Here are my contributions to the avalanche of post-election commentary. These are topics running through my mind…
Trinity-Spadina
I’m proud to have worked on Christine Innes’ campaign. Though she wasn’t victorious she did the Liberal Party proud and kept things close with Olivia Chow. Though Ms. Chow doesn’t do much beyond talking a lot and endlessly promoting herself in the riding with vacuous fliers, she does have a national profile and the advantages of incumbency. The riding is changing with a large influx of new voters in condos and townhouses, but there’s still a large base of NDP voters. So given the generally poor showing for many Liberals across the country combined with the uphill battle in the riding, Innes’ showing was very respectable and keeps the Liberals in a viable position for the next election.
Electoral Reform
As usual, after an election with skewed results there are the calls for proportional representation and electoral reform. After the debacle of the Ontario referendum on MMP and the complete lack of discussion on the federal level, except for the occasional plaintive cries of the NDP and Greens, I’m highly cynical of there being any chance for electoral reform at any level in Canada. But I’ll take this opportunity to reiterate my views that electoral reform is necessary and MMP is the best option. I would have felt better knowing my losing vote in Trinity-Spadina might have helped the Liberal Party nationally.
Minority Government
This brings me to my next topic of minorities; because if there was electoral reform then minorities would not be an occasional but a consistent result. I understand why this is a scary prospect for Canadians based on the performance of our recent minority parliaments. But I maintain that the problems with the current minority exist because of the ever-present potential for a majority, which is the real fixation of the parties – in particular the Conservatives and the Liberals. Conservatives governed for the past year and then called this election all with the achievement of a majority in mind. Liberals abstained from votes or voted for bills they had issues with because they didn’t want to go into an election unprepared and cost themselves in the long-term game for a majority, not to mention keeping the Conservatives from one.
Both game plans cost the parties in the end which I hope they learn from, because the more the parties work together the more Canadians will benefit and the more the parties will gain both in terms of legislative and electoral gains. The parties will worry about staking out their territory and differentiation, but that’s the talk of the majority game. We need a new dialogue given the economy, foreign policy, and Canadian regionalism – we need leadership from all the parties and not the usual partisan bickering.
Partisanship
When it comes to partisanship I look squarely at Mr. Harper. Canada is more partisan than ever before and I blame the wedge and regional politics of the Harper Conservatives. The rise in inflammatory rhetoric on blogs and the comments sections of online newspapers has been alarming and is not helping our political climate. I’m certain the Conservative War Room and their Conbots (a term I picked up from a blog’s comments) are largely behind this and have emboldened others from the left and right in the process. In this election we saw politically motivated vandalism, which I don’t directly ascribe to any party but I can’t help but wonder if it’s a symptom of the increased partisanship driving the Canadian political climate. If this continues, what hope does any party have in bridging the gaps between Alberta, Ontario and Quebec? So, enough with the Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove politics that have damaged the US; Canadians’ ability to compromise and work together have made this country great and it’s something we need to restore.
Harper
I don’t like the way Harper does politics, the way he governs or his policy approaches. He’s too ideological and with an ideology that has damaged the US under George W. Bush. However, he’s smart and tactical so I hope he changes his ways in pursuit of his self-interests and listens to the 62% of voting Canadians who didn’t support him. I’m willing to see the Liberals work with Harper to improve our economy, but not if he wants to continue bullying us and belittling our values.
Dion
On the flipside, I like Dion. I like his politics, his approach to politics and his intellect, honesty and integrity. I echo the comments from others that Dion must be given time to study his options and come to his own decision. The practice our party has of eating our own has to stop. The attacks on his persona from within the party and without, and now the anonymous and public requests for Dion to step down are, as Ignatieff called it, indecent. Dion has done his best for our party and we need to respect him and show him the respect and courtesy our leader, indeed the leader we chose, deserves.
The Liberal Party
What it is the time to do is re-examine our party and identify what needs to be done to get back on top. The party must change its structure and listen to its ridings more, diversify and improve its fundraising abilities and develop a strategy to rebuild in Quebec and make inroads in the West. We’re a big tent party with a shrinking base and that needs to change, which means winning back those moderates who have gone to the NDP and Conservatives. It may seem contradictory to gather from the right and left simultaneously, but we’ve had them before so it can happen again.
My analysis has been partly pre-empted by a good analysis done, in all places, the National Post. But what is clear to me is that for all of the above changes to happen the Liberal Party needs better leadership. If Dion can grow and fill the gap, fantastic, but if he can’t – and it’s likely he won’t be given enough time to do so – then we need a leader who can take the party forward. Despite being a system of parties, history has shown that electoral success in Canada comes down to the party leaders.
The Liberal Party has not had strong leadership since Pearson. Trudeau’s success derived from a strong personality and the inspiration of his vision of a just society. But for all his political success he also devastated the party in Western Canada and weakened the base in Quebec. Further, he left the party divided – a rift that to this day is not healed, which more or less speaks to the failings of all the leaders that have followed. Chretien was politically shrewd but a good leader should never have had a coup such as what Paul Martin organized. Martin’s rise to the top was Machiavellian but his leadership was not, so he was forced to lie in the bed he made.
So we as a party can invigorate the grassroots and set-up more sophisticated fundraising mechanisms and reach out to Quebeckers and Westerners, but all our efforts will fail unless there’s a leader to inspire the membership and reclaim the support that’s been lost. As long as Ignatieff and Rae refuse to compromise and Kennedy’s backroom deal in 2006 continues to be a drag on his potential, then I don’t see any of the past leadership candidates filling the void in the way that’s needed. So if there is a leadership convention, it’s the ability to unite and inspire that I’ll be looking for more than anything else.
The Liberal Party does not need to be reinvented or rebuilt. We have a long, strong and proud history that should be honoured. It’s also a history that should be understood and used to learn from and build on. Our values – prosperity and compassion – are strong and very attractive to Canadians; we just need the infrastructure and leadership to get Canadians back on board and to restore the Liberal Party to power.
Trinity-Spadina
I’m proud to have worked on Christine Innes’ campaign. Though she wasn’t victorious she did the Liberal Party proud and kept things close with Olivia Chow. Though Ms. Chow doesn’t do much beyond talking a lot and endlessly promoting herself in the riding with vacuous fliers, she does have a national profile and the advantages of incumbency. The riding is changing with a large influx of new voters in condos and townhouses, but there’s still a large base of NDP voters. So given the generally poor showing for many Liberals across the country combined with the uphill battle in the riding, Innes’ showing was very respectable and keeps the Liberals in a viable position for the next election.
Electoral Reform
As usual, after an election with skewed results there are the calls for proportional representation and electoral reform. After the debacle of the Ontario referendum on MMP and the complete lack of discussion on the federal level, except for the occasional plaintive cries of the NDP and Greens, I’m highly cynical of there being any chance for electoral reform at any level in Canada. But I’ll take this opportunity to reiterate my views that electoral reform is necessary and MMP is the best option. I would have felt better knowing my losing vote in Trinity-Spadina might have helped the Liberal Party nationally.
Minority Government
This brings me to my next topic of minorities; because if there was electoral reform then minorities would not be an occasional but a consistent result. I understand why this is a scary prospect for Canadians based on the performance of our recent minority parliaments. But I maintain that the problems with the current minority exist because of the ever-present potential for a majority, which is the real fixation of the parties – in particular the Conservatives and the Liberals. Conservatives governed for the past year and then called this election all with the achievement of a majority in mind. Liberals abstained from votes or voted for bills they had issues with because they didn’t want to go into an election unprepared and cost themselves in the long-term game for a majority, not to mention keeping the Conservatives from one.
Both game plans cost the parties in the end which I hope they learn from, because the more the parties work together the more Canadians will benefit and the more the parties will gain both in terms of legislative and electoral gains. The parties will worry about staking out their territory and differentiation, but that’s the talk of the majority game. We need a new dialogue given the economy, foreign policy, and Canadian regionalism – we need leadership from all the parties and not the usual partisan bickering.
Partisanship
When it comes to partisanship I look squarely at Mr. Harper. Canada is more partisan than ever before and I blame the wedge and regional politics of the Harper Conservatives. The rise in inflammatory rhetoric on blogs and the comments sections of online newspapers has been alarming and is not helping our political climate. I’m certain the Conservative War Room and their Conbots (a term I picked up from a blog’s comments) are largely behind this and have emboldened others from the left and right in the process. In this election we saw politically motivated vandalism, which I don’t directly ascribe to any party but I can’t help but wonder if it’s a symptom of the increased partisanship driving the Canadian political climate. If this continues, what hope does any party have in bridging the gaps between Alberta, Ontario and Quebec? So, enough with the Newt Gingrich and Karl Rove politics that have damaged the US; Canadians’ ability to compromise and work together have made this country great and it’s something we need to restore.
Harper
I don’t like the way Harper does politics, the way he governs or his policy approaches. He’s too ideological and with an ideology that has damaged the US under George W. Bush. However, he’s smart and tactical so I hope he changes his ways in pursuit of his self-interests and listens to the 62% of voting Canadians who didn’t support him. I’m willing to see the Liberals work with Harper to improve our economy, but not if he wants to continue bullying us and belittling our values.
Dion
On the flipside, I like Dion. I like his politics, his approach to politics and his intellect, honesty and integrity. I echo the comments from others that Dion must be given time to study his options and come to his own decision. The practice our party has of eating our own has to stop. The attacks on his persona from within the party and without, and now the anonymous and public requests for Dion to step down are, as Ignatieff called it, indecent. Dion has done his best for our party and we need to respect him and show him the respect and courtesy our leader, indeed the leader we chose, deserves.
The Liberal Party
What it is the time to do is re-examine our party and identify what needs to be done to get back on top. The party must change its structure and listen to its ridings more, diversify and improve its fundraising abilities and develop a strategy to rebuild in Quebec and make inroads in the West. We’re a big tent party with a shrinking base and that needs to change, which means winning back those moderates who have gone to the NDP and Conservatives. It may seem contradictory to gather from the right and left simultaneously, but we’ve had them before so it can happen again.
My analysis has been partly pre-empted by a good analysis done, in all places, the National Post. But what is clear to me is that for all of the above changes to happen the Liberal Party needs better leadership. If Dion can grow and fill the gap, fantastic, but if he can’t – and it’s likely he won’t be given enough time to do so – then we need a leader who can take the party forward. Despite being a system of parties, history has shown that electoral success in Canada comes down to the party leaders.
The Liberal Party has not had strong leadership since Pearson. Trudeau’s success derived from a strong personality and the inspiration of his vision of a just society. But for all his political success he also devastated the party in Western Canada and weakened the base in Quebec. Further, he left the party divided – a rift that to this day is not healed, which more or less speaks to the failings of all the leaders that have followed. Chretien was politically shrewd but a good leader should never have had a coup such as what Paul Martin organized. Martin’s rise to the top was Machiavellian but his leadership was not, so he was forced to lie in the bed he made.
So we as a party can invigorate the grassroots and set-up more sophisticated fundraising mechanisms and reach out to Quebeckers and Westerners, but all our efforts will fail unless there’s a leader to inspire the membership and reclaim the support that’s been lost. As long as Ignatieff and Rae refuse to compromise and Kennedy’s backroom deal in 2006 continues to be a drag on his potential, then I don’t see any of the past leadership candidates filling the void in the way that’s needed. So if there is a leadership convention, it’s the ability to unite and inspire that I’ll be looking for more than anything else.
The Liberal Party does not need to be reinvented or rebuilt. We have a long, strong and proud history that should be honoured. It’s also a history that should be understood and used to learn from and build on. Our values – prosperity and compassion – are strong and very attractive to Canadians; we just need the infrastructure and leadership to get Canadians back on board and to restore the Liberal Party to power.
1 comments:
Excellent post & analysis, insightful!
Post a Comment