Premier Brad Wall has recently been caught in a precarious game of when to be supportive of the federal Conservatives.
Of course, Wall and his Saskatchewan Party followers have no official ties to Stephen Harper's Conservatives that make such support a given. That's an advantage for a couple of reasons.
First, as student of political history, Wall would know that Saskatchewan provincial parties tied directly to the federal government generally pay the price. Ross Thatcher, for example, could never shake the Pierre Trudeau Liberal connection.
Second, while the Wall and the Sask. Party are "conservative" in style, their success has had a lot to do with distancing themselves from the "Conservative" brand in Saskatchewan that has been defined by the debt/corruption Saskatchewan's 1980s Progressive Conservatives.
As Wall often reminds us, his Sask. Party is a coalition of Liberals, Reformers and old Progressive Conservatives.
It is for that reason that Wall has always kept a somewhat safe distance from the federal Conservatives.
That said, Wall also needs the help and support from the Conservative federal government. And in today's modern Saskatchewan, there is also a need to somewhat keep harmony in the "conservative" family, After all, a lot of people in Saskatchewan who support both the Sask. Party and the federal Conservatives.
But just when to supportive of the Harper government has become an increasingly precarious thing.
For example, Wall's recent pronouncement that the Senate is beyond repair and the time has come to abolish it was a popular one that people of all political stripes can get behind.
But it was a severe body blow to Harper and the Conservatives who - notwithstanding the shenanigans of a few Liberal Senators - now own the Senate mess.
It was Harper who appointed Senators Patrick Brazeau, Mike Duffy and even Pamela Wallin who have been at eye of the Senate firestorm over whether or not they misused their housing or travel allowances. It was Harper's own former chief of staff Nigel Wright who stroked the $90,000 cheque Duffy used to pay back his wrongly claimed housing expenses.
And it is now Harper's Conservatives that are plummeting in the polls as result of all this.
So when Wall started to sound more like Thomas Mulcair and the federal NDP by joining the chorus of those wanting to abolish the Senate, it likely didn't sit well with Harper.
This may have been why Wall was so eager to take on federal Liberal leader Justin Trudeau for charging $20,000 speaking fees to charities while sitting as an MP.
After all, it is an unconscionable amount for the rich, privileged son of Pierre Trudeau to be charging - especially while drawing an MPs salary.
And there's the added bonus of taking on a Trudeau - still a despised name in the West and among Conservatives everywhere.
What better way to ingratiate yourself to Harper than to use one's own credibility to take on Harper's biggest foe?
The problem, however, is that Wall might not have picked his spot very well.
As it turns out, Wall's own handpicked star candidate, former Roughrider Gene Makowsky, was also charging charities speaking fees while sitting as an MLA - something he cleared with the conflict-of-interest commissioner. (He announced he was giving back the money after Wall's criticism of Trudeau.) And while Makowsky's $2,000 fee seemed rather paltry compared with Trudeau's $20,000 charge, the principle remains the same.
Moreover, Wall seemed to forget his own Sask. Party history involving Saskatoon Northwest MLA Serge Le Clerc - its only MLA forced to resign in scandal.
Part of that scandal included the use of his MLA office to run his lucrative speaking business.
So while trying to lend a hand to Harper, Wall may have created a few problems for himself.
It's all part of Wall's dilemma of picking the right time to throw his support behind Harper's Conservatives.
Murray Mandryk has been covering provincial politics for over 22 years.
