"He's Not Coming Back For You"

"Glen, come on, you've got to get out front." I just can't do it easily. Politics isn't much of a place for a person with a shy nature, but that's what I find myself in. And campaigns can be difficult for someone like that - all the handshaking, stump speeches, interviews. And yet I do it because it's my job. Any election campaign is about the voter getting to know the people they might be voting for. That can't be done if everyone's playing "Where's Waldo."It's strange, then, when a party leader, especially a Prime Minister, opts to stay within a bubble of tight scripts and limited access. To be sure, the person who is in the lead at the start of any campaign maintains a careful strategy so as not to cause the big blunder that could tip the campaign. But Stephen Harper's method of doing this has been about as isolated as anyone can recall.And it's happening in various dimensions. For the media, the frustration of limited access to the PM and the practice of only permitting four questions at each event has been frustrating. It's their job to cover developments and provide commentary, but when they can't get to the top political official in the land, they can't fulfill their responsibility to the public as well as they would like. But it's also more than that. Journalists are screened, questions are vetted, and the PM has taken to the practice of just not answering questions he doesn't like. It's a problem that continues to dog his campaign.Meanwhile his chief challenger Michael Ignatieff has taken on all comers. He incorporates endless rounds of media interviews into his campaign. He holds town halls in numerous locations where people aren't screened and opposing voices are permitted. He has no idea who's "out there" in the seats and the variety of questions tossed his way are as diverse as the nation itself.This was just the way it was when Ignatieff visited my home town of London, Ontario a few days ago. The venue was packed to overflowing and the questions covered a multitude of issues. The sense of openness was a big hit compared to the PM's visit to London last night. It was a rally for campaign supporters and, again, access was limited. Security for a Prime Minister is essential and accepted - but by party affiliation?I received an email this morning from a Conservative friend (not from my riding) who was in attendance. He told of reporters not being permitted to ask many questions. There were massive security checks and people were tossed out of the venue for their relations to the Liberal party. People were turned away for not having identification. He said that was it for him. He had been experiencing difficulty with the Harper approach in the last couple of years but the rally convinced him it was time to move on. He doesn't know how, or if, he'll vote in this campaign, but he can no longer support the PM.We have a PM who, five years ago, came to power by promising easy access, open democracy, financial accountability, protection of the experts in the bureaucracy, prudent fiscal restraint and a balancing of the books. At present he is moving away from every single one of these things, knowing that having broken those commitments to his party he will nevertheless be able to maintain their support for the sake of keeping power. Maybe. But in doing so, the PM is forcing true Conservatives to choose between their values and retaining power, and that can never be a good thing.What we have now is the present political leader afraid of one-on-one debates, even when it's Rick Mercer attempting to broker the deal. He's afraid to take on free-wheeling questions; worried about dissent; deeply distrustful of media; and unwilling to permit you access unless you carry the brand in some sort of party identification.Is this what we want as we struggle for open democracy? My Conservative friend is a true Canadian, but this isn't what he voted for and he's now checked out of the system. Liberals suffered the same difficulties a short while back but are now re-engaging as Ignatieff woos them just as they are.Stephen Harper took up the reins of power by promising all those things that matter in an open democracy, including fiscal accountability and transparency in government. Then he left. Having grasped power and attained it, he departed the democratic realm for 24 Sussex Drive and ensconced himself in a deep ideological and security bubble. Five years in power have only entrenched that pattern, and even in a election campaign where everything about openness really matters, he maintains an iron grip on his exclusiveness.You might be hoping to see more of him in the weeks ahead, straining to see the one who made all those democratic promises five years ago. But now you are learning that he didn't come back for you. He got the power he coveted and promptly forgot the promises. You were his ticket; now you can't even get in to see him. It's a bitter lesson, and for all those in the country, whatever their political stripes, the desire for democracy where leaders are accountable to their citizens appears just that much farther off.