The Conservative Party in Canada embraced British Tory traditions, but other strains flowed into it. Indeed, the ancestor of the modern Conservative Party can be discovered in the 1854 Liberal-Conservative COALITION GOVERNMENT of the PROVINCE OF CANADA.

John A. MACDONALD entered the 1854 coalition as a moderate Conservative, and it was he who eventually shaped the Liberal-Conservative Party that was dominant at CONFEDERATION. As Canada's first prime minister, Macdonald constructed a party that emphasized the commitment to Confederation and a policy of national economic development. The party's name symbolized Macdonald's own commitment to equilibrium and moderation, to an emphasis on what Canadians held in common, and to an obscuring of those matters where they divided. He managed to combine ULTRAMONTANE Roman Catholics from Québec, Tories, Orangemen and businessmen in all 4 founding provinces. Rejecting "abstract debate," he emphasized personality, patronage and compromise; but by 1872 the many parts of the expanding nation had become too different to patch together. In 1872 he won 103 seats to 97 for the Opposition Liberals. The majority did not hold; in November 1873 his government fell.

The PACIFIC SCANDAL that brought down Macdonald's government indicated the problems of his approach. The Pacific railway was essential to his nation-building dream; however, its construction and similar development policies linked the government too closely with private interests that did not always serve the public interest. In opposition Macdonald seems to have become convinced that his party should represent something more than simply support of Canada. By then the party had largely dropped the Liberal-Conservative label in favour of Conservative. In the 1878 election campaign Macdonald committed his party to the NATIONAL POLICY, which emphasized PROTECTIONISM, expansion in the West and an assertive central government. This appealed to Ontario and Québec manufacturers and to those who feared the US following its rejection of free trade and RECIPROCITY. A strong pro-British message was added, its effectiveness proven by Macdonald's re-election in 1882, 1887 and 1891.

Macdonald complemented the National Policy with shrewd and lavish patronage and a willingness to compromise, although compromise evaded him in the case of Louis RIEL after the 1885 North-West Rebellion. Riel's execution, along with weak leadership among Québec Conservatives, led to a decline in support there from 48 seats in 1882 to 30 in 1891. Macdonald's reaction to Riel followed logically from his centralist perspective, which kept provinces and local interests in the background. The result was that the provinces became increasingly Liberal, and supported the provincial-rights stand of Liberal leader Wilfrid LAURIER. After Macdonald's death in 1891, his party could not endure attacks on so many fronts. The Conservative governments of John ABBOTT, John THOMPSON, Mackenzie BOWELL and Charles TUPPER struggled to maintain supremacy, but language and religious problems (see MANITOBA SCHOOLS QUESTION) and patronage problems in Québec were great obstacles. The Conservatives lost the 1896 election and for many years did not regain their pre-eminence.

Nova Scotia lawyer Robert BORDEN, Conservative leader 1901-20, sought to expand the Macdonald legacy. He experimented with a Québec lieutenant, flirted with American progressivism and advocated civil service reform and public ownership. He lost the elections of 1904 and 1908. To win in 1911 Borden emphasized the National Policy and the imperial connection, winning support in Ontario, BC and part of the Maritimes.

In Québec the Conservatives allied themselves with anti-Laurier nationalistes who were seduced by Borden's promise of a referendum on naval assistance to Great Britain. The Conservatives won the election, but the imperialist-nationaliste coalition collapsed. By 1913 nationalistes in his caucus were bitterly disillusioned with Borden's siding with the more numerous imperialists. WWI extended Borden's mandate, but in 1917 an election could be postponed no longer.

The December 1917 election was critical for Canadian conservatism. To ensure that his CONSCRIPTION policy was upheld, Borden made an alliance with conscriptionist Liberals. The resulting UNION GOVERNMENT triumphed, but the victory created lasting resentment among French Canadians and immigrants, especially German Canadians. Liberals soon deserted the coalition, leaving the Conservative Party with a narrower base than ever before. Moreover, nationalization of the Grand Trunk and Canadian Northern railways caused the defection of the Montréal business community, probably the party's greatest source of funds.

Arthur MEIGHEN, Borden's successor, immediately tried to shape the remnants of Unionism into Conservatism. In the 1921 election the Conservatives finished third with 50 seats, behind the PROGRESSIVE PARTY with 65 and the Liberals with 116. Meighen's support of conscription meant the loss of francophone support. In western Canada, Progressives identified more readily with Liberals since they associated Conservatives with the despised National Policy. Meighen served briefly as prime minister in 1926, but a Liberal majority soon returned (see KING-BYNG AFFAIR). Conservatives were too closely linked with Britain when Canada's Britishness was disappearing. Nor did Meighen manage to adapt the National Policy to postwar economic conditions.

In 1927 R.B. BENNETT, a wealthy Calgary businessman, succeeded Meighen and in 1930 won a majority, taking 25 Québec seats. The GREAT DEPRESSION created the climate for Bennett's victory; it also ensured his defeat 5 years later. Bennett's initial response to the Depression was a characteristically Conservative attempt to protect industry and to obtain imperial preference. It did not work. In 1935 he called for many social reforms, but these proposals came too late to be convincing (see BENNETT'S NEW DEAL). Many Reformist Conservatives had already left to join the Reconstruction Party founded by former Bennett minister H.H. STEVENS. Moreover, 2 new parties, SOCIAL CREDIT and the CO-OPERATIVE COMMONWEALTH FEDERATION, appealed to areas of English Canada. The 1935 election witnessed the worst Conservative defeat; they took only 40 seats against the Liberals' 173.

Thereafter the Conservatives struggled to rebuild a successful coalition. The enmity of French Canada endured, even though in 1938 the party chose Robert J. MANION, who had opposed conscription, was Catholic and had married a French Canadian. His attempts to conciliate Québec only angered numerous colleagues once WWII began. Party funds were depleted, and party organization had atrophied. In 1940 the Conservatives again won only 40 seats. Manion's defeat turned the party back towards Arthur Meighen, who shunned compromises and to many Conservatives appeared to be the Canadian Churchill. Canada, however, was not Britain, and Meighen lost a February 1942 by-election.

Encouraged by Meighen, Manitoba Premier John BRACKEN, a Progressive with no Conservative experience, sought and won the 1942 leadership, and the party's name was changed to the Progressive Conservative Party. It was attempting to turn left in order to place itself on the path of wartime reform sentiment. But the CCF and the Liberals were also moving left. In 1944 the Conservatives were caught up again in the pro-conscription movement. Although the Liberals brought in conscription, the Conservatives' enthusiasm ensured that they would bear the blame. In the 1945 election they could not even find candidates for most Québec ridings. Elsewhere, conscription was largely forgotten when the war ended. The PCs came fourth on the Prairies, behind the CCF, Liberals and Social Credit.

The Conservative platform appeared to have more substance than it actually possessed. Despite strong Québec support, Diefenbaker could not come to terms with Canada's bicultural nature. His policy initiatives seemed eclectic rather than parts of a larger vision. In 1962 Diefenbaker lost his majority, and in 1963 his government collapsed and the Liberals won the subsequent election. Diefenbaker's populism had lost much business support and now lacked urban support generally. French Canada once again shunned the Conservatives. Diefenbaker, however, retained strong support in the West and in pockets elsewhere. His removal as leader in September 1967 damaged party unity, and his successor, Nova Scotia Premier Robert STANFIELD, felt the wounds.

Diefenbaker's legacy was strong Conservative support in western Canada. Other successes in the 1960s and 1970s occurred provincially, especially in Ontario, where the Conservatives maintained a regime from 1943 to 1985. By 1979 Conservatives governed in Ontario, Manitoba, Alberta, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland, PEI and New Brunswick. But Stanfield was unable to lead the federal party to power, and in February 1976 Joe CLARK, an Albertan, became its leader. In May 1979 the Conservatives under Clark formed a minority government, but they were defeated in the House in December and lost the February 1980 election.

The defeat of the Conservatives in 1980 brought Joe Clark's leadership into question. In 1983 the party rejected Clark and chose the bilingual Québecer Brian MULRONEY as its leader. Although Mulroney lacked any parliamentary experience, he possessed superb organizational skills and a deep knowledge of his native province. The party, so often fractious, united behind the new leader as he faced Pierre TRUDEAU's successor, John TURNER, in the federal election of September 1984. Mulroney took the Western base of the party and fused it with a renewed support among Québecers who were disillusioned with Trudeau's federalism. The presence of notable Québec nationalists such as Lucien BOUCHARD was an indication that this was a perhaps uneasy coalition.

Despite being plagued by ministerial resignations and scandals, the Mulroney Conservatives implemented much of their business agenda, privatizing crown corporations and arranging a FREE TRADE deal with the United States. Nevertheless, the failure to achieve its goal of a new federalism through constitutional negotiations and an inability to reduce the public debt or to raise Canada out of a persistent recession eroded the party's support in its second term. The free trade deal did not produce the jobs and prosperity that Mulroney had promised. In Ontario the perception was widespread that the deal had cost many jobs. Western disaffection rose over the delay of the Mulroney government in scrapping the hated National Energy Policy, the decision to award a lucrative defence contract to Montréal instead of Winnipeg, and lingering animosity over the implementation of the GST. Mulroney's personal popularity fell to lower levels than any previous prime minister.

Signs of weakness in the government emerged as early as 1987 when Preston MANNING formed the REFORM PARTY under the general slogan "The West wants in" and led it to a respectable showing in Alberta in the 1988 election. It elected its first MP in a 1988 by-election. Weaknesses in Québec emerged when Mulroney's close friend and Cabinet colleague Lucien Bouchard resigned in disagreement over proposed changes to the MEECH LAKE ACCORD. Several Conservative MPs from Québec followed him and they formed another new political party, the BLOC QUÉBÉCOIS.

In 1993 the Mulroney coalition disintegrated under Kim CAMPBELL, who was unable to distance herself from the Mulroney regime. Québec supporters turned to Lucien Bouchard and the Bloc Québécois and Western supporters turned to the Reform Party. The election resulted in the most devastating defeat in the history of Canadian politics. The party's 154 seats evaporated. Only former leadership aspirant Jean CHAREST and Saint John, NB, mayor Elsie Wayne managed to win seats for the party. The Conservative Party lost its official status as a political party and faced a financial as well as a political crisis. Jean Charest became interim party leader in 1993 and in 1995 was confirmed as leader, the first French Canadian ever to head the Conservatives. The youthful Charest was seen as the key to rebuilding the Conservative Party, and indeed in the 1997 general federal election the Tories won 20 seats and 18% of the popular vote, regaining official party status. Despite this victory, in April 1998 Charest left the federal Conservatives to replace Daniel Johnson as leader of the Québec Liberal Party, in the hopes of usurping the ruling Parti Québécois in that year's provincial election (which he failed to do). Charest's replacement was a return to the past. Joe Clark returned to active federal politics, and in November 1998 he easily won the Tory leadership race against a challenge from a maverick nationalist outsider, David Orchard, and became federal Conservative leader once more.

In June 1999 the United Alternative, a right-wing coalition begun by the Reform Party, voted in favour of proceeding with their plan to unite the conservative parties so as to make political inroads against the federal Liberal Party. The Progressive Conservative Party officially refused to participate in the United Alternative movement. The United Alternative nonetheless proceeded with the support of some of the leading members of the Ontario provincial PC Party and, just as important, with the backing of some very wealthy and right-wing Bay Street businesspeople. These defections caused yet another serious blow to the Conservatives.

The CANADIAN ALLIANCE was formed in 2000 and chose former Alberta treasurer Stockwell DAY as its leader. Day led the party to 66 seats and 25.5% of the popular vote. Joe Clark, who waged a strong campaign and performed extremely well in the debates, barely held on to official party status with 12 seats and 12.2% of the popular vote. Most of his seats were in Atlantic Canada. He made a brave decision personally to run in Calgary, where to everyone's surprise but his own, he won. The party's campaign was hampered by lack of financial support and the party remained deep in debt after the election.

Stockwell Day, however, proved to be a singularly inept leader of the Canadian Alliance, and his policy decisions and leadership style quickly generated internal dissent within his party. Seven members left his caucus in 2001 and formed a loose alliance with the Conservatives under the name the Democratic Reform Caucus, led by Deborah Grey and Chuck Strahl. However, when Stephen HARPER succeeded Day as leader, all but one returned. Clark's strategy of rebuilding the Progressive Conservative Party on the base of a crumbling Canadian Alliance had failed, and he faced the difficult task of rebuilding the party against a reinvigorated Canadian Alliance with his party deeply in debt.

In May 2003 the Progressive Conservative Party held a leadership convention to choose Clark's successor. Front-runner Peter MACKAY made a deal with his nationalist rival, David Orchard, that he would not pursue a merger with the Canadian Alliance. However, by October 2003 the Progressive Conservative Party and the Canadian Alliance had agreed in principle to form a new political party. The Conservative Party of Canada came into existence in December 2003. It held its first leadership convention in Toronto in March 2004, and former Alliance leader Stephen Harper became the first elected leader of the new party.

Author: WILLIAM CHRISTIAN

When Peter MacKay won the leadership of the Progressive Conservative Party in 2003, he did so in part with the support of David Orchard, a staunch traditional Tory, with promises to re-examine the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and to reject merger talks with the Canadian Alliance. Within weeks of gaining the leadership, however, MacKay began secret discussions with Harper on a merger of the two conservative parties. These talks resulted in an announcement on 16 October by the two leaders that an agreement in principle had been reached on a merger. The merger agreement was ratified overwhelmingly in December 2003 by separate votes by the memberships of both parties.

The merger was bitterly opposed in some quarters, especially among traditional conservatives. The same day as the merger was announced, 8 Dec 2003, Joe Clark and two other Progressive Conservative MPs left the party. Other MPs and supporters soon joined them, believing the merger was less a coming together of equals and rather a takeover by the Canadian Alliance. The decision to drop the term "Progressive" from the party name was viewed as more than symbolic; instead, it seemed an indication of a social conservative strain running through the Alliance. Indeed, the new Conservative Party seemed to many more like the American Republican Party than the traditional Tory Party.

Harper won the leadership of the Conservative Party on 20 Mar 2004, defeating Tony Clement, a former Ontario Cabinet minister, and Belinda Stronach, head of Magna Corporation. Weeks later, Harper and his newly minted party found itself in a federal election. Despite a buoyant economy, the governing LIBERAL PARTY, headed by Paul MARTIN, was immensely unpopular in many areas of Canada, being viewed as corrupt and untrustworthy. Harper's Conservatives hoped to harness this discontent to their advantage, and for a time seemed successful. Heading into the last couple of weeks of the campaign, several polls showed the Conservatives on the verge of forming a minority government. However, the loose comments of some Conservative candidates in the last days of the campaign (compulsory abortion counselling, ending support for minority language programs, and using the notwithstanding clause to restrict Charter rights) raised concerns the party had a hidden agenda on social issues. Harper's own comments the year previous in support of the unpopular Iraq war also raised fears a Conservative government might align Canada too closely with the United States on foreign policy. Many Canadians also viewed Harper's Conservatives as wanting to allow a parallel private health care system in Canada.

The election of 28 Jun 2004 saw the Conservative Party take 99 seats and nearly 30% of the popular vote, enough to secure Official Opposition status to the once-more victorious Liberal Party. Some critics suggested the result fell short of expectations. They pointed out the percentage Conservative votes was considerably less than the Progressive Conservative Party and the Canadian Alliance had garnered in the 2000 election. Others, however, noted the new party had gained seats overall, especially in Ontario, and that Canada's right wing was now united for the first time in over a decade. From this perspective, it could be argued the party was well positioned for future elections.

The minority Liberal government struggled over the next year and a half, beset by a scandal involving the misuse of public funds. Finally, in November 2005, the Liberal government fell. Running on a platform that emphasized democratic reforms while otherwise abandoning or downplaying some of the party's more contentious policies, Harper's Conservatives emerged victorious in the 23 Jan 2006 election. The victory was tenuous, as the Conservative Party won only 124 seats within the 308-seat House of Commons. (The number of Conservative seats increased to 125 two weeks later when a former Liberal Cabinet minister crossed the floor.) Nonetheless, many observers viewed the election results as significant, signalling a long-term shift in political power in Canada to the western provinces, especially the prosperous province of Alberta, Harper's electoral home. Harper was sworn in as Canada's 22nd prime minister on 6 Feb 2006. He immediately chose his Cabinet of 27 ministers, significantly fewer than the 38 positions held by the Liberal government, and did not appoint a deputy prime minister.

Harper's government quickly passed several measures, most notably a decrease in the Goods and Services Tax from 7 percent to 6 percent, then later to 5 percent. The government also quickly made good on promises to allow the GUN CONTROL registry to become moribund, to scuttle Canada's support for the Kyoto Protocol on global warming, to cancel the Kelowna Accord dealing with Aboriginal issues, and to pursue SENATE reform. The Harper government also passed Bill C-16, which fixed election dates, ostensibly preventing a government from going to the polls at its own discretion.

Beyond these immediate measures, the Harper government's performance over the next 2 years faced increasing criticism. The party was criticized for being highly confrontational and partisan in dealing with other parties in the House of Commons, and secretive and controlling in its dealings with the media and public. Some noted the increased centralization of power within the prime ministerial office. The government faced further criticism in the spring of 2007 when a document was revealed that instructed Conservative MPs on how to impede all-party committees from doing their mandated jobs.

At the same time, the Harper government successfully managed to push through certain policies, most notably gaining parliamentary support for continued Canadian involvement in the increasingly controversial AFGHANISTAN mission.

In the summer of 2008, flush with financial contributions and facing a weakened Liberal Party headed by Stéphane DION, the Conservative Party believed that the time was right to go to the polls. The party ignored its own bill on parliamentary dissolution, arguing that Parliament had become "dysfunctional." An election was called for 14 Oct 2008.

For a time during the election, it appeared that Harper's Conservatives would obtain a much sought-after majority. However, a backlash in Québec over cuts to arts programs damaged hopes of a breakthrough in that province.

The election was further marked by a sudden escalation of the financial crisis that had been spreading throughout the world since 2007. In this context, the question of who might best manage the economy became central.

In an election marred by the lowest turnout in Canadian electoral history, the Conservative Party was elected again, with a second minority. Although it lost votes, it marginally increased its percentage of votes overall by comparison with the other parties, and increased its seat total to 143.

Heading into its second straight term, the Conservative Party initially promised a new spirit of cooperation with the other parties to deal with the escalating economic crisis engulfing the world and Canada. The government's fiscal update, presented to the House of Commons on 27 Nov 2008, was rejected by the other parties who viewed the Conservatives' response to the emerging economic crisis as inadequate. The Liberals and NEW DEMOCRATS signed an accord to form a minority coalition government with the Bloc Québécois agreeing to not vote against the coalition on a matter of confidence for a period of two years. The idea of a Liberal-NDP coalition was immediately applauded and denounced throughout Canada, raising also the spectre of a constitutional crisis.

Panicked by this abrupt turn of events, the Conservative government asked Governor General Michaëlle Jean to prorogue Parliament. Prorogation was granted on December 4. By the time Parliament reconvened in late January 2009, the public mood had shifted strongly in support of the Conservatives, especially in English-speaking Canada. Lacking political support, and perhaps will, the Liberal Party stepped back from its coalition bid. Its leader, Stéphane Dion, resigned and was soon replaced by Michael IGNATIEFF. The Conservatives had weathered the coalition storm.

The threat caused the Conservative government to change direction on the economy, however. With the economy worsening in the United States and elsewhere, and its effects now washing across the Canadian border, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty announced the introduction of a program of economic stimulus to combat the recessionary slowdown. Termed "Canada's Economic Action Plan," the plan also soon proved a stimulus to Conservative fortunes as the government could claim credit for the mild upturn in the economy that occurred over the following two years.

In other policy areas, the Conservative government continued to advance "tough on crime" measures, increased military expenditures, and targeted tax breaks. Opposition critics condemned these policies as fiscally unsound and designed primarily to garner political support, but these concerns found little resonance with the Canadian people.

Rather, the greater concern expressed regarding the Conservative government proved to be less its policies than its manner of governance, viewed by many as authoritarian, partisan, and intensely secretive. The public's more general concerns regarding Canadian democracy were reinforced in late 2009 when Prime Minister Harper once more advised the Governor General to prorogue Parliament for the period 30 Dec 2009 until 3 Mar 2010. As stated by the government, the purpose of recessing Parliament was the XXI Olympic Winter Games, held in Vancouver, but opposition MPs argued that prorogation was in fact meant to avoid troubling questions about the treatment of Afghan detainees.

The parliamentary session that followed was short and largely uneventful. In June, however, the government made the controversial decision to make voluntary completion of the long form CENSUS. The decision was widely criticized not only by other political parties but by a wide swath of corporate, union, and non-profit groups as well as academics. The decision led to the public resignation of Statistics Canada's director.

Internationally, the Conservative government slowly moved away from its hawkish stance on Afghanistan towards a more familiar Canadian position of social and economic development. A withdrawal of Canadian combat troops from Afghanistan by June 2011 was also enacted.

The government took controversial stands on a number of international issues, such as support for Israel that some viewed as at odds with Canada's tradition as an "honest broker" in the region. The Conservative government's opposition to measures to deal with climate change and the de-funding of agencies whose family planning initiatives included the right to abortion also brought criticism. In the fall of 2010, Canada lost its bid for a seat on the United Nations' Security Council. Critics charged that this was the result of Canada being increasingly offside with many underdeveloped countries. Conservative supporters, however, claimed that Canada was standing up for firm principles and that loss of the seat was not a reflection on the government.

Partly out of fearing to cause an election, for which they were unprepared, and partly out of agreement with Conservative policies, Canada's opposition parties during the period after the 2008 election often went along or at least did not oppose the government. There was much sabre rattling, but each threat of bringing down the government soon evaporated.

By the spring of 2011, however, the Parliament was at an end. The opposition parties felt they could no longer support the government and still save face; the governing Conservatives believed that an election might at last bring them a majority. The defeat of the government's budget on 25 Mar 2011 paved the way for the election that followed.

The 2011 election proved surprising in many respects. Going into the election, many expected a minority Conservative government once more. Harper's Conservatives campaigned on a platform of economic stability in uncertain times. While some viewed the campaign as lacklustre, it was effective in controlling messaging and avoiding any major gaffes.

Liberal leader Ignatieff carried on a very traditional campaign of town hall meetings which initially appeared effective in countering an unrelenting barrage of Conservative attack ads questioning his patriotism, which he had faced since becoming leader two years earlier. But a poor performance in the televised leaders' debates, combined with his party's dismal fundraising and acute failures in articulating a distinct set of policies, steadily diminished Liberal support as the election wore on.

Still, no one could have predicted the Liberal Party's widespread collapse nor that of the Bloc Québécois in its home province. While the New Democratic Party led by Jack LAYTON was the prime beneficiary of the latter's difficulties, the Conservative Party proved the overall beneficiary of the changed political scene. When the votes were tallied on 2 May 2011, the Conservative Party had emerged with its long-sought majority, taking 166 seats and nearly 40 percent of the vote. The NDP became the Official Opposition with 103 seats (31 percent), while the Liberal Party was reduced to 34 seats (nearly 19 percent) and the Bloc 4 seats (6 percent). The Green Party elected its first and only member, leader Elizabeth MAY.

The government's Throne Speech, delivered on 3 Jun, offered little that was surprising. Promises included Senate reform, abolishment of per-vote subsidies, the end of the long gun registry and the Canadian Wheat Board's single desk selling, continued support for the military, and harsher prison sentences.

The government faced immediate opposition to several of these initiatives, most surprisingly from many Conservative Senators appointed by the prime minister who questioned the efficacy and legitimacy of Senate reform. With a new majority under his belt, Prime Minister Harper appeared in good position to advance the cause of embedding conservative principles and policies at the heart of Canada's political system.