It’s a staple of punditry to take events in one region and try
to connect them to another. And far be it from me to break with tradition. But
I think the parallels between
They do have a lot in common: fresh female faces that won the leadership against expectations and with minimal caucus support. Both took
over long-ruling governments (crazy-long in Alberta ’s case) facing a public appetite for
change. Both were seen as too moderate and l/Liberal. And both faced significant
threats on their right flank, from the Wild Rose Party in Alberta to the BC Conservative Party in
B.C. Both opponents have drawn lots of attention, and both have weak benches
beyond their leaders.
Now, the parallels aren’t perfect, of course. BC
Conservative leader John Cummins is most definitely no Danielle Smith. And
Redford had no real threat on her left from the Alberta Liberals and NDP, while
Clark has to contend with an NDP that's leading the
polls and the reality of vote-splitting moving ridings to the NDP. But I do
think it’s telling how both Redford and Clark
have dealt with their very similar situations.
Facing a threat on her right flank, Redford
may well have been tempted to lunge right to bring the defectors back into the
camp. Instead, she stayed in the moderate middle (it’s large even in Alberta)
and was able to bring progressives into her fold, attracting traditional Liberal
and NDP voters determined to stop an even more conservative threat. She may
have lost some of her more conservative members (goodbye, Ted Morton) but the
result is a government with broad public support that owes nothing to the right.
Meanwhile, facing the same threat on her right in B.C.,
Clark has opted for the opposite approach, shifting ever more right to try to
bring conservative voters back into the fold that are fleeing to the BC
Conservatives. She’s stuffed her office with Harperites, adopted his media approach and taken him to hockey games. Other than a majorly overdue hike to the minimum wage, from
crime policy to resource development I can’t point to many particularly Liberal
policies from her government.
And what has this rightward shift gotten her? Continued bleeding in the polls and a restless caucus as, faced with a choice between
faux-conservative and the real thing, most people looking for that opt for the
genuine article.
In the interim, Clark ’s
left flank, ignored and taken for granted, is becoming increasingly restless.
With her Harperite chief of staff musing about dropping Liberal from the party name, many wonder if that hasn’t happened already. If Clark
keeps ignoring her left flank, she’s going to wake up one day soon and find it’s gone. With
her right going to the BC Conservatives, that doesn’t leave her with very much
to work with.
I’d encourage Clark to embrace Redford ’s
example. And embrace her own image. She’s seen (by those on the right,
certainly) as a progressive with (too) strong Liberal ties. Trying to
out-conservative John Cummins is a losing battle. She’s a centrist, and the
votes are in the centre. One reason Redford succeeded is that she was genuine,
while Clark is running away from herself.
Let the far-right leave and stop drawing you away from where
most of the voters are. Marginalize and ignore the BC Cons: only two parties have a
realistic shot at government – the BC Liberals the BC NDP. That’s the choice;
focus on that battle and on winning the centre.
Maybe it’s a hopeless fight; it certainly seemed so for Redford . And Clark is
between a rock and a hard place. But the right will never buy her as a
born-again conservative, and trying to do so will only drive the left away.
I’d leave her with this thought: is a desperate lunge right
really why she got back into politics? I’m not saying the fall is all that’s
left. Anything can happen. But does it matter how one falls? I think it matters
a great deal.
