Perusing the social media over the weekend, it was remarkable how many people are providing input into what the Liberal party must engage in to renew itself. It was comforting in its own way, though it left the lingering impression on me that my own meagre posts are likely inconsequential.
A most helpful comment came in through Facebook from Jon, a London, Ontario journalist, and it was profound enough to sit me up to take a look at it once again. Here’s what he said:
The Liberals in power embraced fiscal conservatism but so too have the Conservatives. As to social issues, it’s long been clear the current PM simply has no desire to wave a far-right flag. There is no great void in the political centre and by pursuing it Ignatieff conceded the Left to the NDP. Now appears some of those who want to lead the Liberals are charging down the same path. A better path might be to talk about issues all national parties have largely avoided. May I suggest health care reform.”
Think about what this would mean for the renewal of the Liberal party if we stopped angling for political position but instead concentrated our efforts on how best to apply ourselves to this country’s greatest challenges. Terry Fallis, in his fictional treatise on Canadian politics, The Best Laid Plans, talks revealingly of the bookending of policy between the CPOs (Cynical Policy Operators) and the IPWs (Idealist Policy Wonks). I’ve witnessed the ongoing tensions between these two groups in every party in the House and it’s one of the most frustrating realities in Canadian politics – to see it from the inside can be deeply disillusioning. What it all means though is that politics becomes an incrementalist’s game – move a bit to the right, left, or attempt to capture the middle. But never go too far lest it provides your opponent an opening or alienates you from the precious middle.
But what if Jon is right? Perhaps part of the reason why Canadians themselves are largely centrist is because our political parties recognize it as the motherlode and, petrified of losing the middle ground, they present voters precious little imagination in their policies. With the Conservatives refusing the bait of veering too far to the right and the NDP pressing to the middle in order to capture the vote, how much ground does the Liberal party have to really stake out a centrist progressive vision? What if we, instead, applied ourselves to the greatest challenges facing our nation? What if we spent the next four years driving for solutions from both the bottom-up and vice-versa? Some examples.
Healthcare – this is Jon’s suggestion and it’s a pertinent one, given that a new healthcare arrangement must be worked out between the feds and the provinces in the next two years. All parties are reticent to open this file because the implications are so ominous, and so they all stumble promising something like a 6% increase in healthcare spending over the next few years. That merely buys us a bit of time but doesn’t get us any change.
Environment – climate change and its effects are changing the future of this country whether we realize it or not. What if Liberals presented a dynamic new plan that involved all players and set those clear targets that will be required if we are to treat the problem seriously?
Aboriginal renaissance – Paul Martin’s Kelowna Accord was remarkable for its breadth and buy-in from all provinces, territories and aboriginal communities. This has been the most prickly problem in Canadian history and deserves generational change.
Cities – distant cousins in our federal framework, our local communities are where the real action is at and yet still they beg for recognition. Time to make them full partners.
Internationalism – With only 50 or so peacekeepers out of 100,000 in the UN, we have faded to obscurity. The world has changed since Lester Pearson’s time; what do we have to do to capture global imagination again?
Immigration – forget multiculturalism, we are a multi-culture. Successive governments tinker when we should be linking our ethnic communities with the remarkable economic and cultural opportunities available for Canadian smaller businesses overseas. Use the expertise of our newer Canadians instead of viewing them as a drain on the system.
Good and Services – why do goods always cost more here than in the United States? Why do we permit trade restrictions with our American friends to drive us to disadvantage in comparison? For that matter, why can’t we solve the problem of trade restrictions within our own provinces.
If we truly believe in the ability of liberalism to bring imagination to any problem, why let ourselves be limited to acquiring an ever-shrinking piece of the centrist pie? Let’s strike out in bold new directions, fully confronting the deepest challenges facing us and show how we as a party refuse to play the incrementalist game anymore and will truly lead. Let the CPOs and the IPWs go at it; they always will. Let’s throw the bathwater out with the baby and just outflank them, driving solutions from the ground-up and with the help of Canadian experts in these various fields. Policy is vital but not when we politicize it so much that it limits us just in the telling of it. Let’s just forget letting professional party people define us because, as Jon rightly concluded, “Perhaps the party’s focus should be less about revitalizing the party and more about the revitalizing the country.”
Might I add Prohibition to your list? Deal with that and many other issues (crime) can be dealt with too. Government honesty and transparency are other areas in great need of fixing.
While I love the idea of a vision for the Party, I sincerely believe that we need to stop this visioning led by freshly minted policy wonks and rebuild the ability to fight 308 campaigns. When the President of the Party and the ED do not have the time to speak to each candidate because they are too busy looking though their bomb sights at 30,000 feet looking for the one “gotcha” target, we cannot effectively run a national campaign. Stop the inane conference calling where 200 people listen to someone pontificate about strategy when that person hasn’t yet banged on a door or put up a sign in a local campaign.
And of greater importance, stop listening to the talking heads who purport to speak for Liberals and listen to the 308 whose names were on the ballot.
Running 309 campaigns is unproductive, inefficient and plain dumb. We have now wasted two of the best leaders we have had in a generation by blindly following the ‘brilliance’ of the inner circle. Dante would be proud.
What an excellent comment sir. Very good work. Thank you for sharing your thoughts.
Those are excellent ideas, and there are a couple of other that I would add to the list:
Pensions – the lifespan of the average company is shorter than the lifespan of the average career. Neither having a strong union nor telling people to sit down with their accountant and broker and invest more is a solution to the fact that a lot of old people won’t have enough to live on. Time is running out.
Quebec and the Constitution – it’s a difficult problem but we can’t continue ignoring the fact that Quebecers remain left out of the Constitution. Do we have the courage to be nation builders?
Robin Hood had it right! Steal from the rich and give to the poor!
Raise the HST and increase the HST rebates (paid weekly or monthly by direct deposit).
Charge HST on everything, eg food.
Introduce a Guaranteed Annual Income.
Put limits on the capital gain on Principle Residences.
Estate taxes, inheritance taxes.
Convince the poor that higher taxes will not affect them.
Subsidized housing.
Too many sacred cows out there.
So you’re saying the party should offer substance, not ideology? Now wouldn’t that be a refreshing change!
The fear, of course, is that once the Liberals start doing that, the other parties will jump in. That will be great for us voters, but not necessarily for the party.
Yet isn’t it supposed to be about us voters, and not about the parties anyway? Should parties do things for their own benefit, or for the voters’ (long-term) benefit?
A successful political party must have a successful leader to enunciate it’s political positions. If the leader has no credibility, the party flounders and fails. Surely Liberals must recognize that simple relationship. Come up with a viable leader and Canadians will listen to you. No leader, no deal, plain and simple.
Wish it were that easy Jim
Sorry for my strident sounding comments, but what’s the alternative?
Do you think defining Liberal principles and developing policies by the party in general and then seeking out a leader who fits within those parameter is the way to go; or should you first find a leader who will provide the guiding principles for the party?
Perhaps Bob Rae is the leader to guide the Liberals towards rebuilding and rehabilitation. We shall see.
I would presume the grassroots of the Liberal party would saw that it has been placing so much power for decision-making in leaders’ hands that has created our internal wars as a party. That might or might not be true, but it definitely seems as though, with Bob Rae as interim leader for the next couple of years, we can now concentrate on our ridings and communities and permit them, finally, some say as to what it is and what they’re looking for. That’s a legitimate process. Bob Rae is a terrific politician and can help to shape such policies coming from the ground-up. But he can’t toss them out as Liberal leaders have sometimes done in the past. It will take both realities – leader and grassroots – working their way slowly towards one another and inevitably forging a relationship that would permit a leader to carry a policy forward, with her/his unique skills, without leaving the ridings in the dust.
Glen, what do you think of this Ottawa Sun column by Liberal columnist Warren Kinsella?
http://www.ottawasun.com/2011/05/28/grit-party-president-must-go
He seems to be advocating the tearing down of the current Liberal foundations and then rebuilding.