OTTAWA — Prime Minister Stephen Harper sees himself as a leader in the same mould as Jean Chrétien, according to a new book on how power changes hands in Canada.

Though Harper famously sees Liberals as his chief enemies, the former Liberal prime minister appears to be viewed as an example and a kindred spirit for this leader, author David Zussman found when interviewing high-ranking advisers for his new book, Off and Running.

“A number of those interviewed for this study mentioned that in Harper’s early months as prime minister he would ask how Chrétien would deal with a particular situation,” Zussman writes, “since he felt that they shared similar management styles — decisiveness, a reliance on a small number of advisers, an interest in getting at the facts, and a stubbornness to stick with a decision once it is rendered.”

Zussman, who presided over the transition team that put Chrétien’s new government in place in 1993, has written a definitive, how-to guide on the changing of the guard in Canada — how it works in theory and in practice.

His interviews with key members of leaders’ inner circles, past and present, offer some revealing insights into the current prime minister and his predecessors.

While Harper may have modelled some of his decisions on Chrétien’s management style, for instance, he seems to have adopted a far more hands-on approach with his cabinet than did Chrétien, who was known for telling his ministers they were on a long leash — until they made a mistake.

For instance, Harper insisted on being present in the room as potential ministers were being vetted for appointment to his new government in 2006 — a situation that his then-chief of staff, Ian Brodie, regretted in retrospect.

The book describes how cabinet recruits were seated at a table with Harper at one end of the table and Derek Burney, head of Harper’s transition team, at the other end.

Brodie recounts the typical scene in detail in the book:

“Knowing that the future prime minister is with you at a table, people responded to him when Derek brought up a background check,” Brodie recounts in the book, describing how would-be ministers invariably said they had nothing to stand in the way of their promotion.

“It could turn out that you have five outstanding legal liens against your property, but you didn’t want to bring that up with the PM in the room,” Brodie said in the interview with Zussman. “I see now the wisdom in separating the candidate from the PM . . . It is unfeasible to hash out any problems with the PM in the room.”

The handover of power in Canada is an incredibly complex task, as Off and Running illustrates, filled with minute attention to detail and the nuts and bolts of government machinery.

But it is also an exercise highly influenced by the personalities of the leaders assuming power — and some not-insignificant advice from their spouses too, as Zussman found.

Paul Martin’s wife, Sheila, appeared to have some say over which of her husband’s many friends and supporters got a cabinet seat when he assumed power in 2003, the book states, and Harper’s wife, Laureen, made her voice heard on staffing matters too.

Geoff Norquay, who served as Harper’s communications adviser in opposition days, said he explicitly asked his prospective new boss about his wife’s views, because his long experience in Brian Mulroney’s government taught him how spouses’ opinions could be important. When the old Progressive Conservative party merged with Harper’s Canadian Alliance, Norquay was worried that Laureen Harper would see him as too tied to the old PC team.

“And Harper kind of chuckled and he said, ‘Well, actually, it was kind of her idea that I hire you,’” Norquay is quoted as saying in the book.

Harper and Martin shared another trait surrounding transition too, Zussman writes — neither leader would allow their chief bureaucrats to meet with opposition leaders to discuss potential transition arrangements while elections were under way. This used to be common practice, Zussman writes, until Martin put a halt to it in the elections of the early 2000s.

Zussman writes of this as a regrettable development, especially when compared to countries such as Britain, where government transitions are sorted out transparently and well in advance, so that coalitions and uncertain election results don’t paralyze the state.

Still, despite Martin’s prohibition, his Privy Council clerk did have a brief conversation with Harper’s chief of staff, Brodie, in the dying days of the 2005-06 election as the Conservative victory loomed, Zussman learned.

The clerk, Alex Himelfarb, asked Brodie how he was feeling. Brodie said he was “nervous,” and then added: “If we make it to Thursday without f-----g up, I’ll believe we might win this.”

Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading... Loading...

When Martin and Harper did meet to arrange the handover of power after the 2006 Liberal defeat, the departing prime minister did exact a promise from the new one, Zussman writes — and it had to do with a plum posting for Himelfarb.

“Martin took the opportunity to ask Harper to honour Martin’s earlier promise to Alex Himelfarb that he would be appointed Canada’s ambassador to Italy,” Zussman writes.

Martin had made the promise to Himelfarb after he convinced him to stay on as clerk when Chrétien left office in 2003, and Harper honoured the promise in June of 2006, after enjoying an “excellent working relationship” for six months with the clerk to two previous Liberal PMs.

Read more about: