"Liberal, Tory, same old story".

"Liberal, Tory, same old story"; so ran a chant of my youth. The trouble is that Canada's elite--led by those twin bastions of acceptable orthodoxy, the CBC and the Globe and Mail--want to make this slogan the iron law of electoral politics. Since the June election their incessant demand is that the Conservative Party cease offering anything conservative and become, well, another liberal Party.

First, the actual election results, which can be understood only as a disappointment.

A disappointment, first, to the Liberals. After so many years of waiting as heir-apparent, Paul Martin came into the Prime Minister's office with high expectations, confident that he could exceed the political achievements of his predecessor, Jean Chretien, who had won three straight majority governments.

In fact, when Martin took over, Liberal insiders were predicting a near sweep that would decimate all opposition parties (200 plus seats was the common expectation). Well, thanks to the worst fear-mongering political campaign I have witnessed, Paul Martin managed to cling to office, but just barely. Paul Martin's star tarnished faster than any political leader's since Kim Campbell.

Conservatives were also disappointed. With a week or so left in the election, a minority Conservative government seemed to be in prospect. Then the successful Liberal attack ads began.

Despite having a Nova Scotian, Peter MacKay, as Deputy Leader, the Conservative showing in the Maritimes was pitiful. In Quebec, the Conservative Party was non-existent. The much-anticipated Ontario breakthrough occurred (largely due to a resurgent NDP splitting the vote on the left for a change), but the Conservative popular vote in Ontario actually declined from the combined PC/Alliance vote of 2000. In Western Canada, the Conservatives did about as well as expected, but they lost both votes and seats in British Columbia. And if this was their best showing, given the corruption of the Liberals in 2004, what grounds are there for future optimism?

Stephen Harper generally ran a smart and disciplined campaign but, as the leaders' debate demonstrated, the parameters of acceptable political discourse in this country have now become so constricted that a "campaign of ideas" is no longer possible.

The NDP were also disappointed. Jack Layton came nowhere near fulfilling his boast of a record number of NDP seats; indeed, at just 19, the NDP alone does not hold the balance of power in our parliament of minorities. Also, one has the distinct impression that Garrulous Jack has grown wearisome to many Canadians. Layton is not a leader to wear well.

Only the Bloc Quebecois could legitimately claim victory. They won 54 seats, tying their best showing ever; the BQ even took Jean Chretien's old riding. Giles Duceppe won both the leaders' debates hands down. Among the party leaders, he alone seemed to have some inkling of what he stood for and why. I suspect that many voters in Ontario and Alberta would now like an opportunity to vote for an avowedly separatist party.

The worst loser on Monday night was Canada. For the first time in a decade, the electorate was offered a plausible alternative to a tired and cynical Government; through fear voters failed to take it. And voter turnout in 2004 was the lowest in Canadian history (barely 60%). By all counts, it is not just the young who are turned off politics. It would be hyperbole to say that Canadian democracy is dead, but it may well be on life-support.

The powerful voices of the Consensus now demand that the Conservative Party abandon any distinctly conservative policy to have a chance of forming a Government. Climb belatedly on the "gay" rights bandwagon, they urge. Support "same sex marriage." Say nothing about abortion. Promote diversity. But even if such a strategy could be successful, which is highly unlikely, what would be the point? One party of Liberals is bad enough; two is unthinkable. And didn't Jesus once ask the question: what shall it profit a man to gain the whole world if the cost is his own soul? And what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?