 15, 2010 A14