PCs’ path to victory has narrowed

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 29/07/2022 (782 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Progressive Conservative (PC) party of Manitoba is trailing badly in the polls, especially in Winnipeg, where the majority of the 57 seats in the provincial legislature are located. After achieving two sizeable majority governments under Brian Pallister, the PCs will likely suffer a political setback at the next general election, scheduled for Oct. 3, 2023.

The size of that setback is uncertain at this time.

Election outcomes are shaped by a host of factors. Four will be examined here: leadership performance, policy ideas, organizational capacity and the changing political context.

The image and reputation of leaders and their parties often become fused in the public mind. Recent research has demonstrated that domineering leaders can deliver short-term success but may cause damage to the medium-range fortunes of a party. Brian Pallister was a dominant leader of the PC party from 2012, and of the government he led from 2016, until he was pressured to retire from politics in 2021.

Pallister’s belief in limited government and balanced budgets drove the government agenda, and during an unprecedented pandemic, budgetary restraint led to backlashes from many segments of society. By enforcing tight discipline on his party, he made politics “all about him,” blocked the development of other talent and weakened rank-and-file involvement.

Such factors partly explain why Heather Stefanson’s narrow victory in the ensuing leadership contest did not bring the anticipated political recovery. As premier, Stefanson has abandoned some of the contentious policies of her predecessor, loosened the purse strings somewhat and adopted a less confrontational governing approach, but her personal popularity numbers remained discouragingly low.

A continuing crisis in the health field has been a major obstacle to improved polling numbers. Humility demonstrated by an apology for the tragic consequences of past decisions might help to win back some nonaligned voters. To further distance itself from the most contentious features of the Pallister legacy, the PC party must present hopeful and convincing messages that social and economic conditions will improve for average Manitobans.

Relentless criticism of government performance, particularly in the media, seems to have created a siege mentality inside the current government, resulting in a defensive communications strategy of withholding information, refusing to grant interviews, and giving non-answers.

An antagonistic relationship with the media has meant minor mistakes, such as a Slurpee purchase by the health minister, were amplified beyond their actual importance.

Strong leaders elsewhere have used populist rhetoric and all forms of media to make a direct emotional connection with voters, in the process bypassing and weakening the party apparatus. Pallister was never a hugely popular leader. His victories reflected more anger with the former NDP government than a personal vote for him. He was also not a highly effective communicator, often using combative language which many voters found offputting.

Stefanson has softened the tone, but has so far failed to connect positively with voters. In her encounters with the media, her responses have been controlled and cautious. She has also made mistakes, such as the failure to disclose conflict-of-interest details until forced to do so by negative publicity.

For her party to contend strongly in the next election, she will need to develop stronger skills in presenting herself and her ideas.

Pallister strengthened the organizational capacity of the PC party by setting membership and fundraising targets for constituency associations, recruiting more women candidates, and running well-planned tactical campaigns, all actions which contributed to the magnitude of his two election victories. The party establishment, however, did not see him as the ideal leader.

In contrast, Stefanson is a favourite of the party elites, which means the party will have no trouble outspending its political opponents. Whether it retains the organizational capacity to mobilize its voters is less clear.

Success in politics is a relative thing that depends on the party and the circumstances. The government must avoid unnecessary conflicts and unforced errors before the election. It must strive for improved outcomes, especially on health and affordability issues.

Even with such favourable developments, there is no realistic prospect the PC party will retain all the 36 seats it currently holds.

The PCs start most election campaigns with 17 to 20 safe seats, so there is a “floor” below which the party is not likely to fall. Some political luck, such as a scandal or major policy blunder by the NDP, might help them to achieve a slim majority or a minority government. That outcome, however, would require the third-place Liberals to perform well enough to steal votes and seats from the NDP.

If the polling numbers remain poor, the PCs might adopt a “damage control” strategy by focusing campaign messages on their presumed strengths, such as economic management, and concentrating resources (money and the leader’s time) in potentially winnable constituencies.

The necessity for such a strategy would reflect the cost of relying earlier on a domineering leader with extreme views.

Paul G. Thomas is professor emeritus of political studies at the University of Manitoba.