Suppose the Conservatives lose this election. Will the Harper Government have a legacy piece?A legacy is usually some legislative or institutional achievement that will continue to shape politics, the economy or society long after the government is gone.Examples include the CPR, our national health care system, the Charter of Rights, and the Canada-US Free Trade Agreement (now NAFTA). For better or worse, all are milestones in Canadian history.With this in mind, I've been asking people about the Harper legacy. They often suggest things like the elimination of the gun registry, bringing down transfers on health care, creating the Universal Child Care Benefit, balancing the budget or lowering the GST.When pressed, however, most quickly concede that these initiatives are not in the same league as, say, the FTA or the Charter. A real legacy piece creates a new way of doing things for the generations that follow. After a decade in office, the Conservatives have no obvious candidates. Why?As with so many things about this government, the answer lies in the man. While Stephen Harper may be a policy wonk, he is not a policy entrepreneur. Indeed, as a policymaker, he is much more of a bureaucrat than a visionary, and a highly risk-averse one at that. To see why, let's go back to his first term in office.In the 2005-06 campaign, Harper promised Canadians that a Conservative government would achieve five things:

• Create new accountability legislation, in response to the Liberal sponsorship scandal.
• Create tough new legislation to crack down on crime.
• Reduce the goods and services tax (GST) to five per cent, from seven.
• Turn the Liberal government's child-care program into a direct payment scheme for parents.
• Reduce wait-times in hospital emergency wards.

Once in power, the new government was able to deliver quickly on the first four promises. Each one focused on how the federal government conducts some aspect of its business and, as a result, implementing the promises was relatively easy. All it took was a decision from the top.On accountability, legislation was drafted to change the rules on how government interacts with lobbyists. On the GST, the government simply cut the rate it charges. On child care, it changed how the support was delivered. And on crime, it had only to amend the Criminal Act, a federal statute.By contrast, progress on wait times was slow and painful. Wait times, it turns out, are not “inside” the federal system the same way, say, the GST or the Criminal Act are. They are a byproduct of how players from different organizations interact within the Health system. No single group determines them and no single decision-maker controls them.Reducing wait times therefore required a realignment of key relationships, which, in turn, meant the government needed buy-in from provincial governments, professional associations and hospitals, to name only a few.When these players disagreed with its plan, the government proved unable to forge a new one that was acceptable to everyone. After a series of disappointing starts, the issue was finally dropped from the government's agenda.The bitter lesson for Harper was that collaboration is difficult and risky. In the decade since, his leadership style has been marked by a fierce resistance to becoming entangled in such issues.Instead, he chooses to focus on issues where the government has enough control over the policy levers that opponents can be ignored. Typically, this involves policy issues that fall well inside the federal system, such as changes to the criminal law, tax policy or investment in infrastructure.Only last week on CBC's The House, Defence Minister Jason Kenney reaffirmed this strategy by dismissing calls for the government to act to prevent young people from being radicalized by extremist groups like ISIS. According to Kenney, the government can't stop such recruitment.Actually, no one thinks it can. Stakeholders recognize that radicalization is a complex phenomenon. They are not looking to the federal government to solve radicalization, but to lead a policy discussion to help everyone rally around a plan that will align efforts and help maximize their impact.But Harper wants no part in root causes or collaboration. He prefers to stop terrorists the same way he stops criminals: through a display of force that he can control.His attempt to resuscitate classical federalism reveals the same mentality. It is a way to avoid getting drawn into discussions he cannot control. Even on federal transfer funds where he is forced to engage, dialogue or interaction is severely curtailed.In effect, Harper's governance strategy is clear. He avoids issues he can't control by retreating deep inside the federal policy silos. To some, this may sound like a good idea. And in the 19th and 20th centuries, it was.But the digital age is different. Today, issues are increasingly defined by interconnection and interdependence, which, in turn, calls for collaboration.The lesson Harper should have taken from his experience with wait times is that governments are not islands. They do not exist in splendid isolation. One thinks of the Keystone pipeline and of Harper's failure to provide President Obama any ground on the environment.And that brings us back to the pathfinders—the legacy pieces of tomorrow. Most now lie outside the silos in the collaborative zone. The big issues of our day, such as climate change, security and skills development, cannot be put in boxes.Everyone owns a part of them; real solutions call out for collaboration, innovation, risk and entrepreneurial spirit. So why is it that the Conservatives have no real legacy piece?You do the math.Dr. Don Lenihan is Senior Associate, Policy and Engagement, at Canada 2020, Canada's leading, independent progressive think-tank. Don is an internationally recognized expert on democracy and Open Government. His recent projects include chairing an expert group on citizen engagement for the UN and the OECD; and chairing the Ontario Open Government Engagement Team. The views expressed here are those of the columnist alone. Don can be reached at: [email protected] or follow him on Twitter at: @DonLenihan