Month: December 2008

My contribution to our Canwest file today:

OTTAWA – When Prime Minister Stephen Harper eventually tangles with Michael Ignatieff in a general election, Harper could be facing his toughest Liberal opponent yet.

Partisans on both sides say the next Liberal leader matches up well against many of Harper's strengths and has the potential to bring his party back to the vote-rich centre of Canadian politics.

“That's his basic philosophy,” said one of Ignatieff's campaign organizers, “and that's where the party is signalling that it wants to go.”

Liberals hope – and Conservatives fear – that Ignatieff can present himself as a transformational character, someone whose very personality reinvigorates the country's political life, in the same way that Pierre Trudeau or Barack Obama were agents of change.

Darrell Bricker, chief executive of pollster Ipsos Reid, said there's no evidence Ignatieff can be that kind of a game-changer right out of the gate.

“The evidence for that doesn't exist,” Bricker said. “It's not like there's any Iggy-mania out there – yet.”

Bricker said Ignatieff's ascension to the leadership gives the Liberals some new opportunities, but it doesn't automatically put them over the top.

But before any potential might be realized, Ignatieff must face his first major strategic decision and it's one that could test Liberal caucus unity: Should he continue with the Liberal-NDP coalition, a union that polls show is deeply unpopular with Canadians, and replace Harper as prime minister? Former Liberal leadership candidate Bob Rae and many Liberals say the coalition should continue. Ignatieff thinks it might be prudent to wait to see what is in Harper's budget. When Ignatieff advanced that view in the closed-door caucus meeting last week, his colleagues shouted him down.

Ignatieff did not speak to reporters Tuesday but is expected to do so Wednesday.

The Conservatives, of course, have no intention of allowing Ignatieff to develop any kind of halo and are developing strategies to do what they did to outgoing Liberal Leader Stephane Dion – quickly marginalize him.

“He's going to wear that coalition in the next election whether he wants to or not,” said a Conservative source, speaking on condition of anonymity.

And, should Ignatieff survive the test of his young leadership that will come with the coalition decision, his political opponents will be waiting with more ammunition. They will try to point out the patrician, aristocratic aspects of his character – he is the grandson of a Russian count who served in the court of Czar Nicholas II – while comparing that to the more workaday background of Harper, the son of an an accountant who grew up in a middle-class Toronto neighbourhood.

Conservatives will also remind Canadians that it was Ignatieff, not Dion, who favoured a carbon tax in the 2006 leadership race, a policy proposal that would make it difficult for Ignatieff to win votes in Western Canada.

The Tories launched an ad blitz immediately after Dion won the leadership in late 2006 and, as Dion himself conceded last month, that campaign successfully created a negative impression of Dion from which he was never able to recover.

Conservatives have not yet decided if they will launch a formal ad campaign to attack Ignatieff, but they certainly have the money to do so. The prospect or fear of a coalition government has fired up the Conservative base so much so that the party raised $600,000 on one day last week alone.

The Ignatieff campaign organizer, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Liberals will not let any such Conservative ad blitz go unchallenged.

“We won't make that mistake again,” the organizer said. “It's now a whole new ball game. While an awful lot of decisions lie ahead, he will be standing in principled opposition to this government.”

Ignatieff also faces some of the trickiest tasks to confront any leader who has ever taken over a federal party in Canada. Even when Jean Charest ended up leading a caucus of two MPs as leader of the federal Progressive Conservatives in 1993, his party didn't find itself in the dire financial straits that the Liberals face and Charest still enjoyed significant support in all regions of the country.

The Liberals are in debt and the party has struggled to find some successful fundraising techniques. In addition, many of his key caucus members are still paying off debts from the leadership race that Dion won in 2006. Dion, himself, is also still in debt.

In some parts of the country – notably Alberta and Saskatchewan – Ignatieff's party is also nearly non-existent.

Perhaps most important, the policy cupboard is all but bare. As a party, the Liberal grassroots have not had a chance to debate and formulate policies at a convention since 2005 when Paul Martin was prime minister. Coincidentally, it was Ignatieff, then a Harvard professor, who gave the conference keynote address, sketching out what he saw as the three pillars of Canadian liberalism: unity, sovereignty and justice.

As he works to meet those challenges, there is one thing Ignatieff can count on that his two predecessors could not: He will lead a relatively united, if humbled, party. The bitter infighting between Paul Martin and Jean Chretien loyalists poisoned Martin's prime ministership. When Dion took over, he had next to no caucus support.

Ignatieff, by contrast, has the overwhelming support of his caucus and the internecine warfare that Martin had to deal with should be non-existent.

Indeed, Rae, Ignatieff's only serious rival for the leadership, said Tuesday, “As far as I'm concerned, the Liberal party is not divided. We're not divided on leadership. We're not divided on substance. We all feel good. We all like each other. We're going to be the most boring party to cover from now on. Just one big happy and successful family.”

Technorati Tags: michael ignatieff

One thing the Liberals need — say Liberals themselves — is a policy convention. The last time the Liberals met to formulate policies was in Ottawa in March 2005. The keynote speaker on the Friday before the conference began was none other than a Harvard professor named Michael Ignatieff. He spoke about small-l liberalism and the state of the Canadian Liberal Party.

Now, as Ignatieff prepares to take over the leadership of said Liberal Party, it's interesting to go back to that speech and take a look at what might stand, at this point, as his manifesto. Happily, you need not look around too much for it because I blogged the speech in its entirety here back in 2005.

As I see it, the Liberal party has three essential purposes:

” To protect and enhance our national unity

” To preserve and defend our national sovereignty

” To advance the cause of social justice.

Je voudrais parler de la base morale de notre action politique : l'unité nationale d'abord; la souveraineté canadienne ensuite; et enfin, la justice sociale pour tous nos citoyens.

Unity, sovereignty, justice: the three fundamentals. Everything else is detail.

Were you a federal Liberal candidate in the 2008 general election? Are you a current Liberal riding association president? Do you know one?

If so, we want to hear from you as soon as possible.

As you likely know, there could be a time in the very near future where Liberal candidates in the last election and/or riding association presidents may be called upon to voice their preference for Michael Ignatieff or Bob Rae for leader.

We're trying to contact as many candidates/EDA presidents as possible by 8 pm Ottawa time Tuesday to get a sense about which way the wind is blowing.

Can you help?

Letting my know by e-mail (dakin @ canwest.com) is best but feel free to call or PIN me. All my contact info is here.

NOTE: We don't need to identify you publicly. We're just trying to do a head count right now.

Thank you!

This statement was just released:

Date: December 8, 2008

For Release: Immediate

Statement by the Honourable Stéphane Dion

After the election on October 14 I announced I would stay on as Leader of the Liberal Party until my party could select my successor. One of my goals was to ensure an effective opposition to Stephen Harper's government. I believe that decision was the right one and I am proud of having forced Stephen Harper to back away from his attempt to force upon Canadians his most ideological and harmful plans in these tough economic times.

The alliance between the Liberal Party and the NDP to replace the Harper government, with the support of the Bloc Québécois, is a solid basis to give Canada a government that reflects both the aspirations of the majority of Canadians and the support of the majority of Members of Parliament.

Such a government would be more stable than a minority Conservative government incapable of cooperating with opposition parties. As the Governor General has granted a prorogation, it is a logical time for us Liberals to assess how we can best prepare our party to carry this fight forward.

There is a sense in the party, and certainly in the caucus, that given these new circumstances the new leader needs to be in place before the House resumes. I agree. I recommend this course to my party and caucus.

As always, I want to do what is best for my country and my party, especially when Canadians' jobs and pensions are at risk.

So I have decided to step aside as Leader of the Liberal Party effective as soon as my successor is duly chosen.

I will offer my unconditional and enthusiastic support to my successor in the same way I have always supported the leaders of our great party.

I will work under the next leader's direction with all my energy in order to give Canada a better government.

I wish to close by making it absolutely clear that my earlier departure does not change the facts of the situation that the Prime Minister has created in the last two weeks. The Prime Minister and his government refused to lay out a plan to stimulate the economy. The Prime Minister has lost the confidence of the House of Commons. The Prime Minister shut down Parliament to save his job while thousands of Canadians are losing theirs. The Prime Minister has poisoned the well of trust and respect that is necessary for a minority government to work in Parliament – especially in a time of crisis.

Mr. Harper took an economic crisis and added a parliamentary crisis that he then tried to transform into a national unity crisis: this is no way for a Prime Minister of Canada to act.

It is my hope that the decision I have announced today will enhance the capacity of Parliament to function effectively for the sake of Canadians in this economic crisis.

Stéphane Dion, PC, MP