Two steps back

By Alex Ballingall - Thursday, December 8, 2011 at 9:20 PM - 0 Comments

Dave Chidley/CP

Don Cherry

As the hockey world adjusts to stricter hitting rules and increasing concerns over brain injuries, Cherry’s tough-guy rhetoric seems more and more antiquated. The man of a million suits bowed to pressure in October and apologized after he called three former NHL enforcers “pukes” and “turncoats.” Weeks later, he declined an honorary degree from the Royal Military College after a professor took issue with Cherry’s alleged intolerance of French-Canadians, immigrants and homosexuals.

Conrad Black

In September the former business mogul was returned to the prison population he once described as “an ostracized, voiceless legion of the walking dead.” U.S. District Judge Amy St. Eve had re-sentenced Black to 13 more months behind bars in Florida for mail fraud and obstruction of justice.

Continue…

Why the Liberals are yesterday’s party

By Peter C. Newman - Tuesday, November 22, 2011 at 10:30 AM - 0 Comments

Photograph by Cole Garside

Peter C. Newman’s latest political book was supposed to be a close observer’s inside account of the rise of Michael Ignatieff from novelist and Harvard professor to prime minister of Canada, with barely a stop in between. Instead, as Newman followed Ignatieff during his climb to the Liberal leadership and the party’s catastrophic federal election campaign last spring, it became clear that he was chronicling the destruction of the Liberal party. In this excerpt from When the Gods Changed: The Death of Liberal Canada, Newman describes the Liberals’ abject failure to respond to the Conservatives’ devastating anti-Ignatieff ads and the Liberal leader’s hapless debate performance:

The attack ads defined Ignatieff in a way the Liberals did not—it turned out, could not—answer. Not because the accusations were true, but because they were repeated with brainwashing frequency.

How that lapse happened is the great untold story of the campaign. There was, during the 2011 election, no public proof that anything positive was stirring inside the Liberal camp, but in fact nearly $5 million quietly trickled into Liberal headquarters. Those voluntary contributions were greater than the totals mailed in during the last three elections. The Liberal party’s fundraising was actually quite good, much better than that of the NDP or Bloc. The problem for the Liberals was that the power brokers divided the spoils. The Grits had the highest infrastructure costs of all the political parties—every federal-provincial association demanded their own office budgets and staff, plus there was a commission for every special interest within the party, each with its own budget. The Liberals’ rotten internal culture meant that the power brokers would rather the party die than lose their little fiefdoms. The party thus left its leader helpless to defend himself. Too busy dividing what remained of fundraising dollars and the public subsidy between its fiefdoms and power brokers, the party was unable to save any for the response to the negative advertising that Ignatieff so desperately needed.

Continue…

A chance for the Liberals to take a chance

By Andrew Coyne - Monday, November 21, 2011 at 9:40 AM - 0 Comments

Peter Power/The Globe and Mail

The best way to understand the situation facing the Liberals is to think of the party as a hockey team. It has won several Stanley Cups in a row, but by the last of those cups, it was relying on a clutch of 43-year-old veterans. With their retirement, the team has no option but to spend a few seasons in the basement, rebuilding. If it learns patience, while the draft picks mature and the losses mount, the team may in time become a winner again. If it does not, it becomes the Leafs.

It is still not clear whether the party fully understands the predicament it is in. To be sure, it understands it lost the last election, and lost badly: the worst defeat in its history. But even if Liberals grasp the magnitude of their defeat, they do not seem to grasp its implications.

A case in point is the “road map to renewal” the party’s national executive released last week. The document is properly proud of Liberal achievements, and properly bracing about the task ahead. Yet it remains fixed in the belief that nothing fundamental has changed for the party, or needs to. It just has to do the same things, better: better fundraising, better organizing, better communications, better outreach.

Continue…

Retweeted tea leaves

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, November 14, 2011 at 8:30 AM - 0 Comments

On Saturday, Bob Rae retweeted a link to a newspaper column that suggested he might be the best person to lead the Liberals into the next election. But on Sunday, Bob Rae retweeted someone quoting him about his own interim status.

Whatever one makes of all that, Mr. Rae’s comments of two weeks ago, to an audience at Carleton University, seem fairly definitive.

As for Rae’s part in becoming the new leader now that Michael Ignatieff has stepped down? “It won’t be me,” he said, to which the atmosphere in the room became heavy. “I’m not going to run for leadership.” 

What happened to the Liberal party?

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, November 9, 2011 at 4:53 PM - 0 Comments

In a speech to a Liberal riding association in Halifax, Stephane Dion considers the history and future of the Liberal party.

In 2008, as Liberal Leader, I did talk about the economy.  I truly believed that the main focus of my campaign was the economy.  The Green Shift’s subtitle was: “Building a Canadian Economy for the 21st Century.”  But because I was promoting sustainable economy, which I strongly believe must be the economy of the 21st century, I was perceived as a one-issue candidate, exclusively preoccupied by the environment.  I failed to convince Canadians of the link that exists between economy and environment.  And we paid the price.

In 2011, I am sure Mr. Ignatieff talked about the economy in his speeches.  But the voters did not hear him, and neither did the Liberal candidates who were so busy campaigning in their ridings.  Most of our communications plan was about helping families: housing, daycare, home renovations, family caregivers, tuition fees, etc.  In the midst of global economic turmoil, we appeared to abandon the themes of employment and economic security to Stephen Harper’s Conservatives.  It seemed that we were trying too much to look like the NDP.  Unfortunately, the natural NDP voters chose the original over the copy and many Liberal supporters who were worried about the economy went over to the Conservatives.

Add another to the enemies list

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, November 7, 2011 at 8:30 AM - 0 Comments

On Friday, Michel Dorais, a member of the internal audit committee which oversees the Auditor General, resigned in protest. In Question Period, Mr. Dorais’ resignation was raised by Liberal MP Denis Coderre. Afterward, Tony Clement stood with a point of order.

Mr. Speaker, I rise on a point of order. During question period today there was some mention from the Liberal Party of a gentleman by the name of Michel Dorais. Further to this topic of discussion, I would like to inform the House that Michel Dorais donated in 2009 to former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. I certainly make no allegations of the partisan leanings of the individual; I simply find that the House should be informed of these facts. I table these documents.

The House: On weakness

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, October 3, 2011 at 1:30 PM - 41 Comments

A footnote on the meaning of Brad Trost.

Here is a question put to the government by the NDP’s Francoise Boivin last Thursday. Emphasis mine.

Mr. Speaker, women’s rights should not be open for debate, yet members of the government seem to think they are. The Supreme Court of Canada has clearly ruled that access to abortion is a fundamental right. Either the Prime Minister has lost control of his caucus or his government’s new policy is to outlaw abortion and turn back the clock on women’s rights. Which is it?

This attempt to define Brad Trost’s public stance as a reflection on the Prime Minister’s leadership is especially interesting given the party to which Ms. Boivin belongs. A year ago it was Jack Layton who was apparently failing to keep sufficient control of his caucus. Continue…

Who paid $10,000 for Elizabeth May’s cane?

By Mitchel Raphael - Monday, October 3, 2011 at 9:50 AM - 5 Comments

Photographs by Mitchel Raphael

The case of the two Louises

Green Leader Elizabeth May’s cane is now worth $10,000. The price tag was set at the Ritz-Carlton in Toronto at the annual gala put on by Egale, Canada’s gay advocacy group. During the fundraising portion of the night, comedian Elvira Kurt spontaneously shouted, “Let’s auction Elizabeth May’s cane,” which seemed to come as a surprise to May. She appeared hesitant, and slightly worried about how she would get around, but then she said she would do it—for $10,000. Within minutes, Toronto-Dominion Bank president Ed Clark announced he would purchase the cane. In the end, he let May keep it. Now, next to her car, it is the most valuable thing May owns.

That same night the 2011 Egale Canada Leadership Award went to former Supreme Court justice Louise Arbour. Egale noted that part of the reason she was selected was that she was one of the first United Nations high commissioners for human rights to speak openly about LGBT rights. Arbour was unable to attend and asked recently retired Supreme Court justice Louise Charron to accept the award on her behalf. Arbour joked that Charron should just pretend to be her. In her speech, Charron observed that this was not so far-fetched because throughout their careers she and Arbour have been mistaken for each other. She noted both are Franco-Canadians with the same first name and they both entered the justice system around the same time when women on the bench were still rare.

At the event, politicians mixed with business people, activists and burlesque dancers. The reception before the dinner featured a brass dancing pole. The gala was co-chaired by Tory Sen. Nancy Ruth. Other Conservatives in attendance were Sen. Salma Ataullahjan, Sen. Linda Frum and Toronto MP Bernard Trottier, the man who beat former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff in Etobicoke-Lakeshore. Interim leader Bob Rae was the only federal Liberal in attendance. When he was onstage with Elizabeth May and interim NDP leader Nycole Turmel, he put his arm around May and joked, “This is the first merger. Every threesome starts with a twosome.”

Continue…

A no-name race to replace Jack Layton

By Paul Wells - Friday, September 30, 2011 at 9:00 AM - 15 Comments

Jacques Boissinot/CP

These days, after question period, Thomas Mulcair gives a little nothing-has-changed statement, through teeth clenched into an approximation of a cheerful smile, before he comments to reporters on the issues of the day. What hasn’t changed is Mulcair’s indecision over whether he’ll run for the leadership of the New Democratic Party. He is widely assumed to be a candidate. He isn’t a candidate yet. He’ll get back to us.

So will Niki Ashton, Paul Dewar, Peter Julian, Robert Chisholm and maybe more. Decent people, maybe more than that. But not really names to set the heart pounding. “There’s no excitement about this race,” a veteran New Democrat told me. “People aren’t excited about this. But it makes sense that they wouldn’t be. Their guy just died.”

Indeed. Jack Layton is gone barely five weeks. The NDP leadership convention isn’t until March 23. There’s half a year between the party’s last leader and its next. The hesitation of potential candidates is natural. The breakthrough party of 2011 is heading into a world of uncertainty.

Continue…

The first day back, and two MPs’ ‘messy breakup’

By Mitchel Raphael - Monday, September 26, 2011 at 9:50 AM - 0 Comments

Photography by Mitchel Raphael

Jack Layton’s chair to go to his family

MPs arriving back on the Hill for the first day of Parliament were greeted by black coffins covered in cut-out, pastel-coloured butterflies on which were written the names of murdered and missing Aboriginal women. It was part of an awareness campaign coordinated by Walk4Justice. That morning, there were tributes for Jack Layton, and his green House of Commons chair was left empty for the day. NDP MP Peter Stoffer says his caucus is buying the chair Layton sat in for $950 and presenting to the late leader’s family. MPs wore orange ribbons in honour of Layton, though at question period it was mostly NDP, Liberal and Bloc parliamentarians wearing them. That included both interim Liberal leader Bob Rae and interim Bloc leader Louis Plamondon. On the Hill for the tribute was former NDP leader Alexa McDonough. The day before, she had helped with the orientation sessions for new MPs from all parties, covering issues ranging from office management to how to avoid temptations like the endless supply of booze at Hill functions. Question period started with interim NDP leader Nycole Turmel reading her questions from her papers, which lessened the impact. She was followed by NDP finance critic Peggy Nash, whose voice boomed out. “I’m used to speaking at rallies,” quipped Nash, who is seen as a strong potential NDP leader candidate.

MPs call it splits

Liberal MPs Mark Eyking and Rodger Cuzner were both elected in 2000 and until Parliament resumed on Monday they were also roommates. “It’s a messy breakup,” jokes Cuzner. “Eyking wants visitation rights for the clock radio.” In reality, two of Eyking’s sons have moved to the capital. One sells real estate and the other is at university. That means Eyking’s wife is in the capital more often too. Cuzner jokes he was “tripping over” Eykings at their place. So he moved out and is now living with his nephew.

Continue…

Bob Rae has 646 days to fix the Liberal party

By John Geddes - Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 9:50 AM - 4 Comments

Sean Kilpatrick/CP

There’s no how-to guide for the renovation job Bob Rae has taken on. As interim Liberal leader, Rae has nearly two years to try to rebuild the once-dominant federal party before his permanent replacement is chosen in a spring 2013 convention, and Rae is being called on to do much more than merely serve as a placeholder. Skeptics doubt even this skilled and battle-scarred veteran can turn around a party that sank steadily through four national campaigns to post its worst-ever third-place finish in the May 2 election. But Rae sees brute necessity as his ally. “It takes a crisis to make change happen,” he told Maclean’s. “Everything I’ve seen in the public and private sector tells me that people make changes when they have to, and right now we have to.”

With the House returning for its fall session this week, Rae is bound to be rated to a great degree on how much question period attention he draws. Widely acknowledged as one of the best orators in Parliament, he’s expected to more than hold his own. Yet he vows not to be “eaten up by the 24-7 news cycle.” Instead, he’s concentrating more on hauling the creaky Liberal machine into the current era. Among other challenges, that means emulating the organizational efficiency Prime Minister Stephen Harper insists on for the Tories and that the late Jack Layton ushered in for the New Democrats. Unlike its more centralized rivals, the Liberal party is still largely run as an unwieldy federation of provincial and territorial party associations. “We do need a more unified approach,” Rae says.

The chance to make that key reform will come next January at a party convention in Ottawa. Among those urging Liberals to change their ways, few know the problems better than Steven MacKinnon, a failed candidate from the spring election, who lost a Quebec riding to the NDP’s “Orange Crush.” As national director of the party from 2003 to 2006, MacKinnon helped usher in reforms that gave the national Liberal machine control over membership and fundraising. However, provincial and territorial wings kept their hold over field organization and policy development. “No other party is hobbled by that,” MacKinnon says. “A radical streamlining is required.” Perhaps surprisingly, key Liberal insiders don’t see any pressing need for an overhaul of their fundraising apparatus. Even though they lag far behind the Tories when it comes to pulling in donations, Liberal officials say the U.S.-designed computer system they introduced in 2009 is up to the job. Improving its performance requires patiently collecting the data on Liberal members and donors that the system is designed to manage. “We’re just scratching the surface of how effective it can be,” says one senior party official. In fact, they need a lot of scratch: to replace the public subsidy to parties, which the Harper government is phasing out over the next four years, the Liberals must more than double the $6.6 million they raised in contributions last year. Rae stresses that no matter how up-to-date the party’s technology for reaching out to its supporters, fundraising will only ramp up when backers are inspired by ideas. “Money follows passion,” he says.

Continue…

Neither small nor big, but local

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, September 20, 2011 at 8:50 AM - 3 Comments

Brian Brown considers the future of governance.

This “localist” trend is beginning to reshape American politics as well. Among its other flaws, the rational planning model was based on the mistaken notion that science could be substituted for the practical knowledge of ordinary citizens. But the social sciences have simply never come close to approaching the physical sciences in their explanatory or predictive power. They cannot grasp or manage some of the most basic variables in public policy, including the human need for ownership over our stake in society — that is, the needs for belonging and participation. As a 2009 report for the James Irvine Foundation puts it, people “want the opportunity to be more than passive audience members whose social activism is limited to writing a check.” And as Robert Putnam, author of Bowling Alone (2000), has documented, communities whose citizens feel a sense of local empowerment report (among other things) better local government, less crime, and faster economic growth. Many citizens are more inclined to participate even in the most basic act of civic life — voting — when a particular issue seems to directly affect them, and they are convinced they can affect it back.

This is not far from something Michael Ignatieff briefly tried to articulate as Liberal leader. More concretely, this idea would seem to be central to the open data movement.

This is the week that was

By Aaron Wherry - Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 9:20 PM - 2 Comments

Stephen Harper considered the lasting threat of terrorism and vowed to reinstate two anti-terrorism provisions. However “necessary” and “useful” those provisions, the government never felt it necessary to use them before they expired in 2007. Nycole Turmel addressed the Global Conference on World’s Religions after 9/11. Barack Obama wrote Canada a thank you note. The Prime Minister quibbled with Jean Chretien’s understanding of the relationship between terrorism and poverty, while himself asserting a connection. Bob Rae reflected and Michael Ignatieff considered the security apparatus that surrounds us and the decade that has shaped us.

Olivia Chow reflected. She decided to stay out of the NDP leadership race and pledged to remain neutral. Anne McGrath, Brian Topp (however few the precedents), Nathan Cullen and Robert Chisholm, kept thinking about getting in. David Miller and Pierre Ducasse counted themselves out. Continue…

When states fail

By Aaron Wherry - Saturday, September 10, 2011 at 12:53 PM - 10 Comments

Michael Ignatieff reflects on 9/11 and the decade that has followed.

We are in need of good politics, of democratic systems that are more than reality-TV shows driven by attack ads, and of democratic debate that allows the people to talk about what actually matters and then to elect politicians who will do what must be done.

We are not short of good ideas about what to do. We are not short of dedicated public servants. Most people, apart from those in the grip of ideological fantasy, know that we need competent sovereigns. But truth be told, a decade later, sovereigns are failing us still. And until they stop failing us, we will not be safe, and our prosperity will not be secure.

See previously: The apparatus

The apparatus

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, September 8, 2011 at 10:00 AM - 7 Comments

The New York Times magazine convenes a panel of contributors, including Michael Ignatieff, to discuss the ramifications of 9/11.

The most obvious consequence of 9/11 to me has been the creation of a new national security state, to rival the one created at the start of the Cold War. It is an archipelago beneath democratic scrutiny, and it has done liberal democracies real damage: rendition, torture, detention without trial, Guantánamo, military tribunals. Its justification is that it has prevented an attack on the homeland. But this is a strange kind of justification: the absence of apocalypse is held to justify a permanent state of emergency, extending indefinitely into the future…

The concern I have about the whole world opened up after 9/11 is this archipelago, not just of drones, but of communication intercepts, Internet monitoring, which preserves our security at the price of … what? We don’t even know. I’m relatively trusting, far from paranoid, but we do have a new institutional problem:  to subject special forces, cybercommand, the boys with the drones, to some form of democratic oversight and control, if we are to stay what we say we are.

How necessary?

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, September 7, 2011 at 1:38 PM - 5 Comments

In that interview with the CBC, Stephen Harper confirms that the government will, again, seek to reinstate two provisions that were part of the Anti-terrorism Act.

Mr. Harper says those provisions are “necessary” and “useful” and that they been applied “rarely,” but when these measures were debated and defeated in Parliament in 2007 it was said that they had never been employed. Indeed, that was a key part of the argument against them made by Michael Ignatieff, then the Liberal deputy leader.

The government has alleged that it is the opposition that is playing politics and is endangering national security by voting to sunset these clauses. However, it well knows that these clauses have not been used once in the entire time they have been on the statute books. The case that we are endangering public safety by our actions is fanciful…

Abridgments of civil liberties can be justified but only if public safety absolutely requires it and then only under strict conditions. If this is the test, the clauses should sunset because they have not proven absolutely necessary to the public safety. The government, in essence, has not proven its case, and, on these questions where our liberties are at stake, the government must prove the case of public necessity beyond a shadow of a doubt.

Something, something, merger

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, August 30, 2011 at 9:00 AM - 79 Comments

In the presence of reporters, Justin Trudeau says something about the possibility of a Liberal merger with the NDP that might be considered interesting.

“If we’re serious about getting this country on the right track and reflecting the will of the vast majority of Canadians who didn’t vote for Mr. Harper, I think we have to be open to looking at different possibilities,” he said. ”I’m certainly not going to take anything off the table but I’m certainly not convinced that a merger is the right thing or the way to go. I’m open to being convinced, but I’m not there.”

In a separate interview, he says the only people talking about a merger are reporters. The Globe, in turn, cites Denis Coderre to explain its interest.

Meanwhile, in a cryptic Facebook note, former Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff makes an observation from Jack Layton’s funeral that could apply to Liberals and New Democrats (or Liberals and Conservatives or Liberals, Conservatives and New Democrats or humanity in general). Continue…

Jack Layton 1950-2011

By Aaron Wherry - Monday, August 22, 2011 at 9:03 AM - 11 Comments

A statement issued this morning by the family of NDP leader Jack Layton.

We deeply regret to inform you that The Honourable Jack Layton, leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, passed away at 4:45 am today, Monday August 22. He passed away peacefully at his home surrounded by family and loved ones. Details of Mr. Layton’s funeral arrangements will be forthcoming.

9:11am. Bob Rae, Carolyn Bennett, Hedy Fry, Wayne Easter, Cathy McLeod, Keith Martin and Governor General David Johnston are among those paying their respects.

9:23am. John Geddes explored Jack Layton’s life and times for this Maclean’s cover story last June. We wrote about his new fight with cancer for this cover story earlier this month.

9:28am. Condolences from Rodger Cuzner, Lewis Cardinal, Colin Carrie, Mike Sullivan and John McCallum.

9:36am. NDP deputy leader Libby Davies talks to reporters in St. John’s.

“He was a great Canadian. He gave his life to this country. His commitment to social justice and equality and a better Canada in the world and at home and I think that’s how people saw him,” Davies told reporters. “They saw him as someone who deeply, deeply cared for people. And they saw that in the campaign and all his work. They saw the courage that he had. He faced cancer and he kept on working, doing his job, because he felt so strongly about what he believed in, so I think people think of him as a great Canadian and we think of him as a great leader, in a political sense but (also) in a personal sense.”

9:43am. More on the life of Jack Layton from the CBC, Toronto Star and Canadian Press.

He was a believer. He made that clear in the first sentences of “Speaking Out Louder:” ”Politics matters. Ideas matter. Democracy matters, because all of us need to be able to make a difference.”

9:54am. Mr. Layton’s Facebook page has become a makeshift memorial.

9:59am. Greg Fingas marks the NDP leader’s passing.

After spending a decade laying the foundation, Jack Layton has tragically died before getting to complete the house that so many said couldn’t be built. For now, there’s little to do but to offer condolences and grieve the loss of a great Canadian and friend. But hopefully Layton’s inspiration will only encourage us to finish what he started.

10:01am. A statement from the Prime Minister. Continue…

‘Something intellectuals fantasize about but rarely do’

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, August 12, 2011 at 11:25 AM - 9 Comments

Jordan Michael Smith reviews the rise and fall of Michael Ignatieff.

This is a tale with many morals. But one clear takeaway from Michael Ignatieff’s attempt to storm the citadel of power in Canada is that makeovers, particularly by intellectuals trying to transform themselves into politicians, have limits. Once Ignatieff established himself as a cosmopolitan free thinker and intellectual entrepreneur, it was difficult for him ever to posture as an ordinary Canadian pol. Most intellectuals looking to enter politics presumably would not hamstring themselves by living outside their native country for nearly three decades and then return only to aim so soon for the top job. And perhaps only an intellectual would be detached enough to believe such a track record would not be an impediment to leading a country. But if Ignatieff’s palpable erudition provided an occasional warning sign for his ambitions, as seen in those Hamlet-like meditations on power, it also gave him a sense that he was not subject to the rules that govern more mundane careers.

One quibble: I’m not sure how many would have described Stephane Dion as a “politician waiting to happen” before he joined the Liberal government of the day.

Taking into account the failure of the last two Liberal leaders and the success of Stephen Harper and Jack Layton—both of whom, mind you, can claim some “intellectual” credentials—there is probably something to be said for the career politician. Not necessarily that the public consciously prefers the “career politician,” but that it simply takes time and experience to both figure out how to be a political leader and win the public’s trust.

This is the week that was

By Aaron Wherry - Saturday, July 30, 2011 at 6:00 PM - 11 Comments

Jack Layton stepped away. Nycole Turmel stepped in. Anonymous New Democrats grumbled. Chris Selley watched Mr. Layton’s announcement. Colin Horgan and the Canadian Press wondered how much we needed to know. Andre Picard demanded to know more. Chris Selley disagreed.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs declared a stalemate in Libya. John Baird redecorated the Foreign Affairs department. The Privy Council Office silenced a salmon researcher. Elizabeth May worried about wi-fi. Jason Kenney championed his most-wanted list. And Stephen Harper pulled in record ratings.

Charles P. Pierce considered rhetoric and violence. Christopher Moore reviewed Lafontaine and Baldwin. Peter Devries counselled Jim Flaherty. Daryl Copeland worried about the nation’s infrastructure. Brian Dunning chided Elizabeth May. Michael Valpy considered Michael Ignatieff. And John Pepall, Fareed Zakaria and Bob Rae considered the meaning of the American debt crisis.

It was about Michael Ignatieff

By Aaron Wherry - Friday, July 29, 2011 at 3:45 PM - 43 Comments

I’m a bit late to finding this, but here is Michael Valpy on the last election and Michael Ignatieff.

And at the end of this election campaign, Erin MacLeod, a post-doctoral researcher from Montreal, drew this intriguing distinction between Mr. Ignatieff and Mr. Harper: “Ignatieff demands that you listen to him and think he’s right, while Harper just wanted people to put faith in the Conservative party that they would sort out what to do when it needed doing. It was as if Ignatieff had his book about Canada all ready, presumptuously written–and that’s what makes him paternalistic.”

Thus to summarize. For younger Canadians wanting vision, they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and saw no vision. For older Canadians wanting that mystical thing called “leadership,” they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and did not see leadership. For women wanting someone whom they could trust and not feel threatened by, they looked at Mr. Ignatieff and saw distrust and paternalism. 

The downside of Stornoway and a dig at Ignatieff

By Mitchel Raphael - Wednesday, July 20, 2011 at 8:35 AM - 16 Comments

Dusseault and his partner Boulet

MP’s girlfriend gets pinned

When he was elected on May 2, NDP MP Pierre-Luc Dusseault became the youngest MP in Canadian history. At the time he was just under 20. The Quebec MP’s plans for the summer include buying more suits. Before the election he owned only one. He bought a second suit for the campaign and after he won, he invested in four more. Dusseault is a fan of the Quebec department store Simons, and so will probably head there for his shopping. Dusseault has been in a relationship for 3½ years with Joanie Boulet, a second-year law student; they’ve been living together for two years. She wears his MP spouse pin, which gives her special access on Parliament Hill; because she’s so young, security guards sometimes do a double take.

XXL for Ambrose

Rona Ambrose, minister of public works and government services and minister for status of women, was recently in Afghanistan, where she held a town hall for female soldiers on the base in Kandahar. The event was packed—more Canadian troops than usual were on the base because they are all coming back to wrap up the mission. When Ambrose played hockey against some of the troops, she was given a jersey with her name on the back. It was so big, she says, it went down to her shins: “They only have one size and it’s always for guys.”

Continue…

Why Jack Layton needed a human shield

By Mitchel Raphael - Monday, July 11, 2011 at 9:50 AM - 0 Comments

Elizabeth May

Politicians with bad hips

At Toronto’s 31st annual Pride Parade it was all about party leaders in rickshaws. Green Leader Elizabeth May rode in one as she has in every parade since having a hip replaced in 2007. This time, NDP Leader Jack Layton, who still walks with a cane after hip surgery, was pulled in one covered in rainbow flags. His team was prepared for all the people who insist on spraying politicians with huge water guns—a nightmare for anyone with a BlackBerry. At one point Layton’s wife, MP Olivia Chow, took a water cannon shot in the back to protect him. Chow then opened a rainbow umbrella to deflect further H20 assaults from Layton’s left flank; a volunteer opened a huge orange umbrella to protect him on the right. May is waiting to have surgery on her other hip and says after that she will be able to walk in the Pride Parade. The Liberal MP presence was diminished this year. Interim leader Bob Rae and Carolyn Bennett were the only two elected Grit MPs. Rob Oliphant, who was defeated in the last election, was also in attendance. Rae’s wife, Arlene Perly Rae, demonstrated powerful arm strength as she tossed bead necklaces into the crowd. One shot accidentally hit a photographer and she quickly went over and apologized.

‘Screw the cottage’

There was much anger and campy commentary over Toronto Mayor Rob Ford’s snub of all Pride festivities. (Ford said he always goes to his cottage for Canada Day weekend and would not be attending Pride.) Former Toronto mayors were well represented. David Miller and Barbara Hall marched and Mel Lastman sent a letter that was read at the Metropolitan Community Church service before the parade began. Ford mockers were out in force. One man dressed as Ford held a sign saying “Screw the cottage.” Many wore Ford masks. “More people wore them on their ass than their face, which sums it up,” noted Fab magazine associate editor Drew Rowsome.

Continue…

The people and the press

By Aaron Wherry - Thursday, July 7, 2011 at 3:52 PM - 21 Comments

The Boston Globe compares what Barack Obama was asked about during yesterday’s Twitter town hall with what journalists asked during the last two weeks of White House press briefings.

A similar experiment here would likely produce similar results: comparing, for instance, what Michael Ignatieff was asked about during his various town halls with what the departed Liberal leader was asked about during scrums would probably find the same disconnect.

You could theorize all sorts of reasons to explain that disconnect, but it is perhaps worth wondering whether something should be done to shrink the gap.

From the American standpoint, Matthew Yglesias sees the “leading failure of the press”