clark: So am I. I’m pretty sure too. For . . . For fuck’s sake!
young man: Sir?
clark: These stamps are wrong. They have the wrong dates, dates from our calendar on the entry stamps. Not the Persian calendar.
Projection:
The CIA forgers made this mistake. All of the faked passports had to be redone.
young man: What are those, sir?
clark: You know, I’m not the smartest guy. I know that. I’m not clever. It’s not my thing, and I’m fine with that. Clever is good, there’s a use for clever. But when everyone is striving for clever, this is the kind of mistake that can happen. When you get so taken by your clever idea, details like this get overlooked. And then people friggin’ die.
The young man, impassive, waits.
I’m sorry I cursed.
young man: Not at all, sir.
clark: What’s your name?
young man: Steve, sir.
Projection:
It was 1985 when Stephen Harper started working on Parliament Hill. In 1979 he was actually working in the mail room at Imperial Oil in Edmonton.
But what the hell.
clark: Steve, I don’t know if you have any ambition to work in politics. You’re young. You should probably get the hell out of Ottawa and make something of your life.
harper: You don’t believe that, sir.
clark: Don’t I?
harper: No, you don’t. You wouldn’t be here if you did.
clark: Yeah. You’re right.
harper: People say things they don’t believe to young people to assert dominance over them.
clark: Is that what I was doing?
harper: I think so. You’ve had a shock. Something in that bag is immensely frustrating to you. I’m standing here, I’m nobody, so you say something cynical and, uh, worldly to me to dominate me.
clark: You’re . . . You’re absolutely right.
harper: I’ve been here a while, I’m nobody, people do it to me all the time.
A beat.
You’re having a rotten day.
clark: Well, the day’s not over yet.
harper: You’re going to lose the vote later?
clark: Looks that way.
harper: What a waste.
clark: I don’t disagree, but in what way, exactly, do you mean it’s a waste?
harper: No, never mind, sir. Not my place.
clark: I’m asking. I’d like your opinion, Steve.
harper: Okay. Well, let me ask you: does Margaret Thatcher’s victory earlier this year not inspire you?
Projection:
Thatcher came to power in Britain in May 1979 in a landslide.
clark: I assume it inspires you?
harper: It does. It really does.
clark: The magnitude of her win?
harper: That’s part of it. She ran a campaign that didn’t shy away from controversial topics or hard choices, and she won huge.
clark: Unlike my campaign, which took a careful middle road and won small.
harper is silent.
Canada and Britain are very different places.
harper: Sure.
clark: She can say harsh things about what she feels is wrong with her country and get away with it. She can alienate half the population, more than half, and still win. That’s not the way we do things here.
harper: But you don’t need a majority of Canadians to vote for your party for you to win, either.
clark: But I need to act like I do.
harper: Why?
clark: It’s called responsible government for a reason. If I lead the country, I act in the interests of everyone in the country, whether they vote for me or not.
harper: But that’s impossible. The country is too big, too fragmented to be acting in everyone’s interests at all times.
clark: It’s complicated, but not impossible. You look at the totality of your choices as Prime Minister, and the goal is to serve the country as a whole through those choices.
harper: Which leads, inevitably, to a ballooning bureaucracy, to overspending and more deficits. It’s just . . .
clark: It’s just what?
harper: No. I’m sorry, sir. I won’t take up any more of your time.
clark: No, I’m curious. Stay. This is practically the first grown-up conversation I’ve had all day. You wish we could have a Thatcherite revolution right here in Canada. What exactly is it about our politics you feel is lacking?
harper: Sanity.
clark: Uh! Uh! Uh! Agreed. But can you be more specif—
harper: Unemployment insurance. A program created to help an individual who suddenly loses their job while they look for a new one? Is now used to prop up a whole region where work is seasonal.
clark: The fishery couldn’t survive without it. Provincial assistance programs are inadequate. Without UI the economy of the Maritimes collapses.
harper: So?
A beat.
clark: You’re not serious.
harper: You’re not serious when you make a statement like “the economy of the Maritimes collapses.” The fishery changes. Maybe it survives, maybe it doesn’t. But if it doesn’t, the people in those provinces, they figure it out. Give them credit.
clark: The hardship would be enormous. Imagine being the prime minister who allowed that to happen on his watch.
harper: I have two points. One: the ocean is getting overfished because there are so many government-subsidized people fishing, which will inevitably lead to the collapse of the fishery anyway; and two: if it can’t survive without massive government support, it can’t properly be called an economy.
Projection:
The cod fishery collapsed from overfishing in 1992.
And now you’re thinking: “But I need the votes that come from Atlantic Canada.”
clark: Yes, I was.
harper: I say you don’t, but let that go for now. You’re now justifying the perversion, the abuse of a perfectly decent social program to save your skin politically.
clark: If I write off an entire region of the country with one decision I deserve to lose their votes.
harper: I’m telling you consistency is what matters. People need to be told the truth, not be taken care of. That’s what I take from Thatcher’s victory.
clark: She said what she was going to do, and she did it.
harper: She said it simply, directly, and without worrying about whose feelings got hurt. She ran on a five-point plan, and she’s been pursuing the plan since she was elected. How many bills have you passed since coming to power?
clark: Six.
harper: Three.
clark: No, pretty sure it’s six bills.
harper: Three were old bills proposed by the previous, Liberal government.
clark: Things we would have done anyway. Passing bills initiated by the Liberals spoke to the co-operative relationship we hoped to have with the opposition.
harper: Yeah! How’s that going for you?
A pause. harper’s gone too far.
Sorry.
clark: You know what—
harper: I’m sorry. It’s a terrible fault of mine. I get worked up, and I become disrespectful, and it’s a terrible fault. I apologize.
clark: It’s okay.
harper: No one asks me for my thoughts. I’m out of practise. I’m sorry, sir. I’m sorry.
clark: It’s not a problem. Steve—
harper: No, it is. I have to fix that.
(to himself) Jeez. C’mon.
clark: It’s okay. Go on with what you were saying.
harper: No, sir. I think I’ve said enough. Thank you, sir.
clark: Steve. It’s okay, I’m not mad; I was momentarily surprised. Go on. Margaret Thatcher is
great because . . . ?
harper: Uhh . . .
clark: Five-point plan . . .
harper: Yes, sir. She had a five-point plan. It’s like a contract with voters.
clark: It’s a gross oversimplification of the job she’s asking for.
harper: In some ways, yes. But isn’t part of her job being able to communicate with the people she’s meant to serve? And isn’t simplicity central to effective communication?
clark: You admire her communications strategy.
harper: I admire her unneurotic relationship with the public.
clark: Her relationship with the public seems unnecessarily harsh to me.
harper: Can I— Can I share with you an observation I’ve made about politics? And politicians?
clark: Can I stop you if I’ve heard it before?
harper: Absolutely. Okay. Say you’re a bunny.
clark: A bunny?
harper: Yes. Say you’re a bunny.
clark: Okay. I’m a bunny.
harper: Fluffy, bottom of the food chain, everybody eats you and you eat nobody.
clark: I’m gentle; I’m delicious.
harper: Yes. And you live in the woods. In a dell.
clark: And I live in a dell.
harper: Woodsy hills all around, and your warren is in a clearing.
clark: A clearing in the dell.
Projection:
A picture, or video, of a leafy forest. A clearing in that forest.
harper: Surrounded by woods, woods, woods, and you’re a bunny, and you live with the other bunnies at one end of the clearing. You and the other bunnies in your warren, you get hungry. A lot. And across the dell, other side of the clearing, is a lot of lettuces. Really a lot. But between you and the lettuces is a den full of foxes. You’ve learned this through experience.
clark: Okay.
harper: Your dad got killed by the foxes.
clark: Okay.
harper: Or no, better: your mother got killed. Your mother got torn apart by some foxes.
clark: Got it.
harper: Your life is exactly two things: eat the lettuces, keep from getting eaten by the foxes.
clark: That’s my whole deal as a bunny.
harper: Those two things. Stuff lettuces, avoid the foxes. Now: going around the dell, deep in the hilly woods to avoid the foxes and getting to the lettuce costs almost as many calories as you gain by stuffing yourself with lettuce. You’re just as hungry by the time you return to the warren if you take the long way.
clark: And going straight through the dell means risking getting my furry self eaten by a fox. Like Ma.
harper: Yes. You see what I’m saying?
A beat.
clark: Are you asking me if I understand this analogy as it relates to political behaviour?
harper: You don’t.
clark: Gonna need a little bit more, Steve.
harper: Weird. Okay. Take the long way to the lettuce and suffer calorically, or take the direct route to the lettuces and risk death. You have to make some version of that choice every day. And you’re always tempted to compromise each of these goals, a little, in favour of the other. You can even convince yourself that there’s a balance to be found between them. Maybe I can risk a tiny bit of danger to keep more lettuce calories. But the truth is, you eventually either get eaten or starve. Because the two goals can’t be blended. They are unblendable.
clark: Okay . . .
harper: That’s being a politician. There are two things going on: politics and policy. You make decisions all day long, and those decisions are either about politics, acquiring and maintaining power, or policy, doing things that further the country.
clark: And I’m tempted continually to blend them?
harper: My observation is this: politicians blend politics and policy all day long. And if you’re in power, you call everything policy. “All I do is in the service of you, the people that elected me.” And that’s not true. Some of your time is spent grasping for power, but it’s hidden away, it’s a secret. And so now you’re in a dishonest relationship with the people you lead.
clark: I think voters can tell when I’m acting in the public interest and when I’m running for re-election.
harper: I’d suggest that you can’t even tell most of the time. Your response to the idea of ending UI for fishermen is two things at once: “There will be enormous suffering” and “They’ll stop voting for me.” One is policy, the other is politics. You blend them so you don’t have to face the fact that, much of the time, you’re just trying to keep your job, not do good. You’re not only in a dishonest relationship with voters, you’re lying to yourself.
clark: I see. And let me guess: you wish I’d do some radical thing, like move my bunny warren to the other side of the dell and avoid the foxes altogether?
harper: Well, in my head, you take a garden hose and stick it in the fox den and drown all the foxes, but okay, sure, your thing.
clark: You think I need to abandon politics for pure policy.
harper: No! I think exactly the opposite.
clark: What!
harper: You spend entirely too much time trying to do good for people.
clark: You’re serious!
harper: Too much policy. Not enough politics. The thing I admire most about Mrs. Thatcher is that ninety percent of her actions are motivated by politics. She spends all of her time making moves that solidify her base. It’s clear, unambiguous politicking. Of the dozens of bills she’s managed to pass since May, all but probably two are politically motivated.
clark: That’s the grossest perversion of what I would consider a leader’s job.
harper: A leader’s job is one thing and one thing only: hegemony.
clark: Hegemony?
harper: Hegemony.
clark: Complete domination of the populace? The accumulation of all available power?
harper: More or less, sure.
clark: Dictatorship?
harper: Dictatorship’s not possible in a democracy, and probably not a worthwhile goal from a moral standpoint.
clark: Phew! Glad to hear it. Nice to know where the line is.
harper: In a democracy, hegemony means convincing the citizenry that your point of view is the objective truth. That the things you believe are actually the way things are.
clark: Being persuasive, getting people on side, sure, these are fundamental to success as a politician.
harper: I’m not wild about persuasion. The problem with convincing people is that it invites rebuttal. Conversation leads to the consideration of the other side, which leads to consensus building, which leads to weak policy.
clark: Otherwise known as democracy.
harper: No! Democracy is the entry point. Once elected, democracy ends. You’re hired to lead, to pursue your agenda—pursue it!
clark: There are a ton of reasons why I can’t just ignore everyone and do what I feel like doing, thank God. Power is also distributed among the provinces.
harper: They have their powers, you have yours.
clark: Doesn’t work that way. Quebec alone has enough seats that I have to consider how a particular policy effects—
harper: You don’t need Quebec.
clark: Sorry?
harper: You don’t need Quebec.
clark: I don’t need Quebec?
harper: You don’t need Quebec.
clark: Every Canadian prime minister since the dawn of time has had to attract enough support from Quebec to get anything done.
harper: You don’t need Quebec. But let me say what I—
clark: No, wait, hang on—
harper: No. Let me finish my point!
A beat. harper has once again gone too far.
clark: Go ahead, Steve. M
ake your point.
harper: Okay. Well. I’m not talking about a province’s power or getting a piece of legislation through or how you engage the opposition. I’m talking about true hegemony: when the fabric of the nation is made by you. When your influence reaches down to the level where people aren’t aware of it. When the country chooses a new flag, and the colours of the country’s new flag happen to also be your political party’s colours. And nobody objects.
Projection:
The colours of the flag of Canada, adopted in 1965, are red and white.
The most exciting thing for me about Mrs. Thatcher’s victory is that she’s building something so durable she will, over time, change the fabric of her country.
Projection:
Once Thatcher was elected the Conservative Party stayed in power for 18 years.
clark: Policies come and go, but hegemony is forever.
harper: Exactly. How many of Trudeau’s policies were you hoping to walk back? How many things did you want to change that, if you did, would simply get changed back when the Liberals return to power?
clark: Meanwhile, the flag of the country stays red and white.
harper: Exactly, sir.
Projection:
Of the 100 years of the twentieth century the Liberal Party formed the government of Canada for 70.
clark: So from your perspective, my putting all my chips on this budget getting passed is foolish?
harper is silent.
From your perspective, is there ever a time when a leader should put principles above longevity?
harper: Longevity is the principle, sir.
A pause. clark starts to move around the room, opening and shutting wood-panelled doors.
clark: I’m looking for . . . I’m looking for a closet large enough to hold your lifeless corpse, Steve.
harper: Sir?
clark: I feel like the greatest service I can offer the country at this moment is to make sure your ideas are never disseminated.
harper: Oh, that’s a joke! Killing me’s unnecessary, sir. There’s no chance the things I want to see happen will happen. Your government is the closest we were ever gonna get, and it wasn’t that close.
clark: I’m as close to Thatcher as Canada’s going to get?
harper: You, personally, have qualities that would have made a Canadian right-wing revolution possible. Setting aside your left-wing beliefs, of course.
1979 Page 5