In politics as in sports, dominant players see the game differently. They position themselves to take advantage of where the action is headed, not where it's been or is happening now.

So it might occur to an astute tactician that Parliament's suspension is more than a panicked timeout by a threatened Prime Minister. A player seeing the game differently would grasp that not much will be the same when play resumes.

Two reasonable assumptions lead to that conclusion. One is that Stephen Harper isn't suffering the slings and arrows of his second annual prorogation merely to postpone questions about what looks, feels and smells like a Conservative cover-up of Afghanistan prisoner abuse. The other is that a controlling prime minister will do whatever is necessary to regain command of the debate that will frame the coming election's ballot question.

Add one assumption to the other and the future becomes clearer. Harper will use his full playbook to thwart meaningful resumption of the Commons' and military police inquiries probing what and when ministers and generals knew about Afghan torture. Then he will use a throne speech and budget to move the national conversation back to themes that resonate more loudly with voters and reduce the noise now buffeting the ruling party.

It's reasonable to expect that come March the opposition will still be talking about torture and ministerial accountability while Harper will be promising, fingers crossed, to restore balance to federal finances with no pain to taxpayers. That's win-win for Conservatives who will continue smearing critics as anti-military while identifying themselves as the party that will protect ordinary, hard-working folks and skin fat-cat civil servants with their nanny state programs.

It hardly matters that questioning patriotism or pitting hinterland against capital are two more pages yanked by Tories from the Republican manual. What counts is who can bounce the public opinion ball into scoring position.

Past experience and current events suggest there's no contest. Conservatives have been setting the agenda since winning power, forcing weak, fissured and inept rivals to react, usually to poor effect. More embarrassing still, the strongest protest against Harper's abuse of procedure to frustrate the will of Parliament is now coming from grassroots internet campaigns.

More adept opposition parties would be focusing on the real world implications of putting Parliament on hold by pointing out, among other things, that airport scanners that increase the illusion of security while stripping privacy will be operating before any public debate. Liberals would be preparing for the coming Conservative game-change by, say, resurrecting Paul Martin, still remembered as Canada's best finance minister, as a special adviser to Michael Ignatieff on balancing budgets.

Conservatives-in-waiting learned to make Liberals pay for every mistake. Chrétien-era ethical failures were kept top of mind while Harper built enough credibility for voters to take his party for a test spin.

Harper in power has learned to get ahead of the game. He is maximizing a deep and narrow Conservative base by pushing hot button issues to polarize public opinion, depressing voter turnout and bending—sometimes breaking—rules, conventions and his own election law.

While many Canadians and all his enemies fume, the Prime Minister is preparing to kick-start a fresh game, one now almost certain to end in an election as early as spring and no later than fall.

James Travers is a national affairs columnist for The Toronto Star. This column was released on Jan. 7.

news@hilltimes.com

The Hill Times