The roots of Stephen Harper’s refugee conundrum

Most government leaders would look at the refugee crisis in Europe and see it as an opportunity, especially during an election, to appear on top of the issue – with some combination of statesmanship, leadership and intuitive grasp of their own population’s sensibility. But Stephen Harper is not most politicians and the refugee crisis turns out to be one of the most intractable and complex issue he has to deal with – which is why he looks so ham-handed over a week into the refugee catastrophe unfolding across the Atlantic. It has shone an extremely unwelcome light on one of the dirty little secrets of the prime minister’s old Reform Party political base: it is chock-a-block with racists and others who simply don’t like non-European immigrants.

Harper and his political machine have done a remarkable job of massaging the huge contradictions in the Conservative Party’s political strategy regarding ethnic communities. They have managed to bleed traditional Liberal support from those communities by spending oodles of time and energy playing to the (conservative) traditional family values of those communities, to their suspicion of big government and their entrepreneurship. Only rarely does the strategy go sideways and expose the party to the anti-immigrant sentiment of their traditional political base.

One example was the rapid Conservative response to the Temporary Foreign Worker Program scandal of last year. The program was incredibly popular with small and large (tar sands) businesses and there was real anger with this chunk of the Conservative base when Harper (and Jason Kenny) made radical changes to their lucrative scam. While there was little reference to it in the coverage of the issue I have no doubt that Harper and Co. knew that rank and file party members, especially in the West and rural Ontario were not happy with their government giving preference to Asian workers over their white Canadian counterparts. When it came to choosing between business owners and the old Reform Party base there was no real debate. Business would just have to suck it up.

Not much is written these days about the nature of the Conservative base post-merger of the old PC Party and the Alliance Party (formerly Reform). But the base is largely the same today and in my book Preston Manning and Reform Party I documented just how dangerous the immigration issue was for Manning and his then-policy Chief Stephen Harper. No other policy issue took up as much time on the political massage table as this one – with Manning having to use all his persuasive powers to neutralize the alarming resolutions coming the famous “grass roots” of the party.

Leading up to 1991 policy convention, the most important the Reform Party ever held, there were eighteen riding resolutions on immigration. Every one of them was considered by Manning and Harper as extreme in one way or another: imposing various restrictions on immigrants, settlement in remote regions, demands for “ethnic balance,” the deportation of immigrants with criminal convictions, etc. None of them made it to the convention floor, replaced by the Party Policy Committee by three more moderate ones.

But in explaining this purge to the affected riding associations the party was very careful in the language it used to criticize the resolutions. As I wrote in my book; “They were rejected because they were open to ‘misinterpretation,’ ‘unenforceable,’ or ‘created administrative problems’.” The reason for the kid’s glove approach wasn’t hard to find – extreme views were actually encouraged by the party because they wanted to build their core membership. Manning and his policy chief Harper were confident they could manage the extremists.

One way they attracted the anti-immigrant vote was through the promotion of the writings and speeches of William Gairdner, one of the party’s most popular key-note speakers. In his book, The Trouble with Canada, Gairdner (in a chapter called “The Destruction of English Canada…”) spoke of “invading cultures” and proposed quotas on “non-traditional” immigrants (those not from the UK, USA, NZ, Britain or white South Africans). Gairdner warned “…in two hundred and fifty years Canada could become a Chinese nation.”

Harper’s precise role in building this anti-immigrant core is not known but he was one of just two people Manning trusted with key decisions – the other being pro-Apartheid activist and Senator, Stan Waters. But we do know that when Harper chose to leave politics in 1997 he became the Vice President (and then President) of the National Citizens Coalition (NCC) the most virulently right-wing political group in the country. Among its many well-funded campaigns (against the Canada Health Act, fair tax reform, unions, and restrictions on corporate political spending) was an hysterical campaign against acceptance of the so-called “boat people” – the 1978-79 wave of refugees from post-war Vietnam. The NCC took out two full-page ads in the Globe and Mail warning that the government’s policies would lead to ”…at least 750,000 [Vietnamese] in the not too distant future.” The actual number was 60,000.

Of course Stephen Harper was not involved in that campaign but ten years later when he was helping Preston Manning found the Reform Party he found in the NCC the closest of fellow-travellers. There was a huge overlap in membership and policies between the Party and the NCC which claimed (from an internal poll) that 60 percent of its members were also Reform Party members.

Given Harper’s penchant for focusing laser-like on strategy it is difficult to tell how he feels personally about immigration – it’s just another issue to be massaged for maximum benefit and minimum damage. But he did once let slip a controversial opinion in the January 22, 2001 issue of Alberta-based newsmagazine The Report where he stated: “You have to remember that west of Winnipeg the ridings the Liberals hold are dominated by people who are either recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from Eastern Canada; people who live in ghettos and are not integrated into Western Canadian society.”

Given the controversial history of the immigration question in Stephen Harper’s background no one should be surprised at the present-day Conservatives tying themselves in knots over the moral issue of Middle Eastern refugees and what Canada’s responsibility should be. With increasing numbers of Canadians saying they want a change (Abacus Data says the number this week is 76 percent) the Conservative campaign has once again been knocked off-message. To preserve their 30 percent base they have to successfully play the security card to resist increasing the numbers of refugees. But in doing so they risk alienating the already limited pool of voters who say they would consider voting Conservative.

Advertisements
%d bloggers like this: