Since I was away, my impressions were confined to newscasts and publications, which meant little exposure to the partisan rationalizations and mostly marginal "details" of the final resolution. What I saw, a Liberal Party that boxed itself in on probably the least advantageous issue available. Ignatieff came out guns a blazing, with ultimatums on a few issues. The stance was such, it unnecessarily raised expectations on what would be required for a final resolution. Harper's reaction was steadfast, and although Ignatieff secured a face to face, which ultimately left a few scraps, the climbdown from the initial position to the conclusion was striking.
For the first time, the characterization of "weak" was applicable. What's worse, the Liberal strategy lent itself to self inflicted damage. The problem was the Liberals never had the stomach for an election, and the maneouvers after the initial "tough" stance proved it in spades. If one has that knowledge beforehand, it's pure folly to over reach, because you know a backtrack could transpire. What the Liberals did, is firmly put the ball in Harper's court, but in such a way that he had the leverage. For all intent and purposes, the Liberals were a paper tiger. Posturing without conviction to see it through, all unnecessary and risky.
The "concessions" the Liberals received where really nothing of the sort. Our main tenet on EI reform, the qualification number is off the table, it's dead and to be truthful we've already lost the PR battle on "45 days". What's left, Ignatieff now parroting Harper on EI- the Conservatives already had the self employed inclusion in their platform and Harper is on record saying the different regional standards are a problem. Harper was right to shrug in his post-resolution presser, that really he's agreed to nothing he already didn't want. Ignatieff was left to champion part of the Conservative platform as though his own, hardly a compelling talking point. There won't be a fall showdown over EI, because Harper will give enough to make an election over an impasse look ridiculous. The kicker, what the Conservatives end up "compromising" on will be on ground they already largely own. Harper agreed to this discussion over the summer because he effectively will get a Afghanistan redux, wherein he neutralizes the Liberals by presenting a non-partisan approach to Canadians.
As it relates to the opposition day in the fall, that's a strategic point and I'm glad we have it. However, to Canadians, a big whatever, so it's hard to argue this is a feather in Ignatieff's cap. The Liberals extracted another chance to force an election nobody wanted anyways- hardly something that resonates or matters in the grand scheme.
It's fair to beat up on the Liberals for their game plan the past week, but it sure as hell shouldn't be coming from NDP or Bloc partisans. Once again, knee jerk rejection that really looks more foolish with each successive example. The NDP are broke, their fundraising sucks at the moment, their polling is particularly bad where it matters most- an election now almost rationally absurd. And yet, there we see the toothless lion roaring, chest glistening, all a by-product of marginalization. The simple fact of the matter, the NDP have absolved themselves of all reasonable responsibility to make Parliament work, instead they effectively endorse the concept of 4 or 5 elections a year. That's the NDP stance in a nutshell, using the Liberals for cover, letting them be the adults, while they operate in theoretical land in a misguided attempt to look "strong". If there is one piece of advice I would offer to the Liberals, rather than ignoring the NDP, strategy wise I would make a point of highlighting their voluntary irrelevance to the proceedings.
Harper extracted what he wanted- time and a modest agenda moving forward. Harper actually addressed his chief weakness, he looked stately rather than petty. EI is now the fall benchmark, and I see little difficulty in manoeuvring enough to effectively neuter the issue as a trigger. Meanwhile, the Liberals have exhausted a certain amount of political capital, Ignatieff is left with his first truly below par performance and the media frame is adjusting. I see the wisdom in wanting a fall election, rather than plunging us into a campaign nobody wanted, the threat of voter backlash probably more likely than any recent example. However, if the Liberals had that knowledge in the first place, it's hard to justify the unnecessary posturing, because the conviction was forever lacking and subsequent events revealed that for all to see.
30 comments:
Probably the best thing I have ever read from you. Keep up the good work!
Cam Guthrie
Very well put.
You seem to forget the fact that the NDP did propose a stable 2 year government where your boy Iggy would have been PM (too bad the Liberals didn't think they could do a better job than Harper). Also, the NDP polling numbers are not much lower than the election result and they're picking up in Quebec now at the expense of Iggy. Also, NDP is not working well in parliment? What about the auto bill, the airline bill, the EI and environment bills they have in the works right now? They just had a bill pass with support from all parties 2 weeks back. What have the Liberals done besides cave in and get a blue ribbon panel that won't get any results for a year?
yeah i'm with anonymous on this. The liberal illusion of power has played well for the NDP. Also the bill introduce last week to repay bonuses played out to social security trustees was a move supported across the board. They are still relevant, like a neutered dog, you still enjoy its company but realize that it can't do anything without your support.
And of course, the NDP supporter trumpeting nothing as though substantial. It's always full bloom for the NDP. Yawn.
BTW, if you take the average polling from the last offering of all the main firms, the NDP is averaging 11% in Quebec, which is 1% lower than the meger showing in the last election. Yes, clearly on a roll, maybe they'll hold onto their one seat.
Like I said, polling badly where it actually matters, like Ontario, but spin how you wish. Hardly persuasive, nor particularly relevant to reality.
Your words "unnecessary posturing" say it all. Perhaps Ignatieff needs some new advisors.
LMA
The peculiar part, this posturing was all done in the name of appearing strong, but it was so miscalibrated it made us look weak. If our thinking was no election, I would rather we just came out and said Canadians don't want a summer election, so we won't bring them down. Succinct, clear and everyone just sighs relief and we move on. Have your own working group on EI over the summer, if you want to look productive.
Obviously the idea that returning to the same well as the budget was too enticing; but as you rightly assign, this time we entered with no hand to speak of.
You can't play poker if you don't have a stake -- when everyone knows that you're position is ultimately not to risk anything, you shouldn't be at the big boy's table.
Chalk it up as a lesson learned. While the media and chattering pol classes were all over Ignatieff's misstep, the rest of Canada put on the sun hat and slathered on the sunscreen, then shrugged.
There was another misstep in how Iggy played this out. He told the media he would give them a straight up or down on Monday. But instead, the media got a jumbled list of requests for more reports, consultations, compromises and what-not.
Basically, Iggy has to learn how to make his actions match his promises/rhetoric. This requires him to think things through well in advance.
It would also help if he had ONE game plan, and stuck to it. Early this year, his rhetoric was "Harper is going to wear this recession". That was a dangerous and tricky narrative to take into a campaign.
But it was also a powerful one, that frankly had me worried, and, IMHO, he should have stuck with it. Which means he should have timed his actions to bring Harper down as unemployment was rising, people were angry, and ready to punish the sitting gov't.
I think Chretien, David Herle and Kinsella were right in their judgement to take Harper down now.
There is one way Up... If the liberals / Iggy / put out a comprehensive platform what they would and will do/ differently / when in power.. this is what everybody is waiting for..
That would clear all these small back and forth ... steps
The good news, if there's a sense that this past week has caused us to lose momentum and/or some fear of negative impressions of Ignatieff forming, it may cause a rethink on the policy front. When everything is going your way, it's easy to play safe.
Well, a few days can make a huge difference in politics - Afghan secrets, the access to info guy "suddenly" quits, Flaherty is talking about the securities regulator issue (after parliament is shut down - how brave) which will likely anger Quebecers, the stock market is going down again and IMF have not so good predictions .....
I suggest instead of thinking of ways the Liberals can win an election you tell to do some work. The NDP are responsible for over half the private members bills. They have asked more then half the questions during question period. One NDP MP does the same amount of work as 5 Liberals according to those numbers. Yah go into an election with those stats and run against the NDP I would love to see it.
All the strikes going on when others are losing their jobs, no jazz festival or gay pride parade in Toronto - the NDP will plummet big time.
I watched a bio on Tommy Douglas last night - what a disaster in general. May have had some ideas 0 but too, too far left on the border of communism. In fact one of his people was a secret communist who was being watched by the RCMP - she left to join up in Maoist China.
"They have asked more then half the questions during question period."
What planet are you on?
Jack was bragging about his 70 odd confidence motions, which means if the NDP had any say whatsoever we would have had 70 odd elections since 2006. I'm sure the people will just flock to that ridiculousness ;)
In the next election, the ballot question will be "do you want a continuation of the Harper/Ignatieff coalition?" if the answer is yes, you can split your vote between the Liberals and Tories. If your answer is NO then you can vote NDP. Its quite apparent that there are no issues at all where Ignatieff and Harper diverge. Look at today's vote where the Liberals supported these draconian new drug laws. Are you proud of that Steve??? At some point point Ignatieff is going to have to actually propose a policy - its going to be tough for him.
DL
You guys can keep going to that well over and over, but I sense it's a tired argument.
If those arguments make you and other Liberals so uncomfortable then it tells me that they are very effective!
Its not exactly news that big "L" Liberals will take whatever the NDP does and try to cast in the most negative possible light. That's politics. If the NDP sticks to its principles and consistently votes non-confidence in the Tories - then you say that the NDP is "irrelevant" and is missing on out on the great opportunity of being able to wheel and deal with Harper. Of course of the NDP actually did wheel and deal with Harper, Liberals would denounce it as propping up Harper and the Liberals would jump at the chance to start doing what the NDP is doing right now and start voting NO to everything the Harper government proposes. Back in the winter the NDP was very willing to compromise and make parliament work and was even willing to put the Liberals in power - the Liberals refused to work with them. We'll see how quick the Liberals are to reject any deals with the NDP after the next election.
"and was even willing to put the Liberals in power "
Oh, give me a break. Layton was willing to put himself into power, so don't frame it as a sign of his accomodation. The stuff you come up with is laughable, it really is.
The good news, apart from hardcore NDP supporters, not many buy the spin. In fact, the general consensus is this has been a terrible session for the NDP, and the word "irrelevant" a common refrain from people who don't have a vested interest. The latest, shoot before your READ just reaffirms how nonsensical the NDP has become. Keep introducing stuff in Parliament, that never goes anywhere, is never binding to anybody, but allows you guys to claim it all actually matters. It's just a game, played within some esoteric reality that has no bearing on real progress. Jack Layton, 79 elections proposed, quite an achievement.
Meanwhile the Liberals keep propping up Harper while getting NOTHING in return (unless you count some impotent "blue ribbon" panel). The Liberals even supported these draconian drug laws etc... What could be more irrelevant than an official opposition that refuses to oppose and instead just props up the government and has nothing to show for it.
DL
As opposed to bi-weekly elections, and not getting ANYTHING. Gee, I wonder which one Canadians would prefer. Face it, the NDP have voluntarily put themselves on the parliamentary sidelines. From a partisan perspective, I'm glad you guys keep misreading the public mood... You're now not even part of the discussion on an issue you've championed longer than anyone else. And, when we see some sort of compromise, the issue will disappear and your irrelevance will be there for everyone to see. Great strategy!
Any "compromise" on EI will consist of the Liberal caving in to Harper and the unemployed will continue to suffer. Ignatieff could have made demands for better EI back in January - but he didn't - obviously the issue just isn't important enough to him.
Seriously though, you know as well as i do that if the NDP gave the SLIGHTEST inkling that it was willing to negotiate with Harper - you would instantly denounce them as "propping up Harper" and the Liberals would be only too happy to switch places with the NDP and start voting non-confidence at every opportunity. Instead the NDP gets to vote against Harper every time while the Liberals are stuck with a bad case of penis envy!
Blah, blah, de blah blah.
Sorry DL, Steve is right about the NDP irrelevance. Look no further than your own leader talking about compromise on EI in today's papers.
Layton knows he's been put out of the conversation and a) it kills him, b) it kills his party.
Course, it could be argued that the first is overdue and the latter has been announced very late.
Course, there's nothing better than the Libs picking up an NDP idea and running with it.
Witness Green Shift, witness EI. Dead and buried and now we won't have to worry about them.
Way to go Libs!
I'm surprised that Liberals are even mentioning the GREEN SHIFT. I thought there were strict orders from on high never to utter those words again in public. It was a fiasco and set the cause of fighting against global warming back by about a generation.
From an NDP perspective, I hope the Liberals put it in their platform again!!
"set the cause of fighting against global warming back by about a generation."
How is that possible, what with the NDP's beloved cap and trade still very much on the table. Is that an admission that this policy by itself isn't enough, or not as comprehensive as the green shift idea?
On of the main reasons the policy is being abandoned was the complete hypocrisy of the so called environmental "left", the NDP using outright fabrications to discredit an idea for political gain. And, don't think it hasn't hurt you guys, I know of many real environmentalists who will never vote NDP again because of that despicable partisanship.
"I know of many real environmentalists who will never vote NDP again because of that despicable partisanship."
Good riddance. I guess the won't vote Liberal either now that Ignatieff has renounced the Green Shift as well. BTW: I followed the election campaign very closely last fall and I frankly don't recall Layton ever saying a word about the Green Shift. It was clear that the NDP plan was different, but there was virtually no actual attacks on the Liberal plan at all. As you may recall, he spent the entire campaign only attacking Harper and ignoring the Liberals. Why bother attacking the opposition when we want to replace the government. I'm sure it drove the Liberals nuts to be ignore and not to get any attention.
" Why bother attacking the opposition when we want to replace the government."
Dude, you're a dream world.
What are you complaining about? I would have thought that from a Liberal perspective the ideal role of the NDP is to only attack the Tories and to say as little as possible about the Liberals. That's what the NDP did in the last election - why no gratitude???
I think I'd rather argue with a potted plant.
Post a Comment