Leading from the rear

by Andrew Coyne on Sunday, December 7, 2008 10:33am - 350 Comments

Leading from the rearRemarkable piece by elite Liberal blogger Rob Silver poses several pointed questions to “any and all Liberal MPs” regarding their support for the coalition and the man who negotiated it. Namely: where were you? If you didn’t think the time was right to bring down the government, if you were opposed to the coalition, if you preferred that someone other than Stephane Dion should lead it, why didn’t any of you say so? The air is full of recriminations now. But not a word was said publicly at the time — not even, it appears, privately.

Of course, when Silver points out that none of them said anything, it follows logically that one member of caucus in particular said, and did, nothing to prevent this train wreck: Michael Ignatieff. That’s significant, because unlike other MPs — Bob Rae comes to mind — Iggy has let it be known through various anonymous surrogates that he had unspecified “concerns” about a coalition government, that he was never really “comfortable” with it, that he might not even have served in it. Yet… it proceeded.

Understand: Ignatieff controls something like 80% of the caucus. With one arch of his magnificent eyebrows, he could have stopped this at any point: when the decision to bring down the government was made, when the coalition deal was being presented to caucus, when it was decided that Dion should lead the coalition, when the letter to the Governor General pledging allegiance to the coalition was being drafted. Yet he did nothing — indeed he continues to defend the coalition publicly.

Even so, his people are still winking to the press that he was secretly opposed to the deal all along. For example, as Jane Taber informs us, he was the “very last Liberal to sign the letter to the GG. The Globe even published a facsimile of the letter, with a blow-up of Ignatieff’s tardy signature. Excuse me? You call this leadership? This was a formal petition to the Crown asking her to install the coalition as the government of Canada. It was freighted with the most far-reaching political and legal consequences. It could potentially have changed the course of Canadian history. Your signature is on that document. But it doesn’t count because you had your fingers crossed?

What does all this mean? It means if you’re a Liberal looking to escape from the coalition — and virtual extinction at the next election — Iggy’s not your boy. He is implicated up to his ears, only without even the virtue of conviction. When the Tories come to remind voters, as they will, who tried to “steal” the election, who was “in bed with the separatists,” who would have let Jack Layton loose in the cabinet, they will make Iggy wear it just as surely as they would Rae or Dion.

The damage done by the coalition dalliance is already massive, and mounting by the day. If the Liberals are to have any chance of walking away from the wreckage, they have to make a clean break — with the coalition, and with those who, directly or indirectly, were responsible for it.

PS: Bourque has an interesting poll up.

Bookmark and Share
  • just a Canadian

    Well Jack,

    At that I gotta agree. But Parizeau sure gave Gilles at lot of praise for the real deal for a separate Quebec. But any one that thinks the separatist hooker will give you enough pleasure for the price is in for a real shocker when they reach around for their wallet in the morning.

    As a Canadian, I’ve no time for separatists of any flavour. But I respect the root cause of the separatist notion in Quebec. But most people from Quebec rejected that option. Democratically. The continuance of the pandering to the vocal few has given voice to another separatist ideal. And their root causes demand respect. Who deserves the loudest voice Jack? Ontario? Quebec? The west? Who should get the mega dollars from the “stimulate the economy” package? Any bets on where it would go had the “coalition” not been pre-empted by Harper?

  • Tim Johnson

    Andrew is really turning this magazine into a right wing rag. We used to tell our students to read Macleans for even handed analysis on Canadian politics. Now its just more of the garbage we see from american editorialists.

    Hes not happy enough that him and the right wing media lynch mob destroyed the career of an honourable and decent man, he now sees it neccesary to pre emptively pile on the next leader of the opposition.

    Only in this country would the media dynamic be so bizarre and insulated, that they think it to be reasonable to focus 90 percent of their editorial space to criticizing the opposition rather than the government.

    Whether he knows it or not, Coyne is a pawn for the PMO.

  • kody

    Another lefty that shudders at the notion that only 98% of the media lean liberal.

    You go after that 2% there Tim. Make it 100%!!

  • David Bakody

    And add yet another smart move by Cnada’s self appointed King and parliamentary rules man!

    My oh my…. ode Mr. Fixed Election Date… taxpayer gamble for a majority to a long and early Christmas taxpayer skip out of a non confidence prorogation vote via world humiliation has now seen his Pals in the ADQ and its leader bite the dust…. even with all his taxpayer support. Yup Change is coming…. and it can not come too soon. Now there are three knives sharpened and ready to be flung … Barid, Prentice and Charest…. Have a Happy Christmas Stevie bye…. Charest sure will.

    And Harper thought they were all tucked in their beds waiting for Santa to do all the work for them… boys oh boys…. they have indeed awaken a sleeping giant… then again they have been around since 1867 as apposed to the Reform/Alliance/Conservative…. yup

  • just a Canadian

    Tim, do you actually teach this ideology to children? Americans are right wing. Right wing media. FYI Harper is a decent and honourable man. Do you have a problem with the media going after him? Or is Dion sacrosanct with Harper being fair game in a balanced national media?

    The opposition, instead of working together with the government during a time of crisis, tried to grab power and threw the country into turmoil. Again, in a time of crisis.

    Just another point of view that merits discussion. Not an ideological rant from those that hold influence over minors. I truly hope that you are not a teacher, but your opinion is certainly representative of some indoctrinators that my kids called teacher.

    In politics, a consensus is transitory. In science, there is never a consensus to a theory. Bet you preach the opposite to the latter, as well.

  • Maggie’s Farmboy

    JAC

    FYI There is no prize for the most posts…

  • gwgm

    Iggy’s attempt to grab the helm of the LPC without consulting anyone but his 50 MPs is flying like a lead balloon.

    Talk about all the wrong moves.

    All this guy had to do was appear “STRONG” and for a “UNITED” Canada (as his web ad banners crow)… and he was a shoe-in to beat Mr. Rae Days in May. From there, all he had to do was wait 18 months as Canadians got to know him, and then go head-to-head in an election with a recession PM. Sounds like a plan.

    But what does he do?

    He signs a deal with the separatists… holds a press conference bragging about signing it…. then he notes that he was the last one to do so, as if people are pining for a follower as the leader of the LPC… Then he goes to the wall supporting Dion…. before he says he Stephane has to go… Then he kinda sorta supported the separatist coalition he signed onto…. before disappearing like a fart in a tornado…. thereby kinda sorta signalling that he might not be in favour of it anymore…. before deciding he’d like to be the leader of the LPC TODAY, based on the say-so of four-dozen other followers who also signed the deal with the separatists.

    As a Conservative…. I’m on my knees praying for Iggy’s LPC coup to succeed. Hard as it is to comprehend, this guy is likely more incompetent and indecisive than Dion.

  • gwgm

    NEWS: Bob Rae just quit the leadership race (heard on CFRB 10:30 a.m.). No joke.

  • oompus boompus

    If Ignatieff will be leader of the Liberals and possibly PM in the near future then it is time to start taking a detailed and skeptical look at his resume and credentials. Other than being a prof. in a mostly foreign universities, what were his professional activities? What books did he write? Who published them? Where did he give off-site lectures, which bodies invited/paid him to give the lectures? Which non-academic conferences did he attend? To which non-academic organizations has he belonged, and whose interests do those organizations represent? Did he do non-university consulting, e.g. to write special reports and papers under contract, and if so, for whom, and in which areas?

    I’m not trying to stir the pot or smear the guy, but unlike any other federal political leader in the history of Canada of which I’m aware, he has spent relatively little of his time in the country.

    From dipping into Wikipedia he seems like a warmonger and an apologist for totalitarian state interventions. Do Canadians want a PM who advocates nearly unlimited war and bloody foreign interventions, torture (sorry, “coercive interrogations”) and detention without trial, all for “altruistic” reasons? If there’s one philosophy that’s been completely rebuked and discredited already in the 21st century it’s this kind of brainless, arrogant Bush doctrine, no matter how polished and professorial the spokesman.

    You should start looking into this before it’s too late.

  • northface

    To think of it, the Liberals deserve what they got …from its own leadership choice and the process leading to it…from the Canadian public, and from Stephen Harper…..how pathetic…..

  • tasso lake

    You guys are so incredibly shallow and naïve. I’ll take Ignatieff’s resume of that of Harper these days.

    Let’s have a look at Mr. Harper’s resume: has demonstrated to all Canadians a remarkable lack of judgement, vision, and a strange mean-spirited side that frankly takes middle of the road guys like me out of the conservative realm – perhaps forever. As sitting Prime Minister he has broken his oath of the Privy Council several times, wraps himself in flag but shows a flagrant lack of respect for the institutions of governance of our country.

    I’m NOT sorry – I am capable – and dedicated now to remove this self-absorbed tool from the office of the Prime Minister. If you feel capable – as you are surely dedicated – try to defend your own leader before you bother to conjecture and spread non-truths about a man that you quite clearly don’t know a damn thing about and hate anyway.

    Please – try to convince me that you are not simply idiotic sycophants – because you post nothing here of much substance to persuade me otherwise.

  • gwgm

    Iggy signed the deal with the separatists, to take power without consulting the people of Canada.

    Iggy stood up at a press conference supporting the deal with the separatists. The same deal that would make Jack Layton a senior member of Canada’s government.

    Iggy ran and hid when the heat was on, abandoning his so-called partners.

    Iggy said Dion was the main to lead the Libs until May.

    Iggy has taken control of the party without the consent of its members.

    What more do you need to know about the man? Seriously.

    The Conservatives are no doubt doing the final edits on their campaign commercials right now.

  • tasso lake

    Mr. Ignatieff’:

    - Has greed to his party’s plan to use legitimate constitutional measures in an attempt to remove a depraved leader from office. (note -–if it was not legitimate why was Mr. Harper so scared?)
    - Did not sign the agreement – he DID sign a letter to the Governor General stating that he lended his support.
    - Was actually not at the press conference.
    - Bloc members are legitimate members of parliament, who remarkably, have show more respect for the rules of parliament than the conservatives.
    - Did not prorogue parliament to avoid confronting his peers and has submitted to several press scrums. In contrast – Mr. Harper doesn’t even have the stones to hold a press conference. Please define “hiding”
    - Supported his leader faithfully. (you have a issue with that? There’s irony)
    - Has followed the rules as put forth by his party’s leadership race fully – which are now irrelevant since he’s been declared by acclamation. I’d like to see Harper face a leadership contest right now!

    Any other point you’d like to debate gwgm? I and Mr. Ignatieff’ will be happy to oblige. Time for Mr. Harper to take a permanent vacation and to give parliament back to people who are willing to serve the interests this country ahead of their own political party. Again – YOU need a new leader…. I will not recognize Steven Harper as my leader anymore.

  • Alex Nixon

    oompus boompus,

    You’re using Wikipedia to make your judgements? Did you get confirmation from the Drudge Report?

    Seriously, Ignatieff’s books are in most public libraries. Read them and then make up your mind. For instance, if you read “The Lesser Evil” (pgs 136-143, if I’m not mistaken), you’d realize that Ignatieff believes that there should be an absolute ban on torture.

    But don’t let facts get in the way of your opinions.

  • Jack Mitchell

    “Permissible duress might include forms of sleep deprivation that do not result in lasting harm to mental or physical health, together with disinformation and disorientation (like keeping prisoners in hoods) that would produce stress. What crosses the line into the impermissible would be any physical coercion or abuse, any involuntary use of drugs or serums, any withholding of necessary medicines or basic food, water and essential rest.”

    Michael Ignatieff

    At least he’s against knouting.

  • Ryan Rigby

    Well said, Alex. We’re going to hear all sorts of nonsense about Ignatieff’s intellectual history spoken by people who haven’t read any of his book, to people who haven’t read any of his books. I’m not saying I, or anyone, needs to agree with all of his opinions, past or present, but people should at least equip themselves with facts. Sadly, in this age of sound bite democracy, I’m not sure facts hold credibility any more.

  • oompus boompus

    Read the quote pasted above. The man contradicts himself in adjoining sentences. But don’t let the plain meanings of words and common sense get in the way of your opinions.

  • Ryan Rigby

    The quote seems pretty clear to me. And I don’t see a single contradiction. If you want contradictions, look up some of Harper’s past op-eds and compare them to what he says and does today on matters pertaining to anything.

  • oompus boompus

    “Permissible duress might include … sleep deprivation … impermissible would be … any withholding of … essential rest”

    Read much?

    Of course Harper is also a liar and a hypocrite. He’s a politician.

  • tasso lake

    Oh my god – and the spin begins…. Dudes – perhaps we should dissect the Prime Ministers interview from today first….

    I think Canadians are simply not willing to listen to another smear campaign. Why not just work on some sound economic policy and we can have a fight about something of substance. If you guys think another round of spin is going to keep the good ship tory afloat – I think you’re delusional at best….

  • David Fraser

    Steve Wart
    Dec 8, 2008 22:29

    “Clearly David Fraser should be producing the next set of fair and balanced videos for the Liberals. I hear there is a vacancy on the team.”

    I have just downloaded the latest Final Cut Pro HD. Should I use “actors” or “real” people?

  • David Fraser

    Bob Rae as first mate and Ignatieff as captain works for me. I would prefer Bob as prime minister, but he’ll get there inevitably, I suspect. But for now, Radwanski’s analysis is pretty exciting. Ignatieff stays high toned, and serene, and appealing to people across the country, while Rae uses his prodigious, unmatched skills (I have never seen his equal in debate) chews Harper’s legs off in the dog House.

    Early New Year’s resolution: David, stop mexing mitaphors.

  • http://ragingranter.blogspot.com Raging Ranter

    …chews Harper’s legs off in the dog House.

    Bob Rae – ankle-biter.

    Sounds about right.

  • Ryan Rigby

    oompus, if you can’t say there is a difference between a thug wanting nappy time and being deprived of it, and a prisoner who requires rest due to an existing medical condition that would make its deprivation life threatening, you are ridiculous. You know, part of reading is comprehension, not just selecting words out of a paragraph.

  • Simplicio

    Just replying to the comment that without the coalition Stephen Harper would be “Supreme Commander of Canada” That’s just hyperbolic nonsense, and sadly, this is the way that most left-wingers think.
    Could it be that the left wing is just as “totalitarian” as the right?

From Macleans