Beyond The Commons

Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Searching for the Liberal Party. Day 1.

by Aaron Wherry on Friday, March 26, 2010 9:41am - 100 Comments

Canada 150Greetings from Montreal, where, for the next three days, we’ll be hanging around the Liberal party’s Canada 150 conference. Herein a running diary of the proceedings.

9:36am. First things first, a requisite description of the surroundings. The conference centre at the Hyatt Regency doesn’t look anything like a conference centre. It looks like a terribly hip Swedish bar. The light fixtures are these silver blobby things hanging from the ceiling and the walls at either end of the room are emitting red light. The foyer is all white light and includes an actual bar. I believe the Cardigans are playing a set here tomorrow afternoon.

9:57am. Paul Martin has arrived. Let the party renewal commence.

10:00am. Jean Chretien arrives and proceeds with a prodigious display of hand-shaking.

10:05am. And we’re off. Which is to say we’ve started, with some opening remarks from Dominique Anglade, who is apparently fluent in five languages and has degrees in industrial engineering and business.

10:19am. Michael Ignatieff went without a tie this morning. Obviously really ready to let loose. All bets are now off on what might happen this weekend. He may remove his jacket. He may even roll up his sleeves. Buckle. Up.

10:26am. He opens with the idea of turning thought into action—arguably the central, if self-imposed, theme of his political career to date. He’s gone without a teleprompter and seems to be paying only passing attention to his notes and is, not surprisingly, sounding much happier. The teleprompter is the enemy of eloquence. When I convene my own thinkers conference next weekend, that will be topic number one.

10:34am. We’ve heard this before, but here is Michael Ignatieff’s Canada: educated, curious, innovative and international. Now to fill the sizeable blanks in between those adjectives.

10:36am. Quoting Lester B. Pearson at Kingston in 1960: “This is no dialogue of the decided.” Quoting Jean Chretien at Aylmer in 1991: “If we just give it another couple years, the Conservatives will be in tatters and we’ll waltz to victory.”

10:53am. The prepared text for Mr. Ignatieff’s opening remarks is here. (Though his speechwriter says much of what he said wasn’t on the page). You can also apparently follow along with the all of the proceedings here.

11:08am. General opening remarks now on foreign, social and economic policy. Odd experience listening to people speak at length about complicated matters without fear of interruption or scorn.

11:44am. The light in the room switches to purple and Rick Miner of Seneca College arrives to tell us about the future of the Canadian labour force. His central message seems to be that we’re doomed. And he has scary-looking bar and line graphs to demonstrate as much. Graphs are exceedingly difficult to argue with.

11:53am. In the future we’ll not be able to take summers off. And we’ll all have to have something more than a high school degree. This is getting dystopian.

11:58am. To avoid an absolutely dire state of affairs—”millions of people without jobs, millions of jobs without people”—we need a national strategy involving all levels of government. That’s apparently the good news. And, on that note, lunch is served. Let us repress our panic and fear with sandwiches.

1:07pm. Lunch was rudely interrupted by a press conference. A scribe apparently mindful of space in tomorrow morning’s paper asked Mr. Ignatieff to explain, in a sentence, what is at stake here. His sentence: “What’s at stake is whether the political system of our country can actually address the real problems the country faces.”

1:16pm. Keynote address from journalist and banker Sheryl WuDunn, wife of New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof. The cause of our time, she says, is worldwide gender equality.

1:30pm. In addition to Ignatieff, Martin and Chretien, Stephane Dion, Bill Graham and John Turner are in the room. We are one Herb Gray short of a complete set.

1:54pm. And now a celebration of the Internet and the Twitter and all the ways in which people across the country are following and participating in these proceedings. Yes, yes, modern communication is fascinating. We will have truly progressed as a society when we stop being impressed by our ability to speak to one another without necessarily being in the same room. The first phone call was completed more than 130 years ago. Let’s try to maybe get over it.

2:09pm. A discussion now of learning and education. The high school dropout rate among the wealthiest is apparently between six and 11%. Among the poorest it’s between 50 and 60%. That seems staggering.

2:12pm. Stephane Dion is sitting in the row in front of the media table. Two photographers have set up at the end of the row, perhaps four feet from him, and are snapping away shots of him as he watches and listens to the discussion on stage and pretends not to notice. Politics is a bizarre existence.

2:16pm. Former Liberal cabinet minister Lloyd Axworthy, now in charge of the University of Winnipeg, with the best—well, only—joke I’ve ever heard about university presidents. “We’re like caretakers at a cemetery. There are lots of people under us, but they don’t listen.”

2:37pm. Stepped out for a moment and return to a question about provincial jurisdiction, educational reform and the constitution. It is somewhat remarkable that anyone would want to govern this country.

3:01pm. The answer to what is needed to put together a national education policy is apparently this: political will. That’s probably the answer to a lot of questions here. Actually, maybe all of them.

3:09pm. Silly questions. What was the last major domestic policy initiative or innovation involving a Canadian prime minister? More specifically, what was the last major policy initiative that was actually implemented (ie. the Kelowna Accord and the Liberal child care plan don’t count)?

3:20pm. To put this weekend in perspective it is probably a prerequisite that you read Andrew Potter’s essay for the Literary Review of Canada. A short break now and then an hour and a half on innovation. And then a cocktail reception with the Liberal leader.

3:40pm. I’ve just become embroiled in a discussion about adult literacy, post-secondary education, business ethics and railroad protocol. It is going to be that sort of weekend.

4:12pm. I realize again precisely how weirdly politicians speak and how relatively nice it is to listen to people who aren’t politicians. Non-politicians just talk because they have something they want to say. Politicians can’t just talk because they’ve been taught to think about what they’re supposed to say. I realize this is not at all insightful. But when you listen to politicians talk all day and spend a good deal of time trying to get politicians to talk, you sometimes forget what humans sound like.

4:31pm. This discussion now seems to hinge on an argument Roger Martin, dean of the Rotman School at the University of Toronto, made that we lack a national innovation policy. It is a compelling suggestion, not least because, by his estimate, it wouldn’t involve money that isn’t already being spent.

5:00pm. An attendee proposes the creation of a Parliamentary committee on the future. Apparently Finland has one. Here is video from a recent meeting of the committee.

5:15pm. And after a few wise words for Mr. Ignatieff—measure output, not input; simplify—it is time to drink and mingle and speak in jargon about complicated matters.

Bookmark and Share
  • hollinm

    If this is an accurate recap of the first day's event then this going to be one gigiantic snooze fest. It can't be otherwise. People talking about what they know best and the Liberals trying to figure out what to do next. It is a recipe for confusion of the highest order. Iffy has his seminar to beat all seminars. He can stand up there and quote Shakespeare till his heart content and there is no answer to the lack of jobs. All it takes is political will. God help Canada and the Liberal party. If this is what they call a government in waiting then Stephen Harper has nothing to worry about.

    • J.M.

      I think it's a little disingenuous to say that they didn't talk about job creation today. If you actually listened to the speakers, I think the common theme emanating from them today is that the key to job creation is improved education, skills training and research/innovation.

      You and others may disagree with those ideas on their merits, but don't just blindly say they didn't talk about it.

      • riley

        Libertarians are naive. They don't seem to realize that they are not alone in society and that they are powerless against big forces out there that don't care about them. But mostly they don't want any responsibilities. They seem to WANT to have to live in a heavily armed gated community in the future. Not to be taken seriously. They will be ignored as the rest of us get on with building a better Canada.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/JustinWordswrth JustinWordswrth

          And what size of force is government?

      • hollinm

        Improved education? Without a ciriculum that is common across the country, classes that are teaching real subjects, teachers teaching longer than 193 days a year and classrooms full of kids with a mixture of kids who are normal and some with disabilities and a powerful teachers union who do not want their teachers held accountable for the quality and effectiveness of the teachers we will never have an effective education system in the country. Lets remember education is delivered by the provinces and all they are interested in is getting the maximum amount of money they can squeeze out of the feds.
        I agree with the skills training but I suspect that many kids in todays society do not want to be a plumber, electrician etc. Some of these skilled trademen are going to be needed in the future but I suspect given our society today kids are interested in the blue collar jobs.
        Research/Innovation…sounds good on paper but where do we get the biggest bang for our buck?

        We can talk about any subject we want to. We can identify the problems but if it is just a gabfest and nothing comes of it then it is a waste of time.

        • J.M.

          I agree with your earlier comment about federal/provincial jurisdiction and that primary/secondary education would fall in there; my comment was more directed at post-secondary accessbility. Accessibility should be improved so that only a person's academic merits should matter for admission, not their finances. I think it's awful that some people perceive universities as elitist institutions rather than open places of learning for people from all walks of life, and there is something to be said for action that addresses that perception.

          Regarding skills training, if kids today have low interest in the trades, that is a problem – society needs plumbers and electricians. I think it's also unfair to think skills training refers to only the trades. What about programmers, database administrators, graphic designers, etc.?

          Research/Innovation – yes, where do we get the biggest bang for our buck? I'd like to see our parliament have that discussion.

          • http://intensedebate.com/people/JustinWordswrth JustinWordswrth

            Post-secondary education is a racket with which governments collude by indoctrinating students with the "Stay in School" shibboleth and then guaranteeing student loans to remove any and all downward pressures on prices.

          • hollinm

            The trouble is most of our kids are dropping out of high school after grade 12. They have little interest in school and their marks are not good enough to get into university. In the meantime we have kids coming out of high school who are functionally illiterate and have trouble balancing their own budgets. They continue to live at home or rely on their parents to support them. It is a real issue but unless we make education more relevant to todays kids we are destined to have a pile of drop outs who only qualify to work at McDonalds.
            I hope you are not suggesting that we should provide free university tuition to those that qualify. Remember if there is nothing invested there is little reason to work hard and be the best you can be.
            You are right about skills training but I am still waiting for an effective way to get kids going to community colleges. The same reasons why kids don't go to university applies to skills training.

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/JustinWordswrth JustinWordswrth

      So, what your saying is that this conference is Much Ado About Nothing?

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/CTM Claudia Lemire

    Wherry you are being quite charming in this blog.

    But truly, what a waste of money and time, you can collect as much thoughts as you want Mr. Ignatieff, travel Canada, coast to coast to coast a thousand times waiting for this big ephipany or idea that will change our minds and elect you, is not going to happen . we already know you can't lead a party much less this wonderful country of ours!

    • riley

      Let me guess … you're a naive libertarian, too. You just want the government to "get off your back" so you can have a few more bucks to spend on yourself because you don't want any responsibilities. You don't want to pay your dues in a civilized country. Prefer a gated community? Move to Columbia or Chile.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/Mike514 Mike514

        That's quite the assumption, based on a short comment.

        Suggesting that Ignatieff can't properly lead his own party, let alone this country, is not a sentiment expressed solely by libertarians. There are many liberals who feel the same way.

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/JustinWordswrth JustinWordswrth

        If one wants the government to take a diminished role in his life, that person is asking for more responsibilities, not fewer.

        • http://intensedebate.com/people/CTM Claudia Lemire

          Actually, I am not, I have always been a Liberal but I am on a holiday and supporting Harper (mind you I do not agree with the PM 50% of the time). To me personally, what is happening to the Liberal party is very sad, they are just so out of touch with Canada that they are not seeing what needs to be done.

          (gotta run taking kids to the movies will finish this later)

  • ken sparrowhawk

    in eveything you do dont forget about god theresa lot of christians in canada whether you know it or not alwys think what would jesus have done and i guarrantee you will winwin dont be a fanatic tho must raise canada premiums quick an lots

  • Chuck Vs. 2010

    Great read Aaron. Some funny lines, But your still a Liberal Blah,blah,blah…

    Wherry says..

    "1:54pm. And now a celebration of the Internet and the Twitter and all the ways in which people across the country are following and participating in these proceedings. Yes, yes, modern communication is fascinating. We will have truly progressed as a society when we stop being impressed by our ability to speak to one another without necessarily being in the same room. The first phone call was completed more than 130 years ago. Let’s try to maybe get over it."

    Gold, solid gold….

    • http://intensedebate.com/people/CTM Claudia Lemire

      Lol!!!

  • Bruce

    A note for times like this: Dec 09, 2008

    The Liberals want to have a new leader in place before the end of the year, so they can prepare for a possible showdown with the Tories in Parliament early next year.

    Rae had wanted all Liberal members to vote on the leadership. But the party’s national executive decided they would have a vote that only included MPs, senators, riding association presidents, club presidents, and defeated candidates. They also decided it would be on Dec. 17 – not enough time for Rae to organize a significant challenge to Ignatieff, who already had the support of support.

    “I learned how to count a while ago,” Rae joked on CTV’s Mike Duffy Live. “I drew a conclusion that said it was time to pack it in.”

    Liberal Sen. Céline Hervieux-Payette, who participated in the conference call, was reportedly furious over the process by which Ignatieff will take power, Fife said.

    “This will destroy the Liberal Party, I’m devastated by what this will do to the party, they don’t understand anything about democracy,” she said, according to notes obtained by Fife.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Anne_Smythe Anne_Smythe

    For genrations my family has been Liberal, I hope the party gets its act together soon

    • SpencBC

      This puts the proof to the idea that Liberals are stupid. What a really ridiculous thing to say. Try voting using your brain rather than your family history. Really how idiotic can you be!

      • http://intensedebate.com/people/SeanStok Sean

        I think there's a way you could express that same idea without coming off as an a**hole. Find it, or please stay away.

  • illbethejudge

    When did we become a country that hates big ideas, big thinkers and big vision? We, as a nation, scoff at intelligence, education and debate. What have we replaced it with? Stagnant Tim Horton's crowd ideology, Everyman thinking. Sorry folks, but that is not where it starts, it's where it ends. Why don't some of you actually LISTEN to what's being said. You don't have to agree with everything, in fact it would be disturbing if you did. But, dismissing this conference or any other because the people involved (non-partisan from what i can see) are very likely smarter than you. Well, that just demonstrates why they are. I'd bet most of the people who value this are soaking up all they can.

    • hollinm

      The fact is nobody is dismissing big ideas or a big vision. The fact is those things needed to be rooted in reality. Having a pile of academics spouting what we already know is not the way to build a party platform for the Liberal party. It is just a gabfest with a lot of topics being discussed and problems laid on the table with no solutions. It is not complicated. We need government to play a role in the economy to ensure the country is able to be competitive in the global marketplace so businesses can create jobs. We do not need pie in the sky social programs which make us feel good but do not work i.e. gun registry. We need lower personal income taxes so the consumers can drive the economy. We need to stop picking winners and losers in the economy. All of this is known to the Liberal party and the other parties in parliament. However, they are all busy trying to buy our votes. There is only one taxpayer and we have three levels of government dipping their hands into our pockets. The Libs need to get down to brass tacks and decide what kind of party they want to be in the 21st century and what policies will best affect the ordinary Canadian. There are more of us than those intellectuals who raise a lot of issues but have no solutions.

    • SpencBC

      We dont hate big ideas we hate Iggy!

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/Open_Democracy Open_Democracy

    Am I mistaken or do the Conservatives just adopt Liberal policy as their own once the Liberals release that policy to the public? Why is it that the Conservatives have been able to rule without any policy whatsoever since 2006?

    I think the Liberals are over-thinking this one too much. I guess that's what happens when you've had 2 academics in a row as Party leader.

    http://viableopposition.blogspot.com/

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/sourstud sourstud

    Agree with most of what you're saying. I just think the timing is quite poor, though not just because of one plant. He's talking down our economy in the middle of a rebound, and like the rest of us, really has no idea what the jobs situation in Canada's going to be even a year from now.

  • http://intensedebate.com/people/frenchie101 frenchie101

    Bring a book! it sounds really boring! zzzzzzz

From Macleans