Traditionally, political parties have been distinguished as left wing or right wing based on how prominent a role they envisaged for government. Those on the right preferred minimum government and maximum freedom for individuals and the economy. They believed that individuals should be free to work toward their full potential and that unfettered economic activity would generate prosperity for all. Those on the left countered that a substantial role for government is needed to ensure equal opportunity for individuals to succeed and to regulate and control the inequities that are increased with unbridled capitalism. There are, of course, other means of differentiation, notably with respect to law and order, with the right emphasizing punishment and the left focusing more on prevention and rehabilitation. Differences are also evident with respect to social issues, with the right being much more resistant to recognition of gay rights and the right to an abortion.
We would find the NDP on the left of the political spectrum, with the Liberals left-centre and the Conservatives centre-right. But it should also be noted that there are always at least a few members within any political party who do not share its place on the political spectrum. This has been especially apparent with the left-leaning Red Tories within the Conservatives, standard-bearers from a time when it was the Progressive Conservative Party – but they have largely disappeared since the party veered sharply to the right under Stephen Harper.
The Shifting Political Spectrum
The political spectrum itself shifts over time and with it the concept of what is a moderate or central position. At some point there is a reaction against where the spectrum has moved and the pendulum swings the other way, usually over-correcting. For much of the past century, the role of government increased, in response to the Great Depression of the 1930s, the Second World War, and post-war urbanization. By the 1980s, however, the view developed that governments had grown too large, become too intrusive, and encouraged too much dependency. Critics complained that the much-vaunted social safety net had become a hammock!
As a result, there was a dramatic shift – led by Margaret Thatcher in Britain and Ronald Reagan in the United States – away from the prolonged period of left-leaning governments. Not surprisingly, the Conservative Government of Brian Mulroney embraced a similar smaller government agenda, but it was actually the Liberal Government of Jean Chretien that acted more forcefully in carrying out this agenda – especially in relation to a series of actions that eliminated chronic annual deficits, reduced the debt to GDP ratio, and introduced a series of annual surplus budgets.
Canada’s right turn increased markedly with the election of the Conservatives a decade ago. Stephen Harper became Prime Minister determined to reduce permanently the role and relevance of the federal government. One of his first acts, against the advice of virtually all economists, was to cut the GST/HST by 2 points, thereby greatly reducing the flow of revenue to the federal government and its capacity to undertake future initiatives. The Conservatives have also reduced the government’s role with respect to the environment, enacting legislation that has removed some existing regulations, closing research facilities, and attempting to muzzle scientists who might make a case for environmental protection.
The Missing Middle
In a variety of ways, the Conservative approach has mirrored that of the Tea Party in the U.S., the ultra-right wing political group that has largely captured the Republican Party. Unfortunately for Canada, with the Tea Party ideology also came the Tea Party tactics and ideological rigidity. The result, south of the border, has been an extremely polarized political system, one in which proposals from one party are automatically blocked – whatever their merits – by the other party. Sadly, something similar has been happening in Canada, with the Harper-led Conservatives pursuing their agenda very aggressively, unwilling to consider any alternatives, and contemptuous of any alternative point of view. The party’s position has been that you are either with them, or you are the enemy and need to be crushed. Instead of a political spectrum with considerable overlap toward the centre, we have seen an increasing division, with less and less common ground.
This is not the Canada that we have known. Political parties have differed, yes, and some individuals in opposing parties did not especially like each other – as was the case, apparently with Liberal Lester Pearson and Conservative John Diefenbaker. Yet there was, for the most part, an underlying mood of civility, a willingness to consider alternative points of view, and to recognize that those on the opposite side of the House of Commons were just trying to do their jobs, and had a legitimate right to do so. I can remember Conservative leader Robert Stanfield rising in the House, during the debate on second reading of a Liberal Government bill, and saying something to the effect that: “This bill has merit, and we will support it on second reading, and will then work to improve it in committee stage.” What a wonderfully sensible approach, one sadly missing for some time now.
Rediscovering the Middle?
One can only hope that the rejection of the Conservative Government and the hyper-partisan and ultra-aggressive governing style of Stephen Harper will arrest the increasing polarization of political parties in Canada. Our parties, and especially the Conservatives, have largely ignored their traditional role of attempting to develop policies that unify Canadians. Instead they have zeroed in on their core supporters, attempting to appease them while trying to win over other specialized segments of the population. Will the Conservatives now abandon the far right end of the political spectrum and move back toward the centre? The prospect for respectful debate and collaboration in the House of Commons would certainly be enhanced if our three major political parties once again shared some common territory in the middle of our political spectrum.