|
|Monday Sept 27, 2004 |
BACK |
NEXT
'Fort
mentality' suffocating Paul Martin's leadership
It took 10 years for Chrétien's leadership to finally
deteriorate, but it's taken Martin's 10 months
Once upon a time, along with
the dogma of the Holy Trinity for Catholics and the infallibility of
the Communist Party in the Soviet Union, there existed unchallenged
loyalty to the leader of Liberal Party of Canada.
Of the three,
however, only the Holy Trinity has been able to somehow withstand
the pressure of scrutiny.
Pierre Elliott Trudeau was
the last one to enjoy full loyalty from his Liberal subjects and,
after him, all Liberal leaders were challenged and, eventually,
crushed by pressure from internal Grit dissidents.
Enter Prime Minister Paul
Martin, circa 2004, and his minority government: his leadership is
no exception, but there is a twist involved.
While former leaders
attempted to stay alive by riding the proverbial Liberal horse,
Prime Minister Martin seems to have abandoned the party to his
destiny by putting all his bets, or, his eggs, into the success of
his government. He wants to build his legacy based on the future of
the federal-provincial health-care accord and on the fight against
patronage. He has put in place some biting initiatives to prevent
patronage appointments and to prevent contracts going to friendly
companies.
I believe he is sincere and
I hope he will succeed. I foresee, however, serious challenges.
The initiatives are so
far effective, that some of the Prime Minister's close friends have
been starting to feel the pinch. According to one top Ottawa source,
the Prime Minister's Office has vetoed contracts to Liberal-friendly
organizations, including Earnscliffe, a company that enjoyed many
government contracts during Jean Chrétien's reign as Prime Minister.
It appears that the new events have divided members of Prime
Minister Martin's elite coterie of advisers, or "The Board," into
two parts: those who ended up in the Langevin Block and the ones
calling the shots and the others who are in a vacuum and have no
grip on the party, including former MPs, and they are having some
difficulties getting back into the private sector.
It's not a state secret
that well-connected government relations firms earn some of their
bread and butter from government contracts or from the perception of
their closeness to power. But with the new policy in the PMO, it's
no longer business as usual.
So if Mr. Martin can't
count on some blind support from his MPs and his party, then his
only hope will be found in the opposition. It won't be impossible,
but it will be a very difficult challenge indeed, although, the
Prime Minister's challenges will become clearer once the House
returns.
In the meantime,
there's plenty of squabbling going on inside the Liberal Party.
Will Mr. Martin be able to escape the destiny that has destroyed
his predecessors? There are many answers to this simple, but crucial
question, but I believe it is too late for Paul Martin.
Since Pierre Trudeau the
new leader has never been able to count on the support of his
predecessor.
It happened to John Turner
who was saddled with the negative part of the Trudeau legacy and the
request of those bizarre patronage appointments.
Furthermore, Mr. Turner
could have done better to mend the divisions after the heated 1984
leadership convention with Jean Chrétien and his acolytes.
We know what happened
after, with the leadership review and the infamous letters from 24
MPs of his 40 member-caucus asking him to leave.
Then there was the 1990
contest between Chrétien and Martin. Aside from Martin and the
members of his inner circle who were able to get contracts and
appointments, Chrétien left out all the people, especially MPs, who
supported his rival in 1990. In 10 years, many of them had to endure
humiliation and being politically marginalized, mostly by Mr.
Chrétien's handlers. They toed the line until 1999, and then all
hell broke lose.
Now history repeats itself
in a much faster pace: the degree of deterioration that Mr. Chrétien
and his advisers finally reached in 10 years in the PMO, Martin's
people have been able to accomplish in about 10 months.
I know that many former
Chrétien supporters have tried hard to establish a bridge, without
luck. Many signals were sent to "the Board" before the election from
Liberals who were willing to work together. One Liberal strategist
told me, "After so many calls, they organized a meeting in Toronto.
Instead of telling us [Chrétien's people] what to do, they told us
how good they were, and how things were just fine. At the end of the
meeting, there were no assignments and no follow-up calls in the
following days." Here's what happened: the Liberals lost the
majority.
After the election there
were still no change in attitudes. Now the fort mentality is
suffocating Paul Martin's leadership.
I believe it's a mistake
to think that a leader can go through the House without the support
of his party, especially if you lead a minority government. History
shows that all leaders who did not have the support of their parties
behind them were eventually crushed at the polls. The 1997 and 2000
elections were an exception because Jean Chrétien had no serious
opposition. After 20 years of warfare in the Liberal Party, invoking
loyalty to the leader is just like looking for virginity in a
brothel. Before loyalty to the leader will be re-established, it's
important to re-establish the loyalty of the leader to the party
first. Paul Martin might have good programs and, definitely, good
intentions; however, he needs the party behind him. To do that, he
has to change the fort mentality adopted up until now. It might have
served him to become leader of the party and Prime Minister, but it
is no good to keep him in both positions. He has to get rid of this
attitude and he has to get rid of some of the people who have
imposed it on the party.
It might not save his
government, but it will help the Liberal Party in the next
elections. |
