|
Monday August 1st, 2005 |
BACK |
NEXT
VADEMECUM FOR A WOULD-BE LEADER
by Angelo Persichilli
(Versione italiana)
THE HILL TIMES
There’s no federal
Liberal leadership race on, but there’s still a lot of buzz floating around
this summer about who will succeed Prime Minister Paul Martin, especially if
he only wins another minority government in the next election.
So who are
the real serious contenders? And what are the elements that will greatly
influence the choice of a Liberal leader? Let's take a look.
First, the elements that will influence the election of a political leader.
Age:
After the reign of Jean Chrétien and Paul Martin, someone under 60 will be
greatly appreciated. (Importance from 1-10: 5)
Charisma:
This is the only element that can tip the scale, on its own, in favour of
one candidate despite weaknesses in other areas. Unfortunately, at the
present time, at least according to what’s out there, this very important
ingredient is in short supply and I don’t believe that is going to be a
factor. (Importance from 1-10: 10)
Character:
If charisma is important in order to connect with voters, character is
important to build the team and gain the trust of the people around the
candidate. Character tells people who you are. Of course, the lack of
character can be greatly minimized by the immediate advisers who will be
able to “screen” their candidate and project a stronger image. (Importance
from 1-10: 7)
Education:
It’s optional, like leather seats in a car. It’s important when you are
Prime Minister, but it won’t help you become Prime Minister. (Importance
from 1-10: 5)
Ethnicity:
Ethnicity is an important factor in politics. In the Liberal Party it’s
close to everything. The alternating process is not just a mechanism to
balance the power between Quebec and The Rest of Canada, but also a tool to
keep non Anglophones and non-Francophones close to the centre of power, but
not in the hot room, so to speak. (Importance from 1-10: 10)
Gender:
Even though all politicians talk about the need to open the door to women,
the only party that has really done something on this front, in terms of
leadership, is the NDP. The Liberal Party, aside for some provincial
“experiments,” is still largely an “all men’s club.” Check for yourself the
federal Liberal caucus, the government and even the PMO. (Importance from
1-10: 10)
Geography:
It is important to evaluate the “alternating process” factor here too. Even
though it doesn’t have the same importance as it has in the past, it’s still
very much alive in the Liberal Party. Just think Pearson, Trudeau, Turner,
Chrétien. The question is how to interpret this “process.” Is it an
unwritten rule to alternate the power between a Quebecer and another from
The Rest of the Canada, or between an Anglophone and a francophone? This is
an important question since the present leader is Paul Martin, an Anglophone
living in Quebec (See
ethnicity).
Geography also penalizes potential Liberal leaders who come from the West.
John Turner was from British Columbia. (Importance from 1-10: 6)
Ideas:
Leadership races are not about programs but about leaders. People are
looking for someone to trust. You can offer the moon, but if people don’t
trust you, your policy programs are irrelevant. Ideas and programs are
important when you’re in power and during the quest for power, it is
important, unfortunately, to give the impression that you have ideas.
(Importance from 1-10: 6)
Language:
The acknowledgement of the two official languages is very important but,
like name recognition, can be addressed in a relatively short period if the
candidate is serious about it. (Importance from 1-10: 7)
Money:
The ability to raise money is a key factor to becoming a leader of a
political organization. The new rules approved by the federal government in
this sector won’t reduce the flow of money to the political system, but only
the way money will be, and already, is raised. See Paul Martin for a good
example. (Importance from 1-10: 10)
Name recognition:
It is an important element and political operatives give name recognition
high marks. It might influence the outcome of a race either way, depending
on the reasons why your name is recognized. However, even though it is
important, it’s not going to be a big factor at the beginning of the race
because in a few months, a good campaign can change this. See the John Tory
campaign, for example. (Importance from 1-10: 5)
Organization:
This is very important and strictly connected to the money. In fact, it
depends 50 per cent on the ability of the candidate to raise money and 50
per cent on the ability to recruit intelligent and effective organizers.
(Importance from 1-10: 10).
Winnability:
At the beginning of the race, it is based on personal assumptions that can
be easily proved wrong during the campaign. People will give limited weight
to this factor because you have to land your support on a personal judgment,
not facts. Unfortunately, once a decision is made, it’s hard to go back and
pay for the consequences. I can think of two names to make this point: John
Turner and Kim Campbell. (Importance from 1-10: 5)
Meanwhile, there are a lot of names circulating, but this is my list. Keep
in mind that some names will be dropped, and others added in the future.
Maurizio Bevilacqua:
Considered
the rising star of Canadian politics a few years ago, he has pulled out from
the limelight since Paul Martin, his idol for 15 years, betrayed his
expectations. I know he is working behind the scenes, but he is keeping his
cards too close to his chest to estimate his present potential.
Scott Brison:
He is hated by the
Conservatives, but very much respected by Liberals, operatives and rank and
file Grit party members. His chances improve with time. The longer Mr.
Martin remains, the better Mr. Brison’s chances are. However, if there’s
another minority government, Mr. Martin will likely be pushed out and in
this case there won’t be enough time for Mr. Brison to establish himself.
Martin Cauchon:
His charisma is not
striking, but he is respected. He has a plan for an organization but many
people are waiting on the sidelines to see how he is going to position
himself. His chances are very much attached to his ability to convince
Canadians that this is the time for a Quebec leader and Paul Martin is an
Anglophone living in Quebec.
Ken Dryden:
He is considered one of
the potential candidates. He is intelligent and capable. If he is able to be
only 10 per cent convincing and inspiring during the daily 45-minute
Question Period spectacle like he was with the mask on his face as a goalie
in the NHL, then he’d be the frontrunner. He has the right stuff, but he
needs to sell what he’s got now.
Michael Ignatieff:
Nobody
doubts his intellect and his name raises a lot of expectations. Many are
mentioning his name, comparing him to Pierre Trudeau. The similarities,
aside for the academic background, are not many. Trudeau had a training
period on the Hill in elected office positions and a powerful trio behind
his quest: Pelletier, Marchand, Lalonde, the generals in the field, not in
the boardroom. Furthermore Ignatieff has spent most of his 25 years outside
of the “riding of Canada” losing touch with its reality: see war in Iraq.
Frank McKenna:
The former premier
of New Brunswick and now Canada’s ambassador to the U.S., is considered a
front-runner. This is mainly because there are, for now, no runner-ups. His
record is positive and he would be a good leader. However his skills are
untested in national waters. He usually doesn’t have his own organization,
but is very good in “borrowing” others. The only one available to him at the
present time is the one that elected Paul Martin. However, this organization
is only on paper, that is, when Mr. Martin will retire, the organization
will disappear and the designated heir will be left only with the negative
side. And Mr. Martin’s organization has created many enemies. The most
powerful organization in Ottawa is now called the “Former Martin’s
Supporters’ Club.” On the positive side, however, is the present activity of
Mr. McKenna who is working hard as ambassador, but also in his campaign. He
is meeting with many Liberal MPs telling them openly that he is going to be
a candidate for the leadership. He already has many supporters.
John Manley:
He had his moment
of glory during the Jean Chrétien era. He had power and the potential of
creating an organization. He also has the ability to attract media attention
at the right time, but he doesn’t know how to politically capitalize on what
he’s got. Having left politics for a few years also is not a bonus. He would
be a good Prime Minister, but he might have serious problems in becoming a
leader.
Bob Rae:
He is intellectually
respected, has a lot of experience in elected positions and is a very good
communicator. He will have behind him most of whatever is left of Jean
Chrétien’s organization and, of course, he will have no problem in raising
money. On the negative side, his name recognition is too attached to the NDP,
and to Ontario where it saw one of the worst economic times under his
leadership. The crisis was not of his making, but he grossly misread
solutions. He knows it now and, I believe, he would be a good leader. But
his name raises a lot of negative emotions that jeopardize his quest for
leadership in the Liberal Party and the government.
Belinda Stronach:
Many are
expressing doubts about her ability to lead the Liberal Party, especially
after her political stunt. Leaving the Conservative Party for the Liberals
would have been more easily accepted had Ms. Stronach decompressed and
paused to sit in the Independent benches for a spell. Nonetheless, if she
plays her cards properly, she might surprise many people, especially because
there is no invincible “white knight” anywhere in sight. Contrary to what
many believe, John F. Kennedy was not the brightest in his family and, even
if many people believe that charisma is something that you’re born with,
J.F.K.’s success was entirely artificially created. His father, Joe Kennedy
Sr., surrounded him with the best of the best in the U.S. in terms of
economists, communicators and organizers. The best lines attributed to John
Kennedy were created by others. The ability of Kennedy was to stick to
script. Two questions: who is the Joe Kennedy in Stronach’s case and will
she be able to stick to the script?
Joe Volpe:
He is a very good
organizer with a good financial support base. He doesn’t need to prove his
abilities in organizing, but has to become a team builder. Organizers can’t
organize their own leadership campaign, he needs others to do the job. He
needs to learn how to delegate responsibilities by improving relationships
with his “former competitors” in the organization. His fortunes and
misfortunes with the rank and files are closely attached to his ability to
handle his present portfolio, Immigration. |
