The 2006 Federal Election in Canada produced some of the most vicious negative attack ads ever produced. Particulary by the Liberal Party of Canada who tried to depict Conservative leader Stephen Harper as a right-wing boogey man. This tactic had worked well in the 2004 election, resulting in a Liberal minority government. In 2006 the Liberals stepped up the accusations, which caused a negative backlash.
The Ads
A dozen 30 second ads were produced by the Liberal Party. All featured a zoomed in and unflaterring picture of Stephen Harper with the sound of war drums beating. The ads claimed many many things including
- Harper is funded by a secret ultra right wing political group in the United States.
- Attack Harper's comments to an American think-tank in Montreal when he called the U.S. a light and inspiration to Canadians and the world;
- Claim Harper will either have to raise taxes or run a deficit to pay for his campaign promises;
- Claim Harper and Bloc Quebecois Leader Gilles Duceppe have a close relationship that will not benefit national unity;
- Claim that Harper once said Liberal ridings in the west of Canada are either dominated by recent Asian immigrants or recent migrants from eastern Canada;
- Report comments Harper made to an American audience, advising them not to feel bad for Canada's unemployed, who receive "generous social assistance and unemployment assistance," and that Canada is content to become a second-tier social country; - Quote a U.S. newspaper editorial that described Harper as the most pro-U.S. leader in the western world.
- One claimed that Harper was "Not Pro Choice" on Abortion, and would threaten a woman's right to choose, which many thought was a cheap shot as Paul Martin had claimed he was pro-life as well, and Harper consistently throughout the campaign claimed he would not open up an abortion debate.
Controversy
One ad in particular caused a great deal of uproar. The ad suggested Harper would put military personnel in Canadian cities, and implied that if he were to be elected he would implement a sort of martial law. Naturally many in the Canadian military were furious about the idea that their government would accuse them of being used to brutalize Canadian citizens. It was also particulary hurtful due to the fact that many Canadian soldiers were fighting in Afghanistan at the time. Many felt that using the military as a polticial tool or game was crossing the line.
The military ad was pulled quickly after appearing on English television for only a day. However the ad continued to be played in French amid the growing anger over the ad. Paul Martin had claimed "That's one (ad) that was not played." He was later quoted on CBC as saying he personally approved all the ads.
Reaction
The military ad was seen in the Canadian public as being over the top in the degree of believability, as a result many believe that it damaged the creditability of the other ads. For days afterwards Liberal Party leader Paul Martin had to defend the ads in many interviews, while some of his fellow Liberal MPs claimed they were "embarassed over these dishonest attack ads." The Conservatives were able to make an ad full of quotes from Liberal party members expressing their disatisifaction with the ads.
The ads did not have the same effect though as compared to the the 1993 Conservative ad mocking Jean Cretien's facial deformity. The Liberal Party did lose the 2006 government but still mainted a strong status with 102 seats. Far better than the Progressive Conservative party of 1993 who were reduced to two seats.