Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 10, 2008

Tell them that Michael Ignatieff says "Bob Rae sleeps with the fishes"

Leadership conventions.

There have been many of them in our nation’s history. Each party has renewed itself through these events which are, in essence, a celebration of grassroots democracy. Many have provided some of the more dramatic moments in our nation’s political history. Party members drawn from every corner of the country, whether it be from downtown Toronto, fishing outposts in Newfoundland, or small towns on the prairies, decend upon a central location to meet and discuss the impending succession. Canadians from all walks of life, bound only by their party ties and commitment to democracy, put prospects to the test, and prepare themselves for yet another generation.

It never used to be this way. Parties, similar to the British model, would simply hole up their MP’s and Senators in a room, and pick one from among them to be their champion.
It was the Liberal Party of Canada that broke from this practice, and invited its rank-and-file members to be part of the process. In 1919, they elected Mackenzie King as their new leader, and, over time, every major political party in every province has adopted the same means of selection.

Some have delegated conventions, with a dozen or so people from each riding. Some have an open popular vote, while some apply some equal weighting to constituencies. The point is that for almost 90 years, the expectation of card-carrying members of Canadian political parties is that they personally, or a dozen of their friends and neighbours, will vote to select a person who could very well be Prime Minister, or Premier.

Now, ironically, the same party that first subjected national leadership to a grassroots vote, has decided that a conference call among some MP’s and Senators will suffice in the ratification of Pierre Trudeau…I mean, Michael Ignatieff, as Leader of the Liberal Party.

Sure, it wasn’t going to be much of a race with only one candidate in the running. Mind you, we had three eager beavers last week, and one of them, Bobby Rae, was talking tough as recently as the weekend. How do you go from criss-crossing the nation, doing the rubber chicken circuit and pressing the flesh, to saying “on second thought, no thanks.”?

Rae, ever the team player, isn’t saying much, but what he has been saying gives me the impression that the problem wasn’t one of desire or motivation.

I get the impression that the people on Iggy’s team are fans of the Godfather movie trilogy, because I see in Bobby Rae someone who was politely told that pushing things any further would result in the political equivalent of waking up with a horse head in your bed, or getting a shot like Moe Green when his rubdown was so rudely interrupted.

So, it appears that there is happiness in the land as the Grit-erati all line up to kiss the ring of Michael ‘Corleone’ Ignatieff, and declare and end to the truce between the three families…Oops, I mean, parties.

There are doubtless many in Liberal Land who are ready to uncork the sparkling cider and celebrate the beginning of their triumphant return to 24 Sussex. While such scenarios are not outside the statistical possibility, let’s be a bit more pragmatic.

First, your party is flat broke. Pledge drives for PBS stations bring in more cash, and what you do get is largely due to the stipends you receive from Elections Canada.

Second, you screwed up big time with the amateur hour putsch, and the PR damage will take more than a couple of months to repair.

Third, you burned your grassroots by making the leadership convention a moot point. You made your peace with Bob Rae and Dominic LeBlanc, but I can’t imagine their supporters don’t feel like they just got screwed over.

Fourth, you have vacated the high ground, because you can’t wax philosophical about democracy when you rear-end your own rank-and-file to obtain power.

Fifth, you are twenty points back, and will probably have to contend with all of the above – less money, fewer foot soldiers, and diminished status – while at the same time answering why your leader, in his writings, identified himself as ‘American’, not Canadian. Of course, don’t get me started on his published views of Ukrainians (read ‘Blood and Belonging’) and how that will bump up the Grit vote in the West.

A new name on the doorplate, or a new logo, or an new PR stunt will not save the Liberal Party. An commitment to old ideas like democracy and accountability might, in the long run.

Friday, December 5, 2008

I see your Johnson, and raise you a Dickens...

The 3 Stooges, and their surrogates, throw out the oft-used quotation by the learned Samuel Johnson, that "Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels."

They argue that due to 26% plus 18% plus 10% plus 6% of Canadians who scattered their vote among the 4 platforms, the law allows them the right to conveniently gloss over the internal distinctions, and rule as a unified front.

Indeed, it does, and not withstanding the prorogation, they may still legally get their chance at the end of January.

To this end, might I offer another quote - this from the character Mr. Bumble from Charles Dickens' "Oliver Twist" :

"If the law supposes that," said Mr. Bumble, squeezing his hat emphatically in both hands, "the law is a ass- a idiot. If that's the eye of the law, the law is a bachelor; and the worst I wish the law is, that his eye may be opened by experience- by experience."

We can only hope so much...

Friday, October 17, 2008

The Stephen Harper "Hidden Agenda" Challenge

Now that the dust has settled, we are left to contemplate the results of this recent federal election – the third in four years. Surely there will be a great deal of discussion on the fates of the respective leaders, as well as the wisdom of the strategies they employed for various effects. Some will speculate on the future direction of the government, and, by extension, the relative congeniality among the assorted parties during this mandate.

These are not questions I would dwell upon as they will be answered for us in the fullness of time – whether it be a year, or two or three.

As a partisan, I am more concerned about what, despite being a theme of the last three elections, remains stubbornly unanswered. That is, the ‘secret agenda’ of Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party.

This ‘secret agenda’ is so secret that neither I, as a Tory constituency board member, nor any of my colleagues have ever been privy to it. Surprisingly, though, it is public enough that every Liberal and NDP candidate knows it intimately.

In frustration, I have attempted to ask these people for details of this sinister subtext, but am left with a string of anecdotes and observations united not by any coherent narrative, but simply by the sympathies of those who broadcast them.

As a rhetorical tactic, the allegation of a ‘secret’ or ‘hidden’ agenda is absolutely superb. Denying you have one is even more deadly that fessing up to it. Of course you would deny a ‘hidden agenda’ – after all, it’s hidden, silly. Denials are as much an admission of guilt as a confession.

In the Middle Ages, enterprising prosecutors had an ingenious device for identifying witches known as the dunking chair. You simply strapped the accused sorceror to the chair and submerged them in a pond for a period of time. If they survived, they were guilty, because how could you stay alive under water for so long without the benefit of the Dark Arts? On the other hand, if they hoisted your lifeless body from the depths, your next of kin could rest assured in the knowledge that you were innocent of the charge and your soul could pass through St. Peter’s pearly gates.

No one can accurately predict the future. I know not when the next election will be, or who will be leading the fight for what party. I don’t even know what defining issue will grab the imagination of the Canadian public. I am, however, pretty confident that the Conservative ‘hidden agenda’ will once again be resurrected to the light of day.

That is why I, for my own piece of mind, as much as for anyone else, would like to seek closure on this vexing issue. Just as rewards are offered for undisputable proof of Bigfoot or the Loch Ness Monster, I wish to offer $100 of my own money to the individual who offers clear and unassailable proof of the Tory ‘hidden agenda.’

My terms are simple. The evidence must be substantive, and well documented, and reach the same burden of proof that one would find in a court of law. Anyone wishing to make quick money by simply copying Liberal and New Democratic blogs and passing innuendo and suggestion for fact need not apply. Dates, times, references to individuals and actions must be both documented and support the broader narrative of a conspiracy for me to open my wallet.

So here it is, Canada. The challenge has been set, and the prize is there to be won.

If a winner is found, I will award the money in however public a fashion the recipient chooses.

If the challenge has not been met before the next election, however, I trust that the Tory ‘hidden agenda’ be filed with the Protocols of Zion and every other scurrilous conspiracy that serves only to slander without proof.