Ignatieff leadership gain of LeBlanc and the scuttling of the Liberal-NDP coalition?

News that is late-breaking tonight suggests that Liberal MP Dominic Leblanc will drop out…

by Stephen Taylor on Sunday, December 7, 2008 11:53pm - 70 Comments

News that is late-breaking tonight suggests that Liberal MP Dominic Leblanc will drop out of the Liberal leadership race and endorse Michael Ignatieff.  It is rumoured that Leblanc will provide Ignatieff with an additional nine members of the Liberal caucus in what is shaping up to be a backroom leadership election by caucus.  Leblanc’s move over to the Ignatieff camp should be smooth for Leblanc supporters as some senior east-coast Liberal organizers who were initially eyeing Frank McKenna for the top job of that party chose Leblanc instead.  New Brunswicker Steve McKinnon, who would have backed McKenna has charted the waters for martime Liberals to sail over to Ignatieff.

This late development means that Bob Rae, who is beating a path coast-to-coast promoting the coalition concept, finds himself further behind now that Ignatieff enjoys an even more comfortable lead among caucus colleagues.  Somewhat ironic is the fact that the coalition deal was struck out of a sense of urgency (or opportunity) to topple the Harper government and that this sense of urgency is also driving the Liberal party to select a leader via caucus selection.  Strategically, Rae should now advocate for a period of Liberal introspection, an abandonment of the push to a coalition with the Bloc and to have a real (yet delegated) full-blown leadership election.  As it stands, Rae would fare worse under the urgent scenario than that which allows the Prime Minister to stay in power for now.

And why not? Some time for the Liberal party to heal might do them some good.  Joining up with the NDP erodes the brand of both parties and upsets each ideological base.  True, those that seek power despite principle would rather see Stephen Harper evicted from 24 Sussex tomorrow.  However, for the longterm livelihood of the Liberal party they ought to take some time out to rebuild, to fundraise and to craft an original policy platform – one without the word “shift”.

If Michael Ignatieff does assume the helm of the Liberal Party via caucus selection, the January throne speech/budget combo should pass through Liberal abstention.  Poll numbers are showing poor support for a Liberal-NDP coalition and Ignatieff himself has never been warm to the idea.  Besides, don’t you get the sense that Iggy is the sort who plays the long game rather than leaps before he looks? A number of Liberals in caucus have privately expressed concerns over the coalition proposal and most scenarios of how a coalition would play out are unknown and therefore should be somewhat worrisome to most.

For Mr. Dion, the coalition concoction was to be his magical elixir which promised new life.  Realistically, his leadership prospects have been long dead.  For Mr. Rae to avoid a quick demise, he should insist upon a delegated leadership election as planned meaning that the coalition ought to be on hold for now or done like Dion.

Stephen Taylor is a conservative commentator and a fellow at the Manning Centre for Building Democracy.

Bookmark and Share
  • Zoé

    WTF. Why is Macleans hiring Conservative spin-doctors to write here? Stephen Taylor is the boss of the Blogging Tories aka Conservative Party official bloggers. For anyone who’s never read those “special” bloggers, I highly recommend you do so before putting any credibility in this guy. What the hell is Macleans trying to do. There are numerous examples of conservative bias news in print, television and radio. A rare place where I thought I could avoid these jerks was on Macleans. Now, I’ll have to stop browsing your site.

  • Peter

    Zoe. Another member of Canada’s tolerant, open-minded left.

  • Big Daddy

    I’m sorry, but WTF is Stephen Taylor doing here?

  • Richard

    Oh, that “left wing media bias” rears its ugly head.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Well, maybe he just wants to wear two hats; maybe he’s trying to come in from the cold. I’ve never read any of this “Blogging Tories” stuff (why would I read a nakedly partisan site?) but I don’t see how this post here is biased.

    Perhaps Mr. Taylor might capitalise the C in “Stephen Taylor is a conservative commentator”; last I heard, association with Harper was offensive to small-c conservatives.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Zoé and Big Daddy: I’d like to know what parts of my article that you agree with and which parts you disagree with.

    Do you agree that a coalition government is less viable today than it was a few days ago? Is this because things are trending towards Ignatieff and the front-runner would rather rebuild the party instead of jump into an unpredictable partnership with parties that have their own interest?

  • Saskboys Homeboy

    Why oh why would any one with an opinion be allowed to post here.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    @Jack: Here’s the definition I adhere to. A big C Conservative represents the brand/party because “Conservative” is a proper noun. A small c conservative is one that represents the movement because “conservative” is an adjective.

    In my opinion, all Conservatives should be conservative but all conservatives need not be Conservative.

  • Peter

    Zoe: “Perhaps I am not tolerant of intolerant people, “. There you have it. Zoe will not tolerate intolerance.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Well, that’s fair enough, and since I’m reading your stuff for the first time I’ll suspend judgment as to whether you’re a conservative Conservative (if, indeed, you are a Conservative — I’m tabula rasa here) or a Jacobin Conservative. En garde, M. Taylor!

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    @Jack: The conservative movement will always survive. There have been many iterations of “Conservative” parties in the past.

  • Austin So

    In my opinion, all Conservatives should be conservative but all conservatives need not be Conservative.

    Under Harper, this is clearly not the case.

    So all you guys (i.e. conservatives) are left with is an illusion of disastrous proportions…

    Austin

  • Jack Mitchell

    @Mr. Taylor: Ah, now you’re hinting you’re a Jacobin. In what does “the conservative movement” consist? A peaceful, orderly, and hierarchical society? That’s the way we used to be in Canada. By contrast, if “the conservative movement” is in favour of the status quo, i.e. they want to “conserve” what we have, then presumably they’re in favour of the welfare state, redistribution, and the Charter. But if it’s grassroots populism that wants to radically reorganise our public institutions and values, the one thing it isn’t is “conservative.”

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    @Austin So: Can you think of what it means to be a Liberal partisan vs. an adherent to the liberal movement?

    The NDP is undergirded by a socialist/labour democratic movement.

    The conservative movement sustains the Conservative Party.

    The greens also have a large movement behind the Green Party.

    But the Liberals?

    What moves people to be Liberal?

  • Jack Mitchell

    Stephen Taylor: “What moves people to be Liberal?”

    I believe it’s their exasperating (to me) conservativism.

  • T. Thwim

    With luck, nothing. Hopefully, Liberal is what people are when they haven’t subscribed to any “movement” at all, but when they are simply concerned with being decent people with a decent government.

    Ideally, a Liberal is someone without any specific ideology that dictates their decisions, but instead is someone who looks at the actual situation and determines their decision based on the facts available.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    @Jack: This has always been a fun game… to sort out the terms muddled by history and er, um “coalescing” of various party elements.

    I would define myself as a “classical liberal”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_liberal

    I believe we find our home within the modern conservative movement in Canada.

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    @T. Thwim: a pragmatist!

    Fair enough… but short on inspiring for people looking for new ideas.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Yes, I’d agree (from my scanty information) that’s what you are; so the only problem is that “the conservative movement” is misnamed. May I suggest “the vile Whigs”?

  • Ryan

    “Ideally, a Liberal is someone without any specific ideology that dictates their decisions, but instead is someone who looks at the actual situation and determines their decision based on the facts available.”

    Exactly. Or more simply, a centrist.

    Sometimes you go right, sometimes you go left. When you make decisions based solely on how you’ve been raised, sometimes you make blind judgments. No movement in the history of the world has been proven to be perfect, so why would anyone throw their support behind one? Is there something wrong with admittedly not always knowing the correct course to take? Most movements seem to think that their methods will lead to a utopia of some kind, if only the damned opponents would accept it!

  • http://www.stephentaylor.ca Stephen Taylor

    Just thought I’d update everyone: Ignatieff just sent out an email stating that he will stand for confirmation at a convention in May if the Liberal executive and caucus select him sooner than that.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Aha, the game’s afoot!

  • Steve Wart

    Confirmation?

  • Jeff.J

    Leblanc’s press conference on now continues the current Liberal game plan to switch channels from the Liberal manufactured crisis to Stephen Harper.

    As the polls show, there’s no national crisis or dissatisfaction with Harper. There is a self-inflicted Liberal Party crisis. Public denial won’t change this. Canadians have already seen through it.

  • Jack Mitchell

    Actually, Jeff, Harper’s personal numbers are way down.

From Macleans