So Conservative leader Erin O’Toole is gone.
In the wake of last year’s federal election, which resulted in yet another minority Liberal government, the Tories commissioned an internal review of what went wrong. Former Conservative MP James Cumming was handed the task.
Cumming pointed to several weak points, both in the party platform and in its messaging. He noted that the Tories lost several seats in ridings with large Chinese communities, because in expressing concerns with China’s increasingly belligerent policies, the party failed to distinguish between that country’s Communist regime and ordinary Chinese citizens.
In effect, the Tories sounded sinophobic, a failing made more credible by the party’s general deafness when dealing with ethnic minorities.
Cumming felt that waffling on such matters as abortion and climate change also dogged the campaign. And he pointed to what looked like an about-turn on the matter of banning assault-style weapons.
But the biggest failing, by far, was the anemic performance of O’Toole himself. He sounded over-scripted and banal. He spent too much time talking from a hotel room in Ottawa, instead of getting out and meeting voters face-to-face.
In short, he turned in exactly the kind of low-energy, uninspiring effort you would expect from a man who is low-energy and uninspiring.
Cumming ended up granting O’Toole a reprieve, conceding that on balance, he was still the best choice to lead the Tories into the next election. How much of this was a counsel of necessity is unclear.
If the Tories settled on a prolonged and messy campaign to find a replacement for O’Toole, they might expect Justin Trudeau to catch the party leaderless by calling a snap election.
Whether that threat is realistic seems doubtful. Voters don’t appreciate political opportunism of this kind.
However, even accepting that risk, disaffected caucus members called for O’Toole’s immediate removal. By a vote of 73 to 45, he was unceremoniously shown the door.
Certainly this was a risky choice. How can a party now committed to electing its fourth leader in five years convince Canadians it’s ready to lead the country?
Even so, this was the right decision.
O’Toole, decent and honest as he is, simply lacked the fire to be an effective national leader. That wasn’t going to change.
One measure of this weakness was his inability to stop infighting within the caucus.
Policies that appealed to central Canadian Tories as sensible moderation were dismissed as a sellout by their western colleagues. On the issues that matter most to the majority of voters, the party was unable to present a united face.
You cannot deal with this kind of suicidal discord by resorting to sweet reason and calls for party unity.
You deal with it by brandishing a mailed fist, and if necessary, using it. Pierre Trudeau, for all his many faults, could do that. Likewise Stephen Harper. Margaret Thatcher, too.
But does anyone honestly believe O’Toole could have carried off such strong-arm tactics? He reminds me of Mike Harcourt in that respect.
Harcourt, too, is a genuinely decent, thoughtful man. He was in the main a fine premier.
But he had no stomach for a fight, nor the ability to look like he did.
The question is whether someone can be found who has the necessary qualities to silence internal dissent and unite the party.
Manitoba MP Candice Bergen has been appointed interim leader, but she hasn’t the right stuff. Rona Ambrose, who does have what it takes, says she’s not interested, and Peter MacKay shows no signs of stepping forward.
Among the potential candidates who have expressed interest, none are household names.
That means whoever gets the nod will be starting from scratch. And the winner?
Justin Trudeau.
