January 7, 2009

In the news... a medley

Lorne Gunter tells us this morning that Layton is the biggest loser of his coalition scheme.
...it was Layton who suffered most.

First, he had a chance to do in the Liberals and replace them as the default selection on the left had he gone along with the Tories' plan to end public funding to parties. Next to the Tories, the NDP has the best chance of replacing public handouts with private donations. Layton could have crippled the Liberals; instead, he tried to vault himself into cabinet by riding into power as the Liberals' shotgun.

With the revealing of the coalition, Layton was also exposed as a self-serving opportunist with no compunction about making a deal with separatists, even weeks before the Tories lit the match on the crisis. And with the coalition's demise, Layton is now even further from power than he was before.

He also reminds us of a sad political reality in Canada, when it comes to the "natural governing party"
...Ignatieff will be aided [in having his mistakes forgotten] by the infinite malleability of the Liberal conscience. Anything a Liberal does can be forgotten by all other Liberals (and the vast majority of the parliamentary press gallery), if shoving it down the memory hole is in the best interest of the Liberal party.

For instance, in Saturday's Toronto Star, senior Liberal strategist Tom Axworthy wrote that Ignatieff's selection gives the Liberals their best chance in a generation of "democratic renewal of the party," even while admitting that Ignatieff's selection marked the first time since the 19th century that the Liberal rank-and-file played no direct part in choosing the party boss.
Chantal Hébert writes that all parties are quietly preparing for a spring election.
...the prospect of a popular Conservative budget only acts as an accelerant on the election flames.

That's because the opposition suspects the Conservatives are preparing for war even as they overtly seek peace, by crafting a budget designed to become the stepping stone to a spring campaign. Having consolidated their advantage in public opinion with a well-received budget, they would be free to engineer their defeat on an issue of their own choosing later in the session.

[...] If there is a community of interest between the Conservatives, the NDP and the Bloc at this point, it is in bringing the Liberals to an election battle before the party has had time to regroup under a new leader.
Where is Ignatieff these days, wonder Lawrence Martin? This so-called "man of magnitude," as the columnist dubs him...
Michael Ignatieff has been completing a book over the holidays, the last chapter in a family saga. That's fine and well, but there are Liberals who wish he'd chosen another time - a better moment than the immediate aftermath of becoming party leader.

[...] By comparison to his predecessor, he is a man of magnitude. But where is the new dynamism? And where is he? At a volatile political juncture when the moment needs be seized, Iggy's off to a quiet and rather unremarkable beginning.

[...] There was no leadership race. That meant no high-profile campaign, no media-saturated convention, no hallmark speech. His overnight enthronement served the good purpose of quickly terminating the Dion stewardship. But coronations cannot be said to be democratically edifying. Rather than bolstering credibility, they can bleach it.

[...] Public opposition to the coalition idea has been allowed to cement. No concerted attempt by Mr. Ignatieff or his followers has been made to discredit misconceptions surrounding it. [...] The coalition question is one on which Mr. Ignatieff has to fish or cut bait, lest he be Dionized. He has to get himself out of the early limbo. It needs to be emphasized that he has only just begun his leadership journey. But it also needs to be emphasized that opening steps are steps remembered. His low profile speaks too much of a party inclined to stay the course, as opposed to being in a rush to change it.
While Hassan Arif, in the Telegraph Journal makes the point that Ignatieff and the Liberals' fate is out of their hands.

If the Liberals vote to support Harper's budget (or at the very least abstain) while the NDP votes against it, then Ignatieff's standing as leader could be severely damaged. For progressive-leaning Canadians, he will be seen as "collaborating with Harper" and "abdicating his role as Official opposition leader," both of which would gravely damage the Liberal Party among a crucial group of voters.

This would open the door for Jack Layton and the NDP to be the dominant voice of progressive Canadians.

The Coalition may not have caught on with the public at large, but it does enjoy a significant degree of popularity among progressive and left-leaning Canadians.

[...] The only way he could plausibly support the Conservative budget is if the NDP supports it too.

This does not seem likely unless Harper strikes a truly multi-partisan tone and offers substantial government intervention to help stimulate the economy.
This important and decisive federal budget is now 20 days away. Speculation is fine and dandy, but only the true power plays ahead will be of importance. Stay tuned...

2 comments:

Skinny Dipper said...

I'll disagree with private over public donations being better for the NDP. Voters who would like to support the NDP do not always have the disposible income to donate. Anohther point is that with the changing economic structures in the auto industry and forestry, the NDP cannot rely on donations from people who may not have lost their jobs. The vote subsidy gives people a chance to support the NDP or other parties by "donating with a vote" whether or not you agree with it. I'm guessing many BT bloggers do not.

Alberta Girl said...

"Voters who would like to support the NDP do not always have the disposible income to donate"

What????

Where does this thinking come from that somehow NDP supporters are poor and CPC supporters are rich? What a load of hoey.

Besides - if the $1.95 is what is at issue - you cannot tell me that every person who votes NDP could not afford to put a toonie in an envelope and send it in.

Pulleeze - don't insult our intelligence.