|
|Monday March 15, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
STOP THE INFIGHING
Some Liberal MPs are unhappy with the new logo of their party, and told
Prime Minister Paul Martin so during the last caucus meeting. “It would have
been nice to see the new logo before making it official,” one Liberal MP
apparently told the Prime Minister last Wednesday.
“I wish I would have
seen it too,” Martin reportedly replied.
Well, this little
exchange of thoughts may seem innocent enough, but it could be a symptom of
a disease capable of killing the government in the next election.
Well, this little exchange of thoughts may
seem innocent enough, but it could be a symptom of a disease capable of
killing the government in the next election.
If Paul Martin keeps it up, he will be making the same mistake that crushed
the aspirations of many politicians in the last 20 years if he goes to the
polls pretending that his government has nothing to do with the past.
"We have to understand that renewing is acceptable, disavowing is a
disaster," one Liberal MP told The Hill Times.
The popularity of a political leader is never enough to win an election,
especially if that popularity is incapable of boosting the popularity of the
political organization behind the leader.
“We have to
understand that renewing is acceptable, disavowing is a disaster,” one
Liberal MP told The Hill Times.
The popularity of a
political leader is never enough to win an election, especially if that
popularity is incapable of boosting the popularity of the political
organization behind the leader.
It happened to John
Turner in 1984 and Kim Campbell in 1993. It has also happened to a number of
provincial premiers, including Ernie Eves in Ontario last October.
Other reasons also
came into play for these disastrous losses; however, all pretended they had
nothing to do with their predecessors.They were punished by the electorate.
While the Liberals
unloaded dirt on Brian Mulroney from 1984 to 1993, the Conservatives decided
to cut him loose and didn’t lift a finger to defend his achievements or his
legacy.
But once the
Liberals came into power they approved Mulroney’s policies, like the hated
GST and the free trade agreement, to boost the economy and put fiscal order
in the government, and won three back to back elections.
Again last year in
Ontario Ernie Eves tried to disassociate himself from Mike Harris: he was
punished too.
Paul Martin is
making the same mistake. He and his handlers are trying to draw a line
between Martin and Jean Chrétien, between his government and the previous
one, when sitting in the front row seats of the Martin government are Deputy
Prime Minister Anne McLellan, Finance Minister Ralph Goodale, Health
Minister Pierre Pettigrew and obviously, Mr. Martin, himself, the person
credited to be the most powerful minister of the former administration. He
is trying to split hairs by telling voters that there’s a difference between
Anne McLellan, the former minister of Health, and Anne McLellan the Deputy
Prime Minister.
And all this comes
at the time when the faith of Canadian citizens in the political system is
so low that they don’t see the difference between Liberals, Conservatives
and, depending on the province you live in, the NDP.
I’m not saying that
they were bad ministers and they were supposed to be left out. In fact, I
believe they did a good job, like some of the others who actually have been
left out. I also believe that it was the right decision to ask for an
inquiry into the sponsorship program.
Where Martin is
making a huge mistake is when he allows the opposition to wrap the whole
scandal around the previous administration without making an effort to
defend that record. This is the fatal virus that affects Martin’s
administration: they do not feel the political pain when the opposition
trashes the previous administration because they don’t feel part of it. And,
I am tempted to believe, they even enjoy it. Many of the people around
Martin are more or less 40 years old. They have worked for Martin’s
leadership since the beginning, which is since 1988.
This means that
almost all their political lives they have been fighting against Liberals
and they don’t see Conservatives or NDPers as their “enemies,” but indeed
fellow Liberals. But out on the streets it’s a different story.
I was in Hamilton
two weeks ago and spent over 10 hours talking to the people. Liberals are
fed up and feel disconnected from the top. Most Libs said they were
convinced that the feud between Sheila Copps and Tony Valeri for Hamilton
East-Stoney Creek, Ont., could have been avoided and, before the nomination
meeting, most of them were blaming Martin’s group for the outcome. Now
they’re accusing Copps, after the pitiful behavior of the former deputy
minister in the aftermath of the messy but fair defeat, to be the culprit.
This might make some of the Martin handlers feel good, but not Liberal
voters. They are fed up seeing their party trashed in the House and in the
media day in and day out while their leaders are just turning the other way,
pretending they were not part of it. Of course, the new Martin
administration might feel that way, but the Liberal Party is their party,
and the previous government was their government; including the current
prime minister, the deputy prime minister, and the minister of finance who
were right in the middle of the action, and many of the new ministers were
there raising their hands every time they were asked to. If they did not
agree, why did they vote for it? Was it loyalty to the party? And isn’t it
now the same party they supported then?
They did it and, I
must say, for most of it, they should also be proud of their record. Of
course, it is necessary to punish the crooks, but they have to repatriate,
repossess what they have done. If they look at it, it’s not that bad.
Definitely the Liberals I met in Hamilton, on both sides, are ready for the
new Martin team to wake up. The only hope for Martin to win the next
election is to run a government and a campaign as a renewed Liberal, not a
Martinite.
|
