Mulroney, Brian – Former PM shaped current PM's thinking on Quebec and his politics

Advice was to reach out to Quebec, "ditch all the yahoos", and move to the centre.

Journalist, academic and Conservative Party political insider Bob Plamondon is one of the leading authorities on the inner workings and history of the party. His 2006 book Full Circle: Death and Resurrection in Canadian Conservative Politics (Key Porter Books) tells the story of how the Canadian conservative movement fell apart and was restored to glory over the course of two decades leading to the election as Prime Minister of Stephen Harper. With former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney in the news over the publication of his memoirs, and particularly with Mr. Mulroney's comments about his former ally Lucien Bouchard, StraightGoods.ca Publisher Ish Theilheimer interviewed Bob Plamondon about Brian Mulroney, Stephen Harper and Quebec.

StraightGoods.ca: What do you think Stephen Harper has learned from Brian Mulroney's experience?

Brian Mulroney's influence on Stephen Harper has been enormous. At a time when many in the newly-formed Conservative Party were telling Stephen Harper he'd never make inroads, and that the province of Quebec was a lost cause for the party, Brian Mulroney very forcefully and persuasively argued the opposite. He told Harper the only way to 24 Sussex was through the province of Quebec. He told Harper he should make an investment, not just to the issues, but invest his own time into building a network, investing money into the province and recruiting candidates there.

Mulroney had been through this before. The first Conservative Prime Minister to come from Quebec was Brian Mulroney, other than John Abbot, who dropped down from the Senate and served for a year. No one thought he would be able to pull it off and he did. He understood that to be a national leader he had to be a force in Quebec.

The Reform Party had no presence in Quebec and made no attempt to win seats there. Mulroney was persuasive in convincing Stephen Harper to concentrate there.

What are the keys to Stephen Harper's understanding of Quebec politics and his success there?

During the Alliance leadership race [in 2002], Stephen Harper reached out to a number of people in Quebec, including [Action Democratique leader] Mario Dumont. Dumont was instrumental in helping Harper win the leadership, tapping into Dumont's network. Harper made the decision and followed Mulroney's advice, to invest in Quebec. Without it he would not be Prime Minister today.

[During the Conservative leadership race in 2004] Belinda Stronach had all the key Conservative organizers in Quebec. She had the largest budget. Harper didn't have much of a network in Quebec. Peter Mackay had almost half the delegates, so Harper needed to make some friends.

So Harper and Dumont go way back?

During the last Quebec provincial election, Harper, at one point when people were asking about his allegiance, went to great lengths to say there's one party in Quebec that wants a referendum and two that don't. He said a number of things that suggested he had no issues with Mario Dumont, even though he was very close to Jean Charest.

One of things Harper did, after the 2004 [federal election] campaign, was that he invited Josée Verner, who lost narrowly in Quebec City, into his caucus and made her chair of the Quebec caucus. So for Quebec Conservative senators, effectively their caucus leader was the unelected Verner. She had a background with both the Quebec Liberal party and ADQ [Action Democratique du Quebec]. She had been a staff member for (Quebec Premier Robert) Bourassa and a member of the ADQ. She was an operative. In 2006 she was elected and recently, of course, she was appointed to Cabinet (as Minister of International Co-operation and Minister for La Francophonie and Official Languages).

The point is that Harper was following Mulroney's advice and making an attempt to win in Quebec.

How did Harper carry out his work in Quebec?

Stephen Harper built a network there. He identified certain policies that would appeal in Quebec. During the course of the 2006 campaign he delivered a major speech in Quebec that called for Quebec being recognized at UNESCO. He spoke of the fiscal imbalance in a way that illustrated he understood the issue. No Liberal leader had done the same. He was speaking to a number of issues of interest to Quebeckers. He had the support of Jean Charest. And a number of the editorial writers began to look at Harper in a different light. He was a strong supporter of the Clarity Act before Dion brought it forward. His view was that you can't take the province out of the country under any other rules than the rule of law. Harper put forward a private members' bill that was a precursor to the Clarity Act.

How has Mr. Mulroney helped in this? Were they longtime allies?

You go back to 1986, Stephen Harper was working for [Calgary Conservative MP] Jim Hawkes. Harper became disillusioned with the Mulroney administration, and he went to Preston Manning. He became Reform's chief policy officer and a founder of the party, and he ran in 1988 and 1993 against Hawkes, and he defeated him. At that point he was an arch-enemy [of Brian Mulroney's].

When the leadership of the PC party came up when Jean Charest went to Quebec in 1998, a number of Conservatives approached Harper about running for the leadership, but he declined. So Harper bided his time. He left the Reform Party caucus. He left Preston Manning, and he was rather agnostic to the conversion of Reform into Alliance. He came back to lead the Alliance when Joe Clark was on the other side [of the House as PC leader], but you still had the prospect after Harper won the leadership of the Alliance and Peter Mackay won the leadership of the PC party, that you were still going to have a ballot with two conservative parties on it. It was at that time in summer, 2003, while there still was a PC party, that Mulroney was in dialogue with Stephen Harper and in dialogue with Peter Mackay.

Was this Mulroney's initiative?

I wouldn't say it was his initiative, but he helped move the process forward. He gave signals to others within the party that this should be supported. It gave Harper a lot of confidence that Mulroney was onside. In fact, Mulroney wanted Stephen Harper to be leader of the new party.

What happened next?

It really was a blur from the time Harper won the leadership until the election of 2004. Harper was somewhat disillusioned. Mulroney consoled him and encouraged him on how to win, not only on Quebec but on political strategy more generally. He was urging Harper to ditch all the yahoos that would cause him grief during an election campaign, embrace Quebec, and move to the centre.

Stephen Harper's politics appear to have changed a great deal from two years ago.

Unrecognizable on a whole slew of issues. I think Brian Mulroney has an enormous influence on Stephen Harper. When you're Prime Minister there are very few people you can turn to who have similar experience and no particular ambition. It did suit Mulroney's purpose to help Stephen Harper. He'd been denigrated for 10 years.

What is their relationship like today?

My book went not much further than 2006. But at dinner last fall where Mulroney was given the award as Canada's greatest Prime Minister, Stephen Harper spoke glowingly about the contributions Mulroney continues to make to the country and the advice he very much cherishes from him. I can't imagine anything that's happened that's diminished that. When Mulroney was given an award on his leadership in supporting the independence of Yugoslavia, Harper was there, even though it was the same night Preston Manning was given an award by his think tank. Harper might have gone to that, but it was very clear Harper preferred Mulroney.

Where do you think Mr. Mulroney would like to see Stephen Harper go in Quebec and how do you think he would advise him to get there?

The last key issue was recognizing Quebec as a nation. I don't know that Harper particularly followed Mulroney's advice on that. I'm sure he went farther than Mulroney wanted him to go. Mulroney went so far as to call Quebec a distinct society. Harper said the Quebecois are a nation.

Does Stephen Harper still go to Brian Mulroney for advice on Quebec?

I think Harper's been there long enough he doesn't need to. He knows the players. There are other people there he can rely on, like [foreign affairs minister] Maxime Bernier, [transportation minister] Lawrence Canon, and [public works minister] Michael Fortier.

Mulroney is the eminence, the elder statesman of party. Stephen Harper may rely on Mulroney more for his insight on international affairs than Quebec.

Any final thoughts?

I came across fantastic quote by Sir John A. MacDonald about recognizing Quebec as a nation. "We must make friends with the French without sacrificing their status... If we treat them as a nation, they will act as a free people generally do, generously. Call them a faction and they will become fractious." Sir John A. MacDonald understood this, and it's still true, 150 years later.

Links and sources
  Plamondon & Associates Inc.

Posted: September 10, 2007

Harper Index (HarperIndex.ca) is a project of the Golden Lake Institute and the online publication StraightGoods.ca