Last
week's changes in the hierarchy of the Liberal Party of Canada, have
been dramatic and deep, but it's still hard to predict if the
changes will solve Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff's problems.
There
is no doubt that something dramatic had to be done to shake up the
party and Peter Donolo is a very experienced communicator.
Nonetheless, last week's changes at the top of the Liberal Party
have the same dangerous traits that have characterized previous
failures.
Liberals
wrongly believe that what prevents them from returning to power is
their leader's lack of communication skills. They also believe that
loyalty is a disposable ingredient for power-hungry people.
Let
me elaborate.
There
is no doubt that Donolo is one of the best communications expert
presently available to them. Still, there are some considerations to
make.
The
first is about his record during Chrétien's
government. He was the director of communications from 1993 to 1999,
at a time when there was little to communicate because the economy
was booming and the opposition was nowhere to be seen. When
Chrétien
did need a good communications expert he was in Milan as Canadian
consul general.
The
team Donolo had around at that time was also impressive: Jean
Pelletier, Eddy Goldenberg and, don't forget, Chrétien,
the great communicator. This is not about Donolo's ability or
talent, which nobody disputes, but about the expectations his fellow
Liberals put on him to return them to power. That's exactly what
they were expecting from Paul Martin, Stéphane
Dion, Michael Ignatieff and others only to dump them when they
failed in their Herculean task.
If
they believe that Donolo alone can take the magic wand from his
pocket and bring Ignatieff to 24 Sussex Dr., they're in for another
big disappointment.
The
other important point is the lack of loyalty that has characterized
the activities of great and not-so-great leaders: the loyalty of the
people around them.
There
is no doubt that something had to be done and the group in the
leader's office had to be changed.
Ignatieff
is a classy individual and a very good friend of Ian Davey's and I'm
sure that he would never treat a friend and, for that matter, any
other person like his former chief of staff was treated. So the
question is: who is in charge in the Liberal Party?
Last
Monday, Davey was in Centre Block having lunch with some Liberal MPs
trying to find solutions together to the party's problems. At that
time, he had not been told he was fired. He heard about his firing
from some journalists.
Even
people in Toronto heard the news ahead of him that night.
Is
that the way a leader deals with his friends?
Some
said that unfortunately the memo was leaked to the media before he
was informed. This excuse makes things worse. Davey deserved an
honourable way out and his departure should have been negotiated
directly between himself and his friend and leader. If the new era
starts with a leak on such an important issue, it means that the new
regime goofed even before it started.
This
incident comes after something similar happened last month with
Liberal MP Denis Coderre, Ignatieff's then-Quebec lieutenant. He was
publicly embarrassed by his leader when one of his decisions,
seemingly pre-approved by Ottawa, was overruled. Originally
Ignatieff supported Coderre's decision against the candidacy of
Martin Cauchon in Outremont. But then he buckled under pressure.
In
politics, one of the most important elements of success is loyalty.
This doesn't mean you have to keep certain people in certain
positions who don't have the necessary expertise only because you're
friends. But when a decision is made to remove the friend it has to
be done with class and respect.
Davey
might have been in the wrong position, but he is a very intelligent,
professional and decent individual and deserved much more respect
than accorded to him.
Donolo knows
that he could easily be treated like Coderre, former chief of staff
Paul Zed and now Davey, if times get tough. But, I also know that
Donolo is a navigated politician and he knows that in case of
difficulties he doesn't need Ignatieff's loyalty. He probably knows
that loyalty, in this case, resides in different hands.
So
I repeat my question: who is really in charge in the Liberal
Party?
