Inkless Wells

Inkless Wells

Paul Wells on all the latest out of Ottawa—along with the occasional post about jazz. Follow Paul on Twitter: @InklessPW

On the terrifying rise of my arch-enemy Michael Byers

by Paul Wells on Wednesday, July 2, 2008 3:21pm - 0 Comments

ITQ brings the big news that Michael Byers will seek the federal NDP nomination in Hedy Fry’s riding. (Why ‘seek,’ by the way? Because the NDP leaves selection of candidates entirely up to local riding associations, and the leader is very reluctant even to state a local preference. This has on occasion led to hurt feelings among candidates-for-candidacies who thought they could rely on the leader’s support. Anyone who wants to run against Byers is free to take a shot, but it’s clear the NDP is excited that Byers wants to run for them.)

Anyway, at the not-inconsiderable risk of being self-indulgent, this gives me the excuse I need to address what Byers seems to regard as my implacable vendetta against him.

“I treat criticism from certain quarters as a measure of success,” Byers told an interviewer last autumn. “I would be worried if people like Paul Wells of Maclean’s magazine liked my book; as it is, the fact that he tried to tear it apart means that he’s taking the challenge seriously.”

I have terrible news for Mr. Byers. I’m not taking the challenge seriously. My proof is that I didn’t actually try very hard to tear his book apart. In fact I embraced its central thesis (that’s the part where I say “I want to be careful to say he makes a big point well”) while, it’s true, making some considerable fun of other parts. Here’s the review; decide for yourself.

I did, in an earlier incarnation of this blog, make even greater fun of some epically obtuse things Byers said on an At Issue panel after the London tube bombing (that was the “if Toronto blew up, we’d get by” appearance), but fortunately for the pressing cause of world harmony, no archive of that particular critique remains.

On the issue at hand, Byers looks like a strong candidate for his party in that riding. And the NDP, in general, is doing a better job attracting moderately high-profile candidates than either of the larger parties. Good news for a party that could use some.

Bookmark and Share
  • MF

    Emerson would never take Van Center unless hell freezes over. If he’s actually interested in staying in politics and doesn’t get a Senate appointment, he’d have to cross the Lions Gate Bridge into West Vancouver in order to be electable.

    Anyway an interesting race in VC. Adrienne Carr is the wild card, will she take more from the Libs or the NDP? If the low-profile Kennedy Stewart could come within 3000 votes of winning, Byers certainly could pull an upset.

  • A reader

    ““Why ’seek,’ by the way? Because the NDP leaves selection of candidates entirely up to local riding associations…”

    “And if you really believe that I have a bridge in Montreal to sell you. They are much better at hiding their backroom machinations, I’ll give you that though.”

    Doesn’t always work though … even Ed Broadbent had to fight a nomination battle in Ottawa Centre in 2004 (against Paul Dewar, who had already declared quite some time before). Next time out, after Ed stepped down, Paul ran for the nomination against Layton’s former aide Jamie Heath, and won.

    Believe me, NDP members do NOT like to be told which way to vote at nomination meetings. This doesn’t stop the leadership from trying to inject a little persuasion, but it sure doesn’t always work and occasionally has exactly the opposite effect from that intended.

  • boudica

    While I respect Byers’s intellect and views on many issues, it really doesn’t amount to much on the campaign trail. Say what you want about Hedy, she’s an excellent campaigner and an even better constituency MP.

    Personally, my money’s on Hedy. If Sven couldn’t take her out in Vancouver Centre, Byers doesn’t have a prayer of beating her.

  • boudica

    Am I the only person who is mystified by the press’ ranting and ravings about David Emerson’s prowess as a politician? Correct me if I’m wrong but isn’t this the same Emerson who negotiated a raw deal for Canada’s forestry industry in the last lumber dispute with the Yanks? I don’t recall hearing anything positive coming from the business community concerning what Emerson negotiated for them.

    Since then, what has he done exactly? Or is it that Harper’s cabinet is so useless that we have had to lower our standards in such a way that Emerson’s performance is now considered stellar?

  • MF

    My feeling is Emerson won’t run again and will instead return to making seven figures on corporate boards.

  • Wayne

    Hey Boudica have you ever stopped to think that (1) maybe the softwood deal wasn’t as bad as the opposition to it claims. Maybe you should have spent some time out here in BC before the softwood deal as things were way worse before and the deal was acceptable to settle things down. Emerson and Harper should have major cudos for getting the deal through and the timing of it. Things could have gotten way worse believe.

  • T. Thwim

    Except that things weren’t in line to get way worse, Wayne. We’d won practically every single court challenge and appeal that the US gov’t could throw at us. We were only a couple of months away from the last appeal at the uppermost court on trade issues, and from everything that was being said, it was going to be another vindication of our practices.

    So Emerson’s deal not only cost Harper his credibility as someone who means what he says (since as leader of the opposition, he was claiming that one thing a Prime Minister shouldn’t do is cut a deal on softwood lumber considering all the facts on our side) but cost Canadians a billion dollars, and a final precedent setting ruling that would have shut down their complaints for a significant period. Instead, we made *our* producers pay *their* producers a billion dollars, and the complaints have already started up again.

    Go Go Team Harper!

  • Wayne

    Hey T. (1) When it comes to this deal and it’s impact on the forestry biz here in BC I know about what I am talking about you see I work for the Ministry of Forests and have dealt directly with the largest and some of the smallest lumber companies and I am afraid you are misstaken in your judgement not the few facts that you posted. You see it doesn’t matter if we won every tribunal and world court proceeding we entered as the Americans do not have the ability to control the appeals and new charges so therefore any local yankee business and legislator = that has a vested interest = will continue either appealing or submitting new claims this is an old strategy and one that works. At the time before the softwood deal there were several major situations that had to be resolved and was costing us millions on non-recoverable dollars not to mention very large contracts in major danger. The situation had to be dealt with and dealt with fast as it had been going on too long with no end in sight – and it was signed on by all the major players involved and we got some money back which was a major surpise so all things considered it was the best we could do at the time and any other point of view is just that a point of view. The reality is that Emerson and Harper did a good job on this file now you can choose to agree or not however if you were directly involved you would know that it was the best we could at the time and that is how it is.

  • boudica

    “Hey Boudica have you ever stopped to think that (1) maybe the softwood deal wasn’t as bad as the opposition to it claims. ”

    Wayne, the claims didn’t just come from the Opposition. As I stated in my post, it was the forestry industry that had a hissy fit over what Emerson negotiated. So forgive me for wondering why the press gallery has all of a sudden decided that Emerson is a brilliant minister that Harper should hold on to for dear life.

    My question is a valid one. What has Emerson done to merit such praise?

  • Pingback: game on in Vancouver Centre « views from the left coast

  • http://www.leehamilton.blogspot.com/ Lee

    It’s a difficult riding to predict. The riding contains one of the highest per capita concentrations of university degree holders in the country, so one would think Byers’ public policy arguments might have some intellectual appeal with this crowd. On the other hand, the riding clearly loves its divas, and Hedy Fry can be surprisingly effective in riding debates and out on the street sidewalks during campaign season. Another advantage Fry has over Byers is that she has roots in the community. Outside of the UBC campus, I can’t say the same for Byers. But professors tend not to handle the transition to politics very smoothly. That said, anything can happen. He’ll definitely need to find an issue much closer to home than Arctic Sovereignty – I doubt this riding will allow itself to be used as a prop.

  • Pingback: Werner Patels - A Dose of Common Sense

  • Pingback: The NDP’s big tent

  • Pingback: Michael Byers, NDP at Leslie Young

  • http://www.flora.ca Russell McOrmond

    I am quite excited by Michael Byers running. I am very involved in the copyright policy debate, and it seems he has some pretty forward-looking views on this.

    http://blogs.itworldcanada.com/insights/2008/07/15/michael-byers/

    In fact, I’ve given the thumbs-up for a number of MPs and candidates in the NDP on this important area of policy.

    http://www.p2pnet.net/story/16394

  • Joel Perry

    Michael Byers is by far the most outstanding,passionate, honest and intelligent candidate in Vancouver Centre. You do not have to dig very deep to find that this is evident.

From Macleans