"Recognize that the party is much worse off than you think." That's Public Eye Radio commentator Bob Russell's first recommendation for the federal Liberals, in an email that's being distributed through party circles. In the email, Mr. Russell, who worked on Paul Martin's first leadership campaign and was chief of staff to the provincial Liberals in Alberta, notes Canadians have lost confidence in the Liberals because "for four elections in a row (the party has) tried to win by demonizing the alternative rather than giving Canadians something to vote for." And, to make matters worse, the Grits have "not had an infusion of new blood in almost 40 years." So, to restore that confidence the Liberals must do more than change leaders - they must find a vision that will infect Canadians with a "sense of national purpose to be achieved through their federal government." The following is a complete copy of that email, which elaborates on those recommendations.
SEVEN RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FEDERAL LIBERALS
Recommendation # 1
Recognize that the party is much worse off than you think. Little solace can be taken from the last minute rebound that elected more Liberal MP's than anyone expected. At 30.2%, the Liberal party recorded its second lowest percentage of the popular vote since 1867 (28% in 1984 was the lowest). When one factors in voter turnout, 75.3% in 1984 versus 64.9% in the last election, the Liberal party just registered its lowest level of support - ever.
Recommendation # 2
Recognize that the reasons for this are of the party's own doing given the absence of any of the external conditions that produce a change of government: for example, an uncertain economy or anything approaching overwhelming confidence in the alternative.
Recommendation # 3
Recognize that such a fundamental loss of Canadians' confidence cannot be pinned on any event, particular person, or group of persons. The reasons run deep and are long standing. There are two which stand out.
First, for four elections in a row you tried to win by demonizing the alternative rather than giving Canadians something to vote for.
Second, the Liberal party has not had an infusion of new blood in almost 40 years. Mr. Turner returned to be leader in 1984 to then be replaced by the man he beat, Mr. Chrétien who in turn was replaced by the man he beat in 1990, Mr. Martin. Not only was each more a link to the past than a window on the future, but in each instance people interested in joining the party were forced to choose between the camp which believed they were owed the leadership and those that opposed them. Not an inviting prospect for anyone hoping to have their voice heard.
Recommendation # 4
Recognize that Liberals must reconnect with Canadians and that to do so, merely changing leaders will not suffice. The party itself much change.
Recommendation # 5
Recognize that in changing, your greatest advantage has to be the very thing that many commentators and particularly the competition criticize you for: your lack of any predefined ideology.
When at its best, the Liberal Party has been a microcosm of the great coalition that is and has always been Canada. When Canadians are invited to find a home within a rebuilding Liberal Party they have to know they won't be asked to leave their beliefs at the door. Instead, they will be given a full opportunity to make their case. Only then will the party discover a Canada full of people and ideas that are not being expressed politically - people and ideas that cannot fit within the other parties established beliefs but have been ignored by you as you focused exclusively on beating your rivals, internal and external.
Recommendation # 6
Recognize the need for a paradigm shift. The issues that matter to Canadians haven't changed, how they are framed has. For example:
* Increasingly fewer people talk about health care as being about defending Medicare. Medicare only deals with our "public supported health crisis intervention system". The proliferation of private market supported alternative health care practitioners, from nutritionists to naturopaths, chiropractors to massage therapists, tells us that rather than waiting to get sick, Canadians are increasingly focusing on health. The Liberal party should too. Given our wealth, Canadians have a right to expect the best health care in the world yet we don't have it by any World Health Organization measure. Excellence should be a principle of our health system equal in importance to those that already exist and Canadians are willing to find a way to achieve it through whatever means necessary. So should the Liberal party.
* Environmental integrity can be about something other than taking or doing less or even about Kyoto. The commercial promise of environmentalism is being recognized by private markets with the emergence of major environmental technology companies. If provided with the right support, these organizations could position Canada to become a world leader in something other than the production of oil and gas: the mitigation of the negative consequences of fossil fuel use. Liberals might consider the
potential of a national commitment premised on the belief that for every job lost due to environmental protection, two will be created.
* Partially evidenced by private sector responses to health care and environmental protection, the public is no longer convinced that government has the best answer to every problem. To resonate with Canadians, 'efficacy' will have to become part of the Liberal vocabulary. Government must be about doing things that matter and doing them well. If it matters to Canadians, do it well. If government can't, let someone or something else that can.
* Finally, there is less tolerance for federal-provincial relations as a zero sum game. Regional alienation is increasingly the language of a previous generation of politicians who still serve a construct that does not understand a transregional, transnational globalism inspired by free trade and reinforced by the next generation's mastery of new communication technologies. Given that all Canadian governments, federal and provincial, are supposed to be working for Canadians, the public increasingly believes a federal government can treat provinces like partners without the country becoming just the sum of its parts.
Recommendation # 7
Recognize that if you cannot infect Canadians with a sense of national purpose to be achieved through their federal government, this will all be for not. Prime Minister Harper and his party are the Canadian end game of the neo-conservatism that gained currency in western democracies in the late 1970's and that has as its raison d'etre the notion that government is intrinsically non-efficacious and should be severely limited. That he speaks only of accountability and never of performance betrays this as does the fact that neither he nor his party have articulated a role for the federal government.
A country of increasing wealth could easily be distracted from debates about national purpose by debates over the distribution or redistribution of its growing wealth. In a Canada where people have lost a sense of their national government having anything to do with national purpose, Mr. Harper's message, if not overly attractive, may nonetheless be found to be satisfactory.
Permanent link
Hi,
Slightly off topic, but what is the feeling out there for who is in the front running for the leadership? Ignateiff? In any case, what are his connections to Marissen et al? What does the future hold for the Marissen-Clark duo?
These two crooks have done enough damage to the Liberal party. If they have some common sense, they would back off, now that their leader is toast, otherwise I can see Liberal membership will not have kind words for them.
I can also tell you that Mark Marissen and rest of his clowns are as popular in the Liberal Party right now, as Saddam Hussein is Iraq.
Well, glad to hear Marissen isn't very popular now. I absolutely hated the way he ran LPCBC. They were so unwelcoming towards the grassroots and if people are bitching about Emerson and his "blind" ambitions, they should really look at Marissen et al. I hope he's done for good and I mean that with all that is in me.
But I thought Marissen was being hailed a hero for winning that extra Liberal seat (well, not there anymore) and the fact that they didn't drop in the popular vote like everywhere else in Canada?
Cheers
Hi, just reading over the seven previous suggestions and I realized why I dislike Marissen so much - because in joining the party, I was forced to take a side between Martinites or anti-Martinites. If you didn't fit with the Martinites, you didn't get anywhere or were even heard. He became the Big Brother of the Liberal Party. I think as long as he is there with his bunch of kool-aid drinking followers, LPCBC will be stale.
Getting back to Bob Russell's recommendations, I think the guy is way off. This election was lost because of the national campaign was a disaster, either through incompetance on the part of the strategists or through deliberate sabotage from insiders in the campaign. Biased reporting by the Asper family owned media didn't help either.Paul Martin's greatest weakness was that he was a poor judge of character when it came to selecting his team, much of which was selected on the recommendation of David Emerson. And,furthermore there's plenty of youth in the party. Certainly a lot more than in the NDP or Conservtives.
Is this guy known to be on the Liberals' right-wing? Because that is exactly where he wants to push them.
"Private market" instead of medicare. Environmentalism is not "about Kyoto," but -- wait for it -- "private markets." And last but not least "the federal government can treat provinces like partners." Why? Because of "globalism."
The NDP would be positively gleeful if this was the direction the Liberals went.
I would also note that these talking points are at least 25 years old. If you're looking for the next thing, this is not it.
Peter V - please explain - what crooked things did Marissen/Clarks do? Who hate them so much?
Celibate one, I think you missed the point.
1st) The next election the Liberals will run the devil you don't know. Harper will be the devil we know.
2nd) Youth in the party? Who are the star candidates for the leadership. Iggy? That the Liberals are having trouble getting leadership nominations is a huge drop. Who will inspire us?
3rd) The national campaign was a disaster. Yes you are right. But you guys are now in a deep hole. You will need more than a better run campaign to dig you out.
Simon, you may be right, but I think the question is you must look beyond the buzzwords of the last 16 years. If you sound the same as the Chretien/Martin era, you're going to smell the same to.
First off, Marissen/Clark are not "crooked" in the sense that they've committed any crimes. I think everyone on this site should be very careful about posting slanderous remarks. No one deserves that.
That, however, is the most charitable thing I will say about this duo. Mark M's control over the LPCBC over the past several years made a mockery of Paul Martin's claim to democratize Canada. My God, you basically had to apply with five references before you could get a membership form to join the Natural Governing Party.
It will be interesting to see if this band of Martinites tries to retain control of the party in B.C. in the hopes of coming back to power in the next election. Will the likes of Jamie Elmhirst, Bill Cunningham, Roy Bornman, Mike Witherley, Tony Roy, et. al. be as loyal now that they are in opposition for a spell? And what are they all doing for jobs now?
"Will the likes of Jamie Elmhirst, Bill Cunningham, Roy Bornman, Mike Witherley, Tony Roy, et. al. be as loyal now that they are in opposition for a spell? And what are they all doing for jobs now?"
I, for one, would be very interested in learning where this crowd will get their next set of jobs now that the MRO pork barrel has been nailed shut. If they are hired by conservative friendly private sector companies, it would cast a very suspicious light on their contribution to the dreadful 2006 campaign.
Hi think Marissen will definitely be kicking around, or at least trying to, because he's a lobbyist and without controlling the Party in BC or having his candidate win the leadership race, he's out of work.
Having said that, I have a feeling that as of now, Ignatieff is the frontrunner for the leadership race. If he wins, Marissen will be cooked. I think he'lll really want to clean things up, get rid of the arrogance, and lead the Party on new principles and ideas (one that I'm sure Marissen won't like).
Hopefully this works out. Having Marissen involved makes me not want to be.
Belinda - you mean the dreadful campaign that produced more seats than the Liberals got since 1968? And went against the tide for the Liberals for the first time since probably the Great Depression?
"'Will the likes of Jamie Elmhirst, Bill Cunningham, Roy Bornman, Mike Witherley, Tony Roy, et. al. be as loyal now that they are in opposition for a spell? And what are they all doing for jobs now?'
I, for one, would be very interested in learning where this crowd will get their next set of jobs now that the MRO pork barrel has been nailed shut. If they are hired by conservative friendly private sector companies, it would cast a very suspicious light on their contribution to the dreadful 2006 campaign."
Posted by Belinda Pescasolido on February 15, 2006 07:44 AM
Carry that thought forward a bit, Belinda. Suppose they are. What does that say about the outrage of so many Liberals, including Cunningham, over the Emerson manouevre?
More generally, the Liberal Party is out of power, out of patronage, and tens of millions in debt. That kind of situation is not going to attract new recruits of any age, but especially the kind of nakedly ambitious young people who have traditionally made up the youth wing of the Liberal Party.
That's something Celibate One either doesn't understand, or else deliberately overlooks. Yes, the Liberals could produce bigger numbers of sexy young students from the university ski clubs and all kinds of young entrepreneur types from immigrant and ethnic communities. They also has a lock on the gay activist organizations and businesses, especially those that had been liberally serviced thru Hedy Fry's office with substantial patronage doses, as Svend Robinson learned the hard way.
But for the most part these are people whose interest in the Liberal Party came to an abrupt end at 9 pm on election night. If Celibate One think's they'll eagerly volunteer to come back and help pay down the party's debt - the real reason why McKenna, Manley, Tobin and Rock are all avoiding the leadership - well, it's time to get the blinkers off and get used to the new reality.
At the Rockpile
Broken News
Creatures of Government
Fighting Words
From the Gallery
Letter from the Editor
Loose Lips
Off the Hill
Public Eye Radio
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
Copyright © 2004-2006 Public Eye Mediaworks. Reproductions of any portion of this Website are permitted only with the expressed permission of Public Eye Mediaworks. Public Eye is graciously hosted by TransitionalMedia. Content management services courtesy of Ian King. Layout and graphics courtesy of Art Department Design, Victoria, BC.
This site is powered by Movable Type.