|
|Monday January 26, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT TONY AND SHEILA
For many of us, the Hamilton mess is just
another fight within a political organization. For many citizens,
specifically for many Liberals, the events unfolding in Hamilton are a
disgrace that could have been avoided and, most importantly, must be
avoided. Sure itıs easy for us in the media, and for some backroom boys and
girls, to make quick sound bite judgments about principles, democracy and
respect for veteran politicians.
But I think we also have to understand that
it's not always about us, about leaders, about politicians, about headlines.
Many times it is about the people in the street, about hard working people
who build a political affiliation and make it their social life. Itıs about
volunteers who work weekends and weeknights who meet for the sole purpose of
trying to do something for the community where they live and itıs about
life-long friendships and, for some, professional careers that provide
financial support for their families.
Firing off judgments about "Tony" and
"Sheila" without putting a few hundred kilometers between their own backs
and the chairs of their offices on the Hill, is an insult to Liberals in
Hamilton going through hell for a reason they donıt understand and, of
course, they do not justify.
In order to understand the mood in Hamilton
these days, it takes only about one hour to do so. All you have to do is go
to a Tim Hortons, buy a coffee and ask a couple of questions to cashier or
to another customer. Then take a pit stop at a gas station and asking the
same questions. I did ask a lot of questions about people felt about what
was going on and I was always countered with another question: why?
Of course part of the answer must be found
in the left-overs of the civil war between Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin.
But this is the easy answer for some journalists glued to their chair in
their Ottawa offices, going on national television shouting judgments and
likely not even being able to point to Hamilton on a CAA map.
I do not agree with Sheila Copps when she
says that "the problem can be solved simply by having Tony moved to the
other riding." Looking at the demographics and contrary to what some
journalists say that "all Ontario ridings are safe for the Liberals," the
riding Copps and Valeri are fighting for is much safer than the other half
in Stoney Creek, as I wrote about last Monday in The Hill Times and as The
Globe and Mail subsequently followed up on last Wednesday. Furthermore, 50
per cent of Valeriıs former riding melts into the new one in Hamilton-East-Stoney
Creek. So Copps, like the late John Munro, doesnıt have the copyright over
the representation of Hamilton: there are, or there shouldnıt be dynasties
in politics. On the other end, nobody can be told when he or she has to quit
politics; and, when they decide, they deserve respect.
This begs another question: has Sheila
Copps being treated with respect? She doesnıt believe so.
She tells The Hill Times that when she was
on holiday in Mexico, in the same resort was one of the most important
Martinıs organizers in Quebec, Jacques Olivier. "He approached me asking
about what was happening in Hamilton and I told him that the problem could
be easily resolved if Tony Valeri would agree to move in the other half of
his former riding." Copps stressed that "we have five ridings and five
candidates." The former minister of Heritage says that he told her he was
going to talk to principal secretary to Paul Martin Francis Fox a try to
solve the matter. The day after Olivier "come back to me and apologized,
saying that he did not agree with it, as well as Fox, but 'the boys in
Ontario’ want you out of politics.ı"
According to Copps, Olivier and Fox
considered the whole matter "incredible, but the decision," Olivier told
Copps "is not up to Francis because Karl Littler and David Herle are in
charge of the campaign in Ontario are." Copps considers those statements
"unacceptable: I do not believe I deserve it. Iım not a criminal and I
believe to have always acted in the best interests of my party and my
country."
People close to Martin dispute these
motivations stressing that fights between incumbent MPs are taking place in
many other areas. "It only takes a look at Mississauga and we see Carolyn
Parrish, an MP supporting Paul Martin, being challenged in a situation
similar to the one in Hamilton, by another MP very close to former prime
minister Jean Chrétien, Stephen Mahoney. Nobody is intervening to defend
Parrish."
So as you can see, there are enough
arguments to make both cases. But this make sense only if you look at the
events without taking into consideration the stress imposed onto grassroots
Liberals who are tired of fighting with each other, especially on the eve of
a national election which will feature two new rejuvenated political
organizations, one the right and one the left, that potentially can reduce
the Liberal Party in size and ambitions. Because if the Liberals are going
to lose the next election, or be reduced to a minority government, the
internal dispute we are now witnessing within the party, is going to look
like a schoolyard fight.
By the way: is Sheila Copps going to be an
independent candidate or join the NDP, in case of defeat? She told The Hill
Times that "if the fight is going to be fair I will accept the verdict,
otherwise Iıll keep all the options open." Last question: is the fight, up
to now fair? "We have already some concerning report about memberships not
properly handed. If that is the case, the fight is not fair." |
