Election 2009?

[Edward Campbell]

Wheels within wheels according to Norman Spector’s blog which is reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail web site:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/connecting-the-coderre-dots/article1304052/

Connecting the Coderre dots

Norman Spector

Monday, September 28, 2009

Denis Coderre says he’s stepping down as Québec lieutenant because Michael Ignatieff preferred to listen to his Toronto advisers in reversing a decision to nix the candidacy of Martin Cauchon in Outremont.

The problem with this analysis is that we know that a very prominent Quebecker, Jean Chrétien, intervened on behalf of Mr. Cauchon. And, as L. Ian Macdonald reminded us on Saturday, we also know that, like Mr. Chrétien, Mr. Cauchon has deep links to the Desmarais family from his time working as a butler at the family estate. Also not to be overlooked the unusual public intervention last week of previously-loyal Bob Rae — another man with deep links to the Desmarais family through his brother John — in favour of Mr. Cauchon’s candidacy.

All of which is to say that a deep fissure has re-appeared within the Liberal Party. And that Michael Ignatieff — already smarting from unfavourable polls and the big loser in Mr. Coderre’s decision — had better watch his back.

*****

UPDATE In the wake of Denis Coderre’s announcement, several officials of the Liberal Party’s Quebec wing have also resigned. They include the Party’s chief Québec organizer, Pierre Lajeunesse, the president of the candidate approval committee, Éric Simard, fund-raiser Jean Rizzuto and a cousin of Coderre, Jean-François Coderre.

A “fissure” indeed!

 

[Brad Sallows]

The mantra that the NDP are "propping up the Conservatives" has become amusing.  Aside from the likelihood that the Conservatives don't really wish to be propped up by anyone at this point, the reality is that the NDP are propping themselves up by frantically stalling an election they are ill-positioned to contest.  I find openly laughable every attempt by their spin doctors to put a good face on their ongoing "oh sh!t" moment which has followed Ignatieff's change of direction, especially on the heels of their self-righteous posturing since December.

Someone should tell Layton, Lavigne, and the rest of the prominent NDP members beaking off to the media about their solemn wisdom that they already have plenty of crap over their faces and there's no need to smear it around some more for better coverage.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail, is the first of a handful of articles dealing with the Coderre imbroglio:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/wounded-ignatieff-faces-test-of-leadership/article1304791/

Wounded Ignatieff faces test of leadership
Liberal Leader loses Quebec lieutenant as party puts forward no-confidence motion

Daniel Leblanc and Les Perreaux

Ottawa and Montreal

Tuesday, Sep. 29, 2009 03:18AM EDT

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff took direct control of his party in Quebec after his lieutenant reignited infighting Monday by quitting over interference from unnamed “Toronto advisers.”

Montreal MP Denis Coderre's bitter resignation press conference, prompted by Mr. Ignatieff's reversal over the choice of a candidate in the riding of Outremont, heightens French-English and Toronto-Montreal tensions among the Liberals at a time when the party is trying to bring down Stephen Harper's Conservative government.

“The message sent by recent events is this: If you want to have what you want in Quebec, all you have to do is short-circuit the party's Quebec authorities by talking to the leader's inner circle in Toronto,” Mr. Coderre said in the most direct challenge to Mr. Ignatieff's leadership since he took power last January. Several Quebec organizers are expected to leave with Mr. Coderre's resignation as lieutenant for the province.

Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Coderre had picked businesswoman Nathalie Le Prohon to run in Outremont, but Mr. Ignatieff buckled under internal pressure last week and approved the candidacy of former Liberal cabinet minister Martin Cauchon.

Mr. Ignatieff's inner circle of advisers consists of Toronto-based political operatives who helped him win the party's leadership and who dominate both the leader's office and the party's leadership. But Mr. Ignatieff dismissed Mr. Coderre's comments on their influence as unfounded.

“The thought that this party is managed in Toronto makes me laugh. It makes people laugh in British Columbia, it makes people laugh in Alberta, it makes people laugh in the Atlantic provinces,” Mr. Ignatieff said. “I lead a pan-Canada formation.”

Mr. Ignatieff added that he will not name a new Quebec lieutenant to replace Mr. Coderre, dropping the parallel structure that is unique to the province and decentralizes the party's organization.

Mr. Ignatieff said his party is in good shape in Quebec thanks to Mr. Coderre's recent work, with 68 candidates already picked for the province's 75 seats.

The latest round of internal discord undermined Liberal efforts to focus on a motion the party moved Monday and to be put to a vote on Thursday, that the House “has lost confidence in the government.”

The NDP has said it will abstain or vote against the motion, ensuring the survival of the Conservative minority government, which may be just as well for the Liberals, given the discord in Quebec.

At his news conference, Mr. Coderre said that in the case of Outremont, Mr. Ignatieff chose to listen to “Toronto advisers who know nothing about the social and political realities of Quebec.”

Mr. Coderre refused to provide names. Liberal officials said he was likely referring to Liberal Party president Alf Apps, who courted Mr. Cauchon as a candidate in recent months, and Liberal MP Bob Rae, who publicly supported Mr. Cauchon's efforts to return to politics after a five-year absence.

Mr. Coderre said he will continue to serve as a Liberal MP, and insisted he remains loyal to Mr. Ignatieff.

Mr. Cauchon was silent through the day, having been told to refuse media requests for comment.

Theories vary on why Outremont became a flashpoint, but the consensus in Liberal circles is that there was an overall lack of communication, fuelled in part by rivalry between Mr. Coderre and Mr. Cauchon, who represented the riding from 1993 to 2004 and was minister of justice in the Chrétien government.

Both have leadership aspirations, and they clashed in the 2006 leadership race, with Mr. Coderre supporting Mr. Ignatieff, and Mr. Cauchon in the corner of Mr. Rae.

Sources said that Mr. Apps approached Mr. Cauchon last June about a return to politics, and that Mr. Cauchon asked for the summer to mull it over.

However, Mr. Coderre worked with other Liberals in Quebec in recent months to persuade Mr. Ignatieff to appoint Ms. Le Prohon in Outremont, long a party stronghold.

After an initial decision was made in favour of Ms. Le Prohon, Mr. Cauchon's team obtained the support of Mr. Rae, who publicly called for a reversal of the decision.

A Liberal official said that Mr. Ignatieff's office “panicked” as the controversy raged and urged the leader to go back on his decision. Unaware that Mr. Coderre was about to quit as his Quebec lieutenant, Mr. Ignatieff heralded the decision as a show of unity on Friday.

“The true strength of the Liberal Party is on display today,” Mr. Ignatieff said in a news release.

With a report from Bill Curry

Coderre has dealt a real body blow to his own party – something he may think is a necessary prelude to his own attempt to become leader and, he hopes, prime minister, sooner rather than later.

There are, still, some hints of the old left/right St Laurent vs Trudeau etc, debate that has fractured the Liberals for 40+ years but it is not clear to me that it is at the core of this dispute. Prince Michael’s “team” in Toronto looks, to me, like a bunch of unreconstructed Trudeauites – but maybe most Liberals “activists” and true believers are that way.

I remain unsure of where Iggy Icarus stands on most issues; I have hear/read the platitudes but for about a year now there has been nothing of substance from anyone in the Liberal Party of Canada. (In fairness there hasn’t been much any substance from the Conservatives, either.) Ignatieff simply slithers from position to position in order to satisfy some particularist audience’s cause du jour.

I think this is, rather than a continuance of the old fracture, three simple “power plays” that have, accidentally, merged into one:

1. Coderre vs Cauchon for the “leadership” of Québec’s federal Liberals because one or the other plans to take over when Iggy Icarus does fly too close to the sun. Both of these ugly ducklings have to move fast before the Québec Liberals find a swan to lead them;

2. Rae vs Ignatieff for the “leadership” of the Liberal Party of Canada because many, many Liberals are frustrated that Prince Michael was anointed (by a gang of Toronto insiders) rather than elected at a convention where the very active left wing of the party might have prevailed; and

3. Québec vs Canada for the soul of the Liberal Party. I think that some (many?) Québec Liberals believe that Conservatism (which isn’t very conservative) is overtaking Liberalism (which is certainly not liberal) in “New Canada” – the growing regions West of the Ottawa River. They note that, since 1947, only Francophone/Québec leaders have “succeeded” as Liberal prime ministers of Canada. (St Laurent, Trudeau and Chrétien all won multiple majorities, Pearson, Turner and Martin all won minorities or failed to win at all. Dion is the exception that proves the rule and they think Ignatieff will follow suit.)

 

[Old Sweat]

There also was a theory that was fashionable or perhaps popular or held as an article of faith by the "old Canada" crowd that only a Quebecker, English or French, could ever become Prime Minister. This was because, the true believers proclaimed, because the Quebec voters would always support on of their own, and without a majority of seats in Quebec, no outsider could win enough seats to form a government.

Given the shift in population towards "New Canada" and the failure of proposals to guarantee Quebec a fixed proportion of the Commons seat, that theory is destined to join the flat earth and centre of the universe as concepts whose time is passed. The next few years may be the last chance for the "Old Canada" crowd to gain power and the unseemly squabbling in the Liberal party reflects the growing desparation. Perhaps desparation is too strong a word for a party which believes that its rightful place is as the government, and it is frustration we see manifested.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, reproduced under te Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail is what I can only describe as a puff piece about Prince Michael in Québec:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ignatieff-stands-firm-in-quebec/article1306236/

Ignatieff stands firm in Quebec
Liberal Leader attends party fundraiser, hoping to show he is not intimidated by resignation of provincial lieutenant, Denis Coderre

Jane Taber and Ingrid Peritz

Ottawa and Montreal

Wednesday, Sep. 30, 2009

Michael Ignatieff is refusing to retreat in Quebec, defiantly showing up at a party fundraiser in suburban Montreal Tuesday night to signal to Liberals that he is still in charge.

The party has adopted a strategy aimed at showing the leader is not intimidated or wounded by the abrupt and dramatic resignation on Monday of Mr. Ignatieff's Quebec lieutenant, Denis Coderre, over who controls the Liberals in the province.

“It hasn't been the easiest week in my life,” Mr. Ignatieff told reporters as he headed into the closed-door event, which Mr. Coderre had organized. “But frankly, I rather like the problems I've got.”

He portrayed the jostling over the party nomination in the Montreal riding of Outremont, which became the catalyst for Mr. Coderre's departure, as a sign of vitality in the party. He repeated that he will not name a new Quebec lieutenant but rely instead on party officials already in place. Several Liberals said former provincial cabinet minister Jean-Marc Fournier is among them.

In his speech Tuesday night at the event in a suburban Montreal hotel, Mr. Ignatieff did not refer to the controversy or Mr. Coderre by name, focusing instead on Liberal values, according to Liberal MPs present.

MP Raymonde Folco said the leader didn't throw “arrows” at anyone.

“We need to repair a lot of bridges. I hope this will happen soon,” she said. “This is our tradition in the Liberal Party. God knows we've had problems in the past. But we've always been able to bounce back.”

Liberal officials said they had sold 150 tickets to the fundraiser. Only a handful of Liberal MPs were present, a fact attributed to a late vote in the House of Commons.

Quebec caucus chair Marc Garneau took pains to praise Mr. Coderre, who helped recruit 68 candidates for the party, while depicting his abrupt resignation as a temporary setback.

Senator Francis Fox called Mr. Coderre's resignation an “unfortunate event” while insisting the party remains a “real political force” in Quebec.

In Question Period Tuesday, the Liberals hammered away at the government's Quebec policies, especially the way in which it is doling out infrastructure stimulus money.

Mr. Garneau spoke to reporters after Question Period, and said that Mr. Coderre's ego may be behind his outburst. He also played down a doom-and-gloom scenario in Quebec for Liberals.

“The party is not crumbling to the ground,” Mr. Garneau said. “We are moving forward at the moment in our party and we are … you know the plan for next week. Tonight, Mr. Ignatieff is going to be in Montreal at an event [the Laval fundraiser]. He has been in Quebec all summer. We are going to continue building on our strategy and we are going to move forward. Every, every party has … hiccups along the way.”

Mr. Coderre is not expected in Ottawa this week. Martin Cauchon, the former Liberal cabinet minister who is a principal in this drama – Mr. Ignatieff appointed him as the candidate for Outremont after reversing Mr. Coderre's decision to give the riding to businesswoman Nathalie Le Prohon – is to end his silence before the end of the week.

When he announced his resignation as Quebec lieutenant, Mr. Coderre said Mr. Ignatieff was allowing Quebec politics to be run from Toronto, suggesting that the Ignatieff inner circle, many of whom are from Toronto, were meddling in his team's affairs.

“Mr. Coderre got carried away, his ego got the better of him and he … let himself go yesterday and said things he should not have said and as result of that, well, we have got what we have today,” Mr. Garneau said. “But the reality is … we can't go around talking about a party that is tearing itself apart. It is simply not true.”

Two days ago, after what Liberals are now calling “the Denis Coderre eruption” and, again Tuesday, loyalists reminded Mr. Ignatieff why he received the majority of support from Quebec delegates during the 2006 leadership election. His policies, especially his defence of the recognition of Quebec as a nation, attracted support among Quebec Liberals, something he must remember as he tries to rebuild the party in the province, he was told.

This weekend, Mr. Ignatieff will speak to Quebec Liberals at their convention in Quebec City. He is expected to tell them the Quebec organization is strong, a team, not just one person.

Last weekend, he tried to reach out to Mr. Coderre, but he was not taking calls. Coderre friends sensed something was amiss because his Facebook page had not been updated. On Tuesday, the MP put up a cartoon that depicted him at a computer deleting Facebook friends, including Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Cauchon.

A friend described him as “serene.”

With a report from Daniel Leblanc

The oft cited requirement for journalistic balance appears to not apply to stories about Iggy Icarus. Critical analysis is neither required nor welcome by some “fair and balanced” journalists.

 

[Rifleman62]

You Got It Pontiac!

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail web site, is more from Norman Spector’s blog:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/ignatieff-and-harper-will-need-this-election-advice-soon-enough/article1305856/

Ignatieff and Harper will need this election advice soon enough
There's still time to reconsider coalitions and Quebeckers

Norman Spector

Wednesday, Sep. 30, 2009

For Canadians, the good news, it now appears, is that we've been spared an election. For the parties – particularly the Liberals – the good news is that they have time to rethink the campaign that will be upon us soon enough.

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's biggest mistake has been to confuse what “confidence” means in Parliament with what Canadians understand it to mean. It's safe to say that Liberal MPs who have been voting with the government have not had confidence in the Conservatives since election night. Voters, on the other hand, see no pressing need to change the government right now.

As Senator David Smith advised before Mr. Ignatieff decided otherwise, not every disagreement merits a trip to the polls. Had he adopted that line, the Liberals could have voted with the government until a major issue arose and then Mr. Ignatieff could have explained why we needed an election and how he would do better.

He could have spared us September's psychodrama and himself a serious hit in public opinion. The disarray within the Quebec wing of his party, and the challenge to his leadership by forces loyal to Jean Chrétien, might never have eventuated. And Mr. Ignatieff would not be in the absurd position, heretofore occupied by Jack Layton, of opposing measures he has not seen.

Mr. Ignatieff must also find a better response to the Conservatives' “just visiting” message. Telling us that he has met many Canadians abroad who think we can do better sounds patronizing. Why not propose reforms based on his considerable experience abroad? How the Brits do Question Period, for example. Or the U.S. legislative process, with its well-staffed committees and independent Congressional Budget Office.

Mr. Ignatieff's most urgent need, however, is to find a better line to counter the allegation of a hidden coalition agenda. Saying he could have been prime minister but turned it down is unpersuasive – it being widely known that he changed his mind for fear that the Governor-General could call an election.

As to his second attempt to parry Prime Minister Stephen Harper, he notably did not use the formulation circulated widely in Liberal ranks, according to which the party that wins the most seats has the right to form the government after the next election.

His failure leaves the Conservatives with an inviting campaign issue, but Mr. Harper also has some serious problems, primarily in Quebec.

He must assure Quebeckers that he respects their right to vote for whomever they like and that he welcomes Bloc Québécois MPs supporting his government's legislation.

At the same time, he should explain that no government of Canada can be beholden to a party committed to secession and that the Bloc's acknowledged strategy of thwarting the formation of a majority government of any stripe is unacceptable in these uncertain times. In this regard, in light of concerns surrounding electoral redistribution, Mr. Harper should emphasize that Quebeckers will have time to adjust to the new reality, as one or possibly two elections will pass before any seats are added to the House of Commons.

After the Montreal celebration of the Conservatives' 1984 election victory, Mr. Harper should no longer be under any illusion that reconciling with Brian Mulroney will yield Premier Jean Charest's endorsement or the loan of his political machine. With polls showing at least half the Conservative seats in jeopardy, he must craft a direct message to Quebec voters – not just to realize his long-sought majority government, but, more important, in the interest of national unity.

While Mr. Harper's values are at odds with those of Quebeckers in many respects, he once was able to speak to their pride and strong sense of identity. As a Conservative, he does not share the Liberals' propensity, evident in Mr. Ignatieff's proposals, to intrude into areas of provincial jurisdiction. On federal securities regulation – which many Quebeckers may appreciate in light of recent financial losses – he is prepared to allow the province to opt in.

Finally, on language issues, Mr. Harper need not line up with devotees of Pierre Trudeau who insist that Montreal's mayor must be bilingual but that Ottawa's need not be. Instead, he should propose measures to strengthen the French character of Quebec, starting with subjecting federally regulated companies to the province's language laws.

I agree, broadly, with Spector on Harper in Québec, including”subjecting federally regulated companies to the province's language laws.” I, especially agree with the idea of telling ”Quebeckers that he respects their right to vote for whomever they like and that he welcomes Bloc Québécois MPs supporting his government's legislation” [but] ”... he should explain that no government of Canada can be beholden to a party committed to secession and that the Bloc's acknowledged strategy of thwarting the formation of a majority government of any stripe is unacceptable in these uncertain times.”

I don’t know when the soonest practical and legal opportunity to enlarge the House of Commons will arise but Harper should must do it at that “soonest” moment, Québec’s worries be damned, but assuaged with soft words.

 

[Edward Campbell]

The Liberal Party’s problem, according to the Red Star’s Jim Travers, is not Prince Michael, their Iffy leader, it is, instead, Liberals. His column is reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Toronto Star:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/703677

Deluded Grits fail to see faults in their leaders

James Travers

OTTAWA

Michael Ignatieff is not the Liberal problem. Liberals are the Liberal problem.

Three times they failed to stare at themselves while looking for a leader. Three times Liberals opted for expediency over renewal.

In each case the party was so consumed with crowning a winner that it ignored red flags waving. It was so sure in 2003 that Paul Martin would sweep the country that it didn't stop to consider shaky leadership campaign performances that forecast his dithering as prime minister. It was so sure in 2006 that voters would soon dump Stephen Harper that it spared itself the tough choice between Ignatieff and Bob Rae by compromising on the obviously inept Stéphane Dion. It was so sure in December that Ignatieff was the new saviour that it aborted a leadership contest that would have hardened the winner and might have exposed the organizational and policy weaknesses now plaguing the party.

One result of doing things the easy way is a party bouncing between ideological guardrails. Martin was fundamentally conservative. Dion planted the standard far to his predecessor's left by defining Liberals as climate change and anti-poverty warriors. Ignatieff is hunting the centre lane as he swings back and forth promising to eliminate the deficit while spending big on national projects and flexing Canadian muscle abroad.

If there's any consistency, it's the raw pragmatism of a big tent party so sprawling that its canopy covers libertarians, fiscal conservatives and social democrats. Determined to manage inherent internal conflicts and bury policy contradictions, the once dominant natural governing party is content to follow anywhere any leader likely to return Liberals to power.

From a distance, Ignatieff was easily mistaken for that champion. A cosmopolitan public intellectual with patrician bloodlines, the writer and professor blended exotic success with domestic roots.

All that was missing was the discipline of due diligence. Locked on to Ignatieff in much the same way they blindly fastened their fortune to rusty John Turner, Liberals either ignored or dismissed available evidence contradicting the consensus and conventional wisdom. Too lightly weighed was the absence of experience in a craft that mercilessly punishes on-the-job training. Too easily skimmed was the library of awkward Ignatieff musings on the American Empire, the Iraq war and the utility of torture. Too fast forgotten was the revealing use of "we" when talking to southern neighbours wary Canadians know as "them."

Every portrait needs a frame and Liberals had none for Ignatieff. A party that hadn't seriously considered its policies, principles or purpose for nearly 20 years could only wistfully compare him to Pierre Trudeau and consider his candidacy in the context of Liberal prospects in the next election.

The Liberal conclusion, accelerated by the Christmas coalition crisis, was that the more seasoned and campaign ready Rae was too burdened by his NDP resumé and that Ignatieff was the answer. Given a broader choice, Canadians are proving harder to convince.

Ignatieff can rescue himself and make Liberals seem smart by dipping deeper into the party's talent pool. After all, politicians dismissed in opposition, Harper and Jean Chrétien included, often surprise skeptics.

But should Ignatieff fail, blame will rest squarely on deluded Liberals who persuaded themselves that returning to power was inevitable and no more demanding than a beauty pageant.

James Travers' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Saturday.

No matter where they try to place the “blame” the political fact is that, while the Liberals may have fixed some of their membership and financial problems, they are not ready for an election: their leader is suspect and the policy cupboard is, pretty much, bare.

 

[ModlrMike]

...deluded Liberals who persuaded themselves that returning to power was inevitable and no more demanding than a beauty pageant.

This passage sums things up for me. Until the Liberals divest themselves of the notion of the "natural governing party" they won't make real progress at self reform. They need to realize that governing this great nation is a privilege and not a right.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, reproduced under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from last Friday’s Globe and Mail, is another take on Prince Michael’s manifold problems:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/radwanski/ignatieffs-ottawa-problem/article1310657/

Ignatieff's Ottawa problem

Adam Radwanski

Friday, October 2, 2009

It's a fascinating debate and all, whether or not Michael Ignatieff's inner circle is too Toronto-centric. Too bad it misses the point entirely when it comes to what’s gone wrong for the Liberal leader.

The problem for Ignatieff and his advisers is not that they're from Toronto. It's that, literally or figuratively, they're spending way too much time in Ottawa.

(Note: This does not apply to the Denis Coderre fiasco, which is a whole different matter. But the Liberals have bigger problems than that, and the last thing the world needs is any more ink - virtual or otherwise - devoted to Denis Coderre.)

One of the pleasures of being around Queen's Park, as I've mentioned previously, is that once you get a couple of blocks from here you're back into normal society. Most of its denizens - from ministers to staffers to journalists - spend a good chunk of their free time with people whose lives do not revolve around politics. As a result, they should be able to maintain a hint of perspective on what those people are concerned about.

It's extraordinarily difficult to achieve the same thing in Ottawa, which is very much a company town. You eat, drink and (in some cases) sleep with people who live and breathe politics as much as you do. And it seems rather obvious that the Liberals - even, for some reason, those who don't spend every minute in that town - are way too concerned with what people there think.

In fairness, this is not just a Liberal problem. The degree of breathlessness in much of the media's coverage of recent events suggests that it's not even restricted to partisans. But it's taking a bigger toll on Ignatieff & Co. than most anyone else.

Inside the political class, it's somehow become an article of faith that being tough means being in a perpetual state of crazed election-mongering, and being open to compromise makes you inherently weak or gutless. The favourite game in Ottawa of late - the only game, some weeks - seems to be calculating who looks "tough" and who looks "weak" after each round of posturing.

Normal people don't think this way. Nor are they sitting there with score-cards, charting the tough/weak axis. And you can bet that when it comes time to cast their ballots in the next election, their decisions will have precious little to do with past decisions about whether or not to support the government following some trumped-up dispute they only vaguely remember.

This point seems to have been rather lost on the Liberals. And so Ignatieff has seemingly been driven for most of this year by a crippling fear of being seen as "weak," which in turn nearly led to him going into an election campaign this fall from a position of legitimate weakness.

Worse, it's held back the Liberals from making a case to Canadians about something they might actually care about, like what they would do differently from the current government, and what tangible impact that would have on people's lives. And to the extent that anyone is paying attention, it's slowly converting Ignatieff's image from that of a promising intellectual to a strutting blowhard.

I've tried not to make too much of Ignatieff's time out of the country, because that discussion was horribly cheapened earlier this year. But it's fair to ask, at a certain point, whether he's suffering from a legitimate lack of exposure to Canadians outside political circles. Having been more or less swept up by an ambitious group of strategists and organizers immediately upon his return here, one gets the impression he's had way too many conversations with them and not nearly enough with anyone else.

Sure, Ignatieff may need to broaden his inner circle, and bring in some A-list talent. But it won't matter if they're not from Toronto, if they're just creatures of Ottawa.

I think Radwanski is on to something. A really smart Liberal, back nearly a year ago, would have said: “Congratulations, Prime Minister. The people have spoken and we have listened. We are cognizant of the deteriorating economic situation and we understand that the people think you have the better ideas. We will support you in every effort to solve our, national economic crisis and we will also respect your earned right to govern according to the platform on which you ran. So long as whatever you propose was in your platform and unless or until the economy deteriorates further, we will support you.”

Canadians would have said, “Attaboy! That’s what we want from minority governments: cooperation.” Iggy Iffy Icarus would be standing tall, today, ready and able to win an election because he would have the respect of Canadians.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Here, in summary form, are the results of a recent Angus Reid poll that tells us why we are, most likely, not having an election this years:

Canada:

BQ: 11%
Cons: 37%
Greens: 6%
Libs 27%
NDP: 17%


Ontario:

Cons: 44%
Libs: 30%


BC:

Cons: 42%
Libs: 23%

 

[RangerRay]

According to Strategic Counsel:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091005/strategic_poll_091005/20091005?hub=QPeriod

    * Conservatives: 41 per cent (+6)
    * Liberals, 28 per cent (-2)
    * NDP: 14 per cent (none)
    * Green Party: 9 per cent (none)
    * Bloc Quebecois: 9 per cent (-3)

Ontario
# Conservatives: 46 per cent (+5)
# Liberals: 30 per cent (-9)

 

[Edward Campbell]

According to Strategic Counsel:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20091005/strategic_poll_091005/20091005?hub=QPeriod

    * Conservatives: 41 per cent (+6)
    * Liberals, 28 per cent (-2)
    * NDP: 14 per cent (none)
    * Green Party: 9 per cent (none)
    * Bloc Quebecois: 9 per cent (-3)

Ontario
# Conservatives: 46 per cent (+5)
# Liberals: 30 per cent (-9)

From the look of it everyone is going to take turns sustaining Harper if need be. He's the only guy who wants an election.

 

[Edward Campbell]

Norman Spector offers some more GST related advice that would make good economic sense and would discomfit the Liberals, especially, and that could provoke an election in this blog entry which is reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from today’s Globe and Mail web site:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/spector-vision/hst-now/article1312951/

HST now

Norman Spector

Monday, October 5, 2009

With the results of the latest Strategic Counsel poll showing that the Conservatives have opened a huge lead, Prime Minister Stephen Harper should not delay enacting legislation to allow British Columbia and Ontario to harmonize their sales taxes with the GST — a measure that would strengthen the Canadian economy.

The reason he should move expeditiously is not to engineer an election, to be sure, but to avoid one. As pollster Peter Donolo makes clear in his accompanying analysis, Canadians would not be amused by any party that brings one on at this time. The reason he should move on the legislation is that the Conservatives are in a strong position to enact it now, and they may not be in a strong position in a few months. And the opposition parties are in a weak position to oppose it now, and that too may change in a few months.

For the past week, the NDP has been positioning itself to thwart implementation of a harmonized sales tax in B.C. and Ontario. While the Conservatives have met their opposition with derision, they should not underestimate the anger in British Columbia in particular. Nor should they underestimate the potential spill-over of this anger into federal politics, which could easily tempt the NDP to withdraw confidence in the Conservatives and bring on an election when they are in a stronger position.

On Saturday, La Presse reported that Liberal MPs disagreed over whether they would systematically be voting against the Conservatives, or whether they would approach the question on a case-by-case basis. Yesterday, according to a report in this morning’s Le Devoir, Michael Ignatieff settled the dispute by indicating that the Liberals would vote case-by-case, except for confidence matters, on which they would systematically vote to defeat the government.

Legislation to implement the HST would be a confidence matter. However, Michael Ignatieff has promised Premier Dalton McGuinty that federal Liberals will respect Ontario’s agreement with Ottawa, so he will have a difficult decision to make if the matter comes to an early vote in the Commons. The prospect of a majority Conservative government if he brings down Mr. Harper should concentrate his mind wonderfully.

The Bloc and the NDP will both, have to vote against this. For the Bloc it is an intrusion into Québec’s sovereignty and must be opposed on principle; for the Dippers it is a big political issue in BC and ON, where by-elections are being held and where the Dippers oppose the HST.

The Liberals will, therefore, have to, either:

• Back away from Iggy Iffy Icarus’ “gunslinger” position (oppose! Oppose! OPPOSE!) and support the government and risk being Dionized again; or

• Stand on “principle” – what principle? – and bring down the government and trigger a winter election.

Not a nice choice for Prince Michael: good policy or good politics? Principle or a dreaded election? Tough guy or wimp?

 

[Edward Campbell]

And here, reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from yesterday's Ottawa Citizen, a perfect image of Prince Michael's current situation:

Cannon to right of them, - the dwindling support from women, ethnics and other traditional Liberals
Cannon to left of them,  - Coderre and the Québec thing
Cannon in front of them  - Harper at the piano, singing "I get by with a little help from my friends"
  Volley'd and thunder'd;
Storm'd at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
  Rode the six hundred.

 

[GAP]

And here, reproduced here under the Fair Dealing provisions (§29) of the Copyright Act from yesterday's Ottawa Citizen, a perfect image of Prince Michael's current situation:

Cannon to right of them, - the dwindling support from women, ethnics and other traditional Liberals
Cannon to left of them,  - Coderre and the Québec thing
Cannon in front of them  - Harper at the piano, singing "I get by with a little help from my friends"
  Volley'd and thunder'd;
Storm'd at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
  Rode the six hundred. uh, and declining..............

 

[Rifleman62]

"Michael Ignatieff has promised Premier Dalton McGuinty that federal Liberals will respect Ontario’s agreement with Ottawa"

Yes, bring the HST legislation forward. The Lieliberals will have to vote with the government or go back on their word (flip flop; their "word" means nothing, etc). By voting with the government it takes the wind out of the NDP election rhetoric in the rest of Canada (ROC), as only the CPC or the LPC can form a government.

I must say that in BC, if you really want examples of how Lieliberals operate in elections/government, there are lots of examples. A huge majority do not understand the HST. They only see more taxes.

 

[The Bread Guy]

....for Iggy?  This, from the Toronto Star:

A Conservative government official said Monday there have been discussions with three Liberal MPs interested in crossing the floor to the Tory side over the past month.

Liberals immediately dismissed the talk as Conservative "mischief" and said it is the government that is on a raiding mission.

There has been speculation in the past few days that Ruby Dhalla, Liberal MP for Brampton-Springdale, has considered defecting to the Conservatives because her own party has refused to back her private member's bill to increase old-age benefits to immigrant seniors ....  Dhalla wasn't talking on Monday about the defection speculation or the party's refusal to back her private member's bill.

In a brief email, the Brampton-Springdale MP said only that "the rumour mill is in overdrive again. ... These people need to find a topic of discussion that doesn't include the name Ruby Dhalla."

An adviser in Ignatieff's office said the talk of Dhalla's disgruntlement is being overblown by Conservatives who would like to see her cause trouble for her leader.

And indeed, Dimitri Soudas, a spokesperson for Prime Minister Stephen Harper, sent out a mass-distributed email yesterday drawing attention to the Liberals' rebuff of Dhalla's bill. "They are voting against the (private member's bill) of MP Ruby Dhalla! Their own bill!" Soudas's email said.

Conservatives wouldn't disclose the names of the three Liberal MPs they say are considering defection, but said Dhalla was not likely to be among them. They suggested Dhalla was circulating the defection rumours to send a message to her own party about its rejection of her private member's bill ....

 

[ModlrMike]

.........and let me add my personal take, stuffy = Harper.

Perhaps his appearance at the NAC is part of an effort to dismantle that opinion? The Torries know full well that women are their largest untapped source of votes.

 

[observor 69]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_BHs82Qhp0

Workin' it, workin' it!!  ;D