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
He also offers his thoughtful perspective of Stephen Harper’s last 10 years in his recent eBook, The Harper Decade.

Liberals: the natural grumbling party

by Paul Wells on Saturday, November 15, 2008 11:38pm - 78 Comments

Bob Rae

From the Inkless emailbox (although actually it was solicited, because I got tipped off by supporters of another candidate and sent notes around to all the main Liberal leadership camps’ supporters tonight):

PRESS RELEASE

Rae Won’t Appear in Media-Lockout “Debate”

Nov. 15, 2008

Toronto — Liberal Leadership hopeful Bob Rae will not participate in the leadership candidate’s forum of the Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario) on Sunday, November 16, 2008 unless the campaign of Michael Ignatieff agrees to withdraw its objection to opening the debate to the media, and its suggestion the debate be cancelled if a closed encounter cannot be agreed upon.

“It sends an awful signal to have a debate that is closed to the media, closed to Canadians”, said Rae, noting that the Conservatives have made closed no-media sessions a hallmark of their conventions under Stephen Harper.

The Liberal Party of Canada (Ontario) is hosting a leadership candidates’ forum with Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff and Dominic Leblanc on Sunday afternoon. The party has indicated the debate will be closed to the media, but is prepared to open the debate to media if all campaigns agree. The Leblanc campaign agreed, but the Ignatieff campaign, as of 8:00 pm Saturday, refused to open the session to media.

“This isn’t a good note on which to start this race, and I think Liberals will be disappointed,” said Rae. The Rae campaign has called for a series of many open debates, starting immediately, across the country.

“I am calling for open debates, and I think we have to start right now, this weekend,” Rae said.

Rae has indicated he will run for the Liberal leadership, and will launch his campaign formally next week.

So that’s the Rae camp’s take.

I reached an Ignatieff supporter but, this late on a Saturday night, he wasn’t in the loop. My assumption is that if he were he’d say something like, this is a very preliminary, informal meeting, en famille, and two of the candidates haven’t even formally launched, so could we please have a chat among friends without inviting the cameras in just yet? Also probably the Ignatiefferati would probably point out that, as the Rae release itself acknowledges, the original decision was no-cameras, and it’s the others, not Ignatieff, who want to change horse in midstream. Or whatever the more apt metaphor would be.

Dominic LeBlanc supporters are saying this kind of instant ex nihilo Rae-Ig bickering is precisely why the party needs to look past them to…well, you know.

Inkless has no opinion, nor any real sense of surprise. It was so encouraging to see the period of mutual respect and accommodation among Liberal leadership contenders last fully one-third of the way through the announcements of the major candidacies. Sunday should be fun.

Bookmark and Share
  • catherine

    I haven’t seen anything from Ignatieff either, but here is a spokesperson (from Canwest):

    Ignatieff’s spokeswoman Jill Fairbrother said the plan was for “an open and frank discussion” with grassroots Liberals and Ignatieff would be available to the media before and after the session.
    “Our hope is that the other candidates will continue to honour the terms for today’s meeting, which were set by the LPCO Executive more than two weeks ago,” she said.

    I agree that Ignatieff has not made the right moves on this. However, on CTV this morning, Rae seemed to be trying to turn this into a constitutional crisis (with him as our saviour). Like we have the choice between leader of the free world (Rae) or a communist dictator (Ignatieff) — at least I think that is what Rae was suggesting in bringing up the former Soviet Union. Or was that simply a jab at Ignatieff’s heritage?

  • T. Thwim

    Perhaps not relevant, but the Conservatives did invite the media to their caucus meeting, then shut the doors on them when they got there.

    So far as I’m aware, nobody had invited the media to the Executive meeting until Rae intimated he would not participate unless they were let in.

  • Cliff

    I guess the bottom line here is simply…does Bob Rae’s word mean anything. He agreed to this closed debate in advance…and now for political reasons (it appears the delegates are not aligning with him) he feels he can use this as an opportunity to slander his opponent. If he really agreed with what he is now saying, why did he not show the leadership, foresight and integrity to just say no….
    Your word is your word..an agreement is an agreement….and Mr. Rae has chosed to honor neither…

  • http://hellupsidedown.blogspot.com/2008/11/its-official-dominic-leblanc-is-most.html whopitulia

    Thanks for the overview. Dominic LeBlanc has now become the most mature leadership candidate by default.

    On fantasy Liberal leadership choices that will never materialize, I’ve always rather liked Marlene Jennings.

    Maybe next time.

    Sigh.

  • John D

    I’m tired of this leadership race already. That can’t be good.

  • Kathy

    in the end it’s not going to matter who said what. The key message coming from the Liberal camp appears to be one of a “private meeting”…….which sends a bad taste pretty much everywhere. No one candidate will wear it….the whole party will wear it.

    So much for respecting the grass root Liberal supporters.

    I’m pretty sure Mr. Kinsella’s got a chapter on this in one of his books?

    Like it or not it does make Dominic Leblanc appear the more mature of the three.

  • http://www.wernerpatels.com Werner Patels

    What exactly is Ignatieff afraid of? That the public will see him as the power-hungry wannabe leader who stayed away from Canada for most of his adult life and didn’t pay the criminally insane taxes in this country, because Canada was “beneath” him?

  • John.K

    It’s you, Werner. He’s afraid of you! Go get ‘em, boy!

  • http://www.wernerpatels.com Werner Patels

    He should not fear me or any common-sensical Canadian who can see through his BS. Instead, he should withdraw from the race and politics, because he is so clearly not competent to be in active politics.

  • catherine

    Speaking of criminally insane taxes….wasn’t Ignatieff based in the UK in the late 70′s? I think their marginal income tax rate hit 98% during that time.

  • John.K

    Ah, the humourless Mr Patels…

    You take yourself much too seriously, sir. As do many here.

  • Paul Wells

    Me. He should fear me. I have the radioactive debris of his home planet. A few pebbles of Iggonite and he’s powerless! Ah-HAHAHAHA!!!!!

  • Ti-Guy

    I think that’s part of the problem. Ignatieff doesn’t seem to fear anything.

  • ERB60

    The LCPO is enough to drive me to the LCBO for relief.

    Here I have been thinking all along that only my evil, scary party and its control freak leader was capable of such a thing.

  • Dianne

    Increasing support and controlled media exposure to Iggy is a bad combination. If Iggy continues to pick up overwhelming support without stating a single policy out of his mouth in the presence of media, what does this say about his candidacy?
    Perhaps, the larger question is, what has Iggy done to earn the Leadership?? So far, it looks like he has cracked a smile, spoken clear English and reaped the rewards of some fans in the media. Wow, the job qualifications to be Liberal Leader are at an all time low.

  • Mike T.

    Don
    Nov 16, 2008 2:07
    Report Abuse

    What is Ignatieff afraid of saying “on the record”?

    * * *

    “We didn’t get it done”

  • Ti-Guy

    “We didn’t get it done”

    I hope the Liberals, in the meantime, blanket the electorate with 10 percenters (I know…such an abuse of the franking privilege…*tsk tsk*) featuring images of Harper and John Howard captured while reciting the “Let’s invade Iraq” speech, in unison.

    Somethings do in fact, never get old…as long as you repeat them, endlessly.

  • Bill D. Cat

    I hope the Liberals, in the meantime, blanket the electorate with 10 percenters (I know…such an abuse of the franking privilege…*tsk tsk*) featuring images of Harper and John Howard captured while reciting the “Let’s invade Iraq” speech, in unison

    Why stop there , Iggy in a trio …… priceless .

  • Ti-Guy

    Why stop there , Iggy in a trio …… priceless .

    …and they can get the Conserva-tards wittering on about that to boot.

  • catherine

    This guy has been liveblogging the leadership forum (in a series of posts):

    http://whatdoiknowgrit.blogspot.com/

    No one seems to have rapped his knuckles yet. Lots of Q&A and seems to be still going almost 2.5 hours later. Not sure why they kept the media out, but I think Rae made a bad call by boycotting it. That has to tick off the Ontario execs who organized this thing. Dominic played it best by saying he preferred it to be open, but agreeing either way to come and answer questions.

  • Activist

    Natural grumbling party? I thought the Liberals were the natural grovelling party.

  • Ti-Guy

    Grovelling? Like when Peter MacKay giggled and told Condi Rice he was her “number one fan!”

    Wait. That’s not grovelling. That’s just pathetic.

  • Paul Wells

    I saw Jack Mitchell shaking Ignatieff’s hand in the CTV clip….

  • http://whatdoiknowgrit.blogspot.com James Curran

    Rap my knuckles? I’d love to see that. That would be a hoot.

  • Jack Mitchell

    PW: “I saw Jack Mitchell shaking Ignatieff’s hand in the CTV clip….”

    That wasn’t me, that was Maher Arar . . .

From Macleans