The first thing one notices about Prime Minister Harper’s cabinet is that it is almost identical to the one he left office with. He may have campaigned on the promise staying the course, but with the election of a swathe of young professionals to the Conservative caucus, Harper had the opportunity to remake the image of the Conservative party as a modern, moderate and cosmopolitan organization. Instead, he chose to stick with disgraced ministers such as Bev Oda and even brought old ones back into the fray. Beyond that, Harper now presides over one of the largest cabinets in Canadian history, an affront to a man who portrays himself and his party as committed to smaller, more efficient government.
Sir John A. Macdonald’s first cabinet consisted of only seventeen ministers. Mackenzie King needed only eighteen to confront the Nazi menace in Europe and to rebuild Canada’s economy after the depression. Currently, the Swiss get by with a slim seven ministers on their Federal Council. So it must be asked, is Canada better off with thirty-eight ministers than it would be with twenty-eight or even eighteen? The answer is probably no, since many ministers could be given multiple portfolios and the number of ministers of state could be reduced significantly with little impact on the public service.
Failing a reduction in the number of ministers, one of the simplest things Harper could have done to send the message that he was committed to austerity would have been to cut ministerial pay. British Prime Minister David Cameron did this when his coalition government came to power this past year. Cameron cut his pay from £150,000 to £142,500 and the pay of his senior ministers from £141,647 to £134,565. While this was relatively minor in scope, it was a symbolic move that could have been mirrored by Harper at a time of economic hardship.
Harper’s new cabinet espouses the idea of staying the course. There are few new faces and few shakeups in cabinet positions. This is a depressing reality for the Conservative voters of Ontario and the GTA who gave Harper the needed MPs to form his long-awaited majority. Mr. Harper should have rewarded the brightest of these new MPs with cabinet positions. While Harvard educated Eglinton–Lawrence MP Joe Oliver was made Minister of Natural Resources – a smart choice given his history in commodities trading – there are several names that are left glaringly absent.
Former Canadian ambassador to Afghanistan and Oxford alum, Chris Alexander was snubbed for the job of Minister of Foreign Affairs for MP John Baird. And while it could be argued that Alexander has no parliamentary experience and, therefore, should not be given such a major portfolio, what seems more obvious is that Baird has no diplomatic experience and, therefore, should not have been made Canada’s top diplomat. Neither was Alexander given what could have been the foreign minister-in-waiting position: minister of state of foreign affairs — Americas and consular offices. It was instead given to party faithful, Diane Ablonczy. Another would-be rising star of the Conservative Party who was left out was former Mississagua City Councillor Eve Adams. Adams is now the MP for Mississagua–Brampton South, which should have made her an excellent candidate for minister of transportation since she resides in a hub of rail, highway and airport transit. Instead, the position was given to Denis Lebel, who represents Roberval–Lac-Saint-Jean, a large, sparsely populated riding in rural Quebec.
Finally, while disgraced MP Maxime Bernier was brought back into cabinet as the new minister of state for small business and tourism, the former IBM Global Services consultant and MP for Etobicoke–Lakeshore, Bernard Trottier remains a backbencher. In other words, the man who advised one of the largest IT companies on how to help start-ups grow and become successful was looked over for the ministerial position in charge of devising ways to ensure Canadian start-ups grow and become successful, in favour of the MP who left sensitive NATO documents at the house of his girlfriend who had links to the Hells Angels.
Without getting too conspiratorial, there is a strange connection between all of these GTA MPs: they are all urbane, cosmopolitan and young. They are all exceptionally well qualified and well educated and have histories of high achievement in the private and public spheres. In other words, they are exactly what Harper is criticized for not being. Had he appointed them, Harper could have presented Canada with a new generation of Conservative leaders. Instead, Harper decided to stick with essentially the same team that has been heavily criticized. Harper missed a great opportunity to change the image of the Conservative Party from one of western philistines and old white men to one of young, cosmopolitan professionals from diverse backgrounds. In this he also handicapped the prospects of his party to be seen as a moderate and diverse political organization, risking future electoral successes throughout Canada.
