11-16-06, 9:58 am

THE WORD AMONG government circles is that Stephen Harper's handlers are determined that he 'not be another Joe Clark.' The reference is to the last federal Tory minority government, and to what Conservative Party strategists see as 'the great failed opportunity' - Clark chose to govern from a minority position rather than use his narrow 1979 election victory to implement sweeping conservative reforms.

Harper, on the other hand, is betting that Canadians are more socially conservative and will accept a greater shift to the right in governance and public policy than is commonly believed. It is a gamble that Harper should be losing, but he has been able to push through his agenda in spite of public opposition, due to the lack of a strong fightback.

Although the Conservatives have yet to pass a single bill all the way through Parliament, and current opinion polls suggest their term in office could be a short one, they have moved swiftly to reshape current and future parliaments in their image.

Foreign policy has been brought sharply in line with the United States, as demonstrated by Canada being the first state to stop funds for the Palestinian people after the election of the Hamas government. Government spending has been drastically reoriented away from social programs and toward tax cuts, debt reduction and a massive $40 billion military buildup.

Productivity will likely be a centrepiece of the next throne speech, and the government will use that theme as political cover for a sweeping rewrite of corporate tax policy as well as extensive rollbacks of government regulation of industry.

Alongside these shifts in government finance and policy, the Conservatives have launched a comprehensive ideological campaign. According to a government source who spoke to People's Voice, 'one of Harper's priorities is to attack and kneecap any potential [extraparliamentary] opposition.

'One of the government's first actions was to release details of a damaging audit of the Congress of Aboriginal Peoples, and this allowed them to paint aboriginal people generally as unreliable and incapable of managing their own affairs. They used this as an opportunity to validate the decision to scrap the Kelowna Accord and breed racism among the Canadian public, with the net effect of weakening and dividing the aboriginal peoples' lobby.'

The government accomplished similar goals through a 40% cut to the Status of Women budget, changes in funding rules to prohibit advocacy from women's organizations, and the elimination of the Court Challenges Program. 'Basically,' the source said, 'if you're not white, patriarchal and Christian, you're not going to see yourself reflected in the Conservatives' vision of Canada.'

While they are busily cutting off potential opposition movements, the Conservatives are also building up their own grassroots power base.

Intimate government interaction with right-wing non-government organizations affords those groups a hand in shaping public policy, and enables them to vastly increase their profile, expertise and funding. Members of the Conservatives' 'backdoor cabinet' include REAL Women, B'nai Brith, Focus on the Family, Institute for Canadian Values and Canada Family Action Coalition.

Until recently, some of these organizations seemed marginal. Now, they are key players in Ottawa and fundamental pillars in Stephen Harper's 'broad coalition of conservative ideas.'

Confronting this coalition, and reversing their right-wing restructuring, requires more than a simple change of government in the next election. History suggests that the Liberals would campaign against, and then embrace, implement and extend Conservative reforms. While the opposition parties have displayed some resistance to Harper, particularly over childcare and the war in Afghanistan, overall it has been uneven and cautious.

Reversing Harper's attacks will require massive political will that can only be generated by a vast mobilization of social forces. Such a broad-based, coordinated fightback is not yet in the works, and time is running short. There are, however, examples of struggles around key issues which indicate how a larger movement could be built.

Childcare advocates and their allies worked feverishly to save the national daycare strategy, and when the government trashed the program they wasted no time in reorienting their campaign strategy in an effort to keep the issue alive in the public mind.

The peace movement, united within the Canadian Peace Alliance, is perhaps the brightest spot in the opposition to the Harper agenda. Following the election, the CPA maintained a high level of activity and has been able to focus public discontent on the government's foreign policy.

The October 28 Canada-wide Day of Action against the Canada's occupation of Afghanistan was the product of a call by the peace movement, labour and the Canadian Islamic Congress. With the active support of many other organizations, the mobilization resulted in 37 actions in communities across the country, and is one example of how unity in action could develop into a coordinated opposition.

Other potential fightback forces, though, have faltered. For several years, since the demise of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women, there has been no broad pan-Canada women's organization. The environmental movement is broad and has a relatively high profile, but its political focus remains uneven. The key weakness of the opposition movement, though, is the labour movement, which alone has the organizational and economic capacity to stimulate and lead a fightback.

As in Ontario following the election of the Mike Harris Conservatives, the labour movement emerged from the federal election divided and ill prepared to confront Harper's assault. Despite solid policy statements, and strong links with social movements across the country, the Canadian Labour Congress has not initiated an extra-parliamentary mobilization against the Conservative government. The question for many working people is: how do we move labour into action?

One place to start, says Action Caucus chair Helen Kennedy, is with union locals sending resolutions to the CLC calling for a fightback organizing effort. 'In the 1980's, the fight against free trade blossomed because of the Action Canada Network's activist labour-community solidarity. We need that kind of organization now and the group to make it happen is the CLC.'

But with many unions transformed into staff-driven organizations, Kennedy cautions against a top-down approach. 'What is key, what will drive and sustain a fightback down the road past the next election, is that workers take ownership over their unions and make them more militant. We need to build the Action Caucus in every union local and at all levels of the union movement, and those caucuses need to make real connections with social movements in their communities.'

Sid Lacombe, coordinator of the Canadian Peace Alliance, agrees. 'Playing at the top isn't really sustainable. You need to build at the base, and to do that you need to focus on action.' Following this line, the CPA has developed networks with groups in communities that are targetted by right-wing policies.

'Communities that are isolated are organizing very quickly to defend themselves,' says Lacombe, 'but the stakes are very high for them so when you're talking solidarity they need the active kind, not just resolutions.'

From People’s Voice