The NDP’s Golden Opportunity
So it would appear that the New Democratic Party of Canada (NDP) has been handed a golden opportunity in Canada’s latest election run-up drama with the Conservatives’ eleventh hour bid to avoid an election. Stephen Harper and the Conservatives are attempting to woo NDP support for their ways-and-means motion by floating potential changes to Canada’s employment insurance protocols that will extend the length of time that “long-tenured workers” are able to receive benefits.
I would offer that the NDP should do whatever they can to negotiate in good faith, come up with changes that both they and the Conservatives can accept, and provide their support to the motion, thereby avoiding a fall election in Canada.
As was noted by commenter Katherine in a previous post, the NDP has nothing to gain from an election and seem far more likely to lose seats than to pick any up. Further, given that news surrounding the NDP’s recent convention was dominated by the relatively banal idea about whether to change their name likely did little to boost the value of their stock amongst Canadians, nor, frankly, to present the Party as a viable governing option.
The opportunity is golden, though because the Liberals have already played their hand, saying that the proposal isn’t good enough, and have gone into election offensive mode by releasing the following advertisement:
While the Conservatives aren’t mentioned directly and Ignatieff doesn’t explicitly mention the possibility of an election, there is little left to imagination with the tag line, “We can do better,”
On the contrary, the NDP has yet to release any ads that I’ve seen, and so while they were seen as pushing hard for a coalition government last year, they have prudently left their opening move on Canada’s current drama unchecked thus far. I say prudently because Canadians in no uncertain terms do not want to head into yet another election. An election would do little to change the dynamics in Parliament and, much like the last affair, would largely be seen as a waste of time and millions of dollars with likely even lower turn out than our last round, which posted the lowest turnout in the history of the confederation.
Harper et al might not be burning to go back into election mode, but realistically they have little to lose given that it would be seen as initiated by Ignatieff and Liberal’s decision to pull support for government. And while the Liberals and Conservatives have been essentially neck-and-neck all summer long, Harper is likely more than happy to bet on Canadians’ frustration over yet another election and their weariness with minority governments swinging in his favour.
If the NDP can find a way of working with Conservatives to achieve reasonable reforms to employment insurance and stymie efforts to topple the government, they could easily be seen as the party that saved Canadians all that time and money — which works well with the image of fiscal responsibility they have been working to achieve. Additionally, the NDP could believably tout the moniker of being the party in Parliament who are really interested in avoiding partisan sniping and in making government work for Canadians.
Such a move might seem in direct contradiction to their past actions, but the time for toppling government has past. And the hallmark of an intelligent, capable, and viable political party is knowing when to tact to the changing winds of political fortune, particularly when such manuevering is, all things considered, the right thing to do.
Related posts...
Tip o’ the Hat
Gifts of Gab
- I should add that there a...
- Presumed innocence is for...
- As a diehard Dick fan, I ...
- I'd recommend checking ou...
- Dave,As someone who makes...
- Well, it puts me back in ...
- Mike,To me, as someone wh...
- What a freaking game.
- The Bowman essay is prett...
- *sigh* As much as it abso...
-
28 comments
I agree completely. The NDP could benefit greatly from some national acts that make them look serious. It reminds me of my grumpy uncles observation when the NDP took power in Nova Scotia.
“The Nova Scotians have gotten so sick of the Idiots (Liberals) and crooks (Tories) that they’re finally going to let the hippies have a go at it. ”
Though I’m a die hard Liberal (and what a winter it has been for me on that front) I’ve always harbored deep affection for the lovable granola munching NDP. Bless their hearts.
Mark
September 14th, 2009 at 1:50 pm
“I’ve always harbored deep affection for the lovable granola munching NDP”
You realize that’s not the entire party, right? The NDP has always been split between the working man and woman (Broadbent) and the anti-capitalists and granola-munchers (perhaps best embodied by the irrelevant and ineffectual Audrey McLaughlin.) I wouldn’t call Broadbent, Stanley Knowles, Tommy Douglas, Gary Doer, Pat Martin or Dave Barrett “granola”. Nor Elijah Harper, who, whatever his failings, had a profound impact on Canadian politics.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
I think the comment was mostly in jest, Mark. But you make a good point, I wouldn’t call most of the NDP insiders I know “hippies” or describe them as particularly “granola”. I think a goodly chunk of those members have already migrated to the Greens, though a certain contingent remains within the Party base. As far as unflattering broad strokes are concerned, I think Harper’s “socialists” epithet is a straighter arrow.
Mark
September 14th, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Harper seems particularly unrepresentative of Canadians these days.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 2:46 pm
Heh, your comment assumes that Harper was particularly representative of Canadians at some point. As a BC’er who moved to Calgary two years ago, let me just say that Harper isn’t even particularly representative of Calgarians or Albertans, as a whole, let alone Canadians.
But I guess the question is: is there a Canadian political leader that is particularly representative of Canadians these days. Which prompts the question about whether Canadians are a class of citizen that lend themselves to being represented by a particular party/leader anymore?
Jaybird
September 14th, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Gilles!
Anyway, I have been told that the current dynamic is one that Canadians prefer. The Conservatives don’t have a majority so they can’t undo anything… but the Liberals don’t have a majority so they can’t do anything. Harper’s fiscal intuitions, such as they are, work fairly well but he can’t do a darn thing with regards to the social sphere (took a lot of damage when he tried to get rid of the gay marriage laws)… which has resulted in, of all things, the Federalism that most “Tenthers” dream about. If you want to live in a pinko paradise, move to Montreal. Want to live with the hippies, there’s BC. If you want to live with American ex-pats, there’s always Alberta. The equilibrium that Harper’s government has achieved has the effect of there being a corner of Canada that will fit your inclinations… and, more importantly, a handful of corners that allow you to say “oh, I would never live *THERE*”.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Gilles is pretty remarkable as a political animal, but his appeal is pretty squarely rooted in Quebec for obvious reasons.
Anyway, I have been told that the current dynamic is one that Canadians prefer.
If you click the weariness with minority governments link, conveniently relinked for you here, I think you will see that recent polling indicates that this is not the case. I can see how the Parliamentary gridlock would appeal to your sensibilities, Jay, and, indeed, there are probably some Canadians who would share your sentiments, but on the whole, I think the majority are generally annoyed and dissatisfied with the current state of affairs.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 3:49 pm
The larger point; however, is that Harper is an accomplished politician and wonk, but someone who has generally failed to really connect with his fellow countrymen/women. In that regard, I think that some proportion of Canadians would express respect for the man’s talents, but few would identify with his as being representative of their “hearts and minds”. Hence Harper’s inability to garner a majority, which may have, at one point, been the game that Canadians were playing, but it’s grown old quickly.
North
September 14th, 2009 at 6:34 pm
I agree in general Scott. I think it’s really simple enough. The liberals are on the naughty stool until they detox and loose all the stupidity and lazy notions they grew like barnacles during their near 2 decades in power. Once the Libs are back in fighting trim they’ll reclaim the center as they always do and sent Harper huffing back out to stew in the west.
Judging by their performance so far I’d say they have a lot of detox left to do. In my darker moments I worry that they may have to jettison an entire political generation to work the hangover out.
Jaybird
September 14th, 2009 at 9:25 pm
Hey, I get all my news from my in-laws. The take I gave is the one that they send me. Well, the anarcho-socialist is arguing for… something else. I don’t really know what he wants, per se.
Though I’m a die hard Liberal (and what a winter it has been for me on that front)
You can’t be happy that Iggy is pushing for our fourth election in just over five years. I really and truly can’t wrap my head around the strategic calculus of that move. Seems destined to stunt what has been a pretty decent Liberal come back after what was a horrendous election.
Katherine
September 14th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
My guesses:
1. He’s impatient. He came back here about five years ago when there was an opening for Liberal leader, the Libs are the “natural governing party”, and yet he’s still not PM.
2. He wants an election before the economy starts to pick up and Harper takes credit for it; and before Harper gets a potential bump in the polls from a successful 2010 Olympics.
North
September 14th, 2009 at 6:29 pm
Katherine, exactly so and succinctly worded to boot. I’d tip my hat to you if I wore one.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 8:08 pm
Yeah, #2 definitely. I think that the boost he gave the Libs over the summer has him honestly believing that he can win an election. It’s bad analysis, but I don’t know that it equals the kind of hubris to which you point in #1. If Iggy thinks he can win an election, by some measure causing one to bring the Libs back in power is the right thing to do as leader. The problem, of course, is that in this case what’s right for the party isn’t consanent with what’s right for the country. A little disappointing, I guess, but not altogether surprising.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 8:17 pm
And of course, his bad analysis will probably wind up hurting the party over the long haul, as mentioned above. So i suppose there may be be a degree of hubris at play here.
On a side note, good on ya Canadian Leaugers for hosting the first real and, I would argue, sharp and intelligent debate on Cdn politics here at the League. My maple syrup coated heart is swelling with sticky pride.
Katherine
September 14th, 2009 at 11:16 pm
The funny (in a painful way) thing is that this is a better debate than I’ve found in the actual Canadian politics forum I’m part of, where nearly everyone is either a party-line partisan with only talking points to contribute, or simply apathetic with the view that ‘they’re all crooks anyway’. I wish there was a site on Canadian politics and policy like this one – there might actually be discussion on the ins and outs of EI reform rather than just the political calculus of it.
Scott H. Payne
September 15th, 2009 at 6:56 am
Lead on, MacDuff…
North
September 14th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
Levity aside, Mark I’ll address you here too: “You realize that’s not the entire party, right?” Scott has me dead to rights, I am well aware that I was putting up an unfair caricature of the NDP. Please rest assured I don’t bear the New Democrats any animus. I genuinely like them but they’re a bit to the left of me on most affairs and thus I’m an affectionate opponent rather than a reliable supporter. For what it’s worth my absentee ballott in the last provincial NS election was NDP (mainly for my Mum who’s a die hard NDP and a dear kind person). They’re good people, possible too good to govern. We will see.
Now Scott, you hit the nail on the head there. I am far from thrilled, there needs to be a lot more mucking out of the Liberal stables before they’re ready for prime time again. This is my own biased opinion: The Liberals are the natural governing party of Canada and frankly they did a hell of a good job after the Tories imploded in a puff of rainbow smoke under that old crook Mulrooney. As is inevitable with the party in power they got lazy and kind of dumb over the decade and some and a lot of dead wood and party sycophants have grown into the party apparatus. So Canadians have sent the party off to the wilderness to work out and loose the idiocy and generally get themselves back in shape. Unfortunately Canadians don’t seem to have settled on an interim party to run the show while the Libs are doing laps and learning how to campaign again. Thus our serial minority governments.
But again I’m just an Liberal loyalist myself so obviously this probably sounds horribly condescending to peeps to the left of me.
I agree with this, although I doubt it will do the NDP as much good as you think. The NDP were really in a bind until Harper’s improvements to the EI system. Now they actually have a reasonable justification for it – but people and the press in Canada treat politics cynically, and the fact that they’re down in the polls will definitely be emphasized by the media to explain their vote and to make them look like hypocrites.
Personally, I think the changes to the bill are good and the NDP ought to vote for them; that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t vote against future bills that don’t include things to help the the lower-middle and lower classes.
I’m surprised Harper did something that helps them so much, but he’s almost sure to lose seats if there is an election – even if people don’t want an election Ignatieff can’t do worse than Dion and consistently polls better – so he has an incentive.
Scott H. Payne
September 14th, 2009 at 8:12 pm
You’re probably right that it won’t act as a panacea for all that ails the NDP, but if they come through in the clutch it will at least be a step in the right direction. In that regard, it is still a golden opportunity and I for one will give the NDP credit for having the discipline and intelligence for acting on it.
Mark
September 14th, 2009 at 10:19 pm
You have a lot more faith in Layton than I do!
Scott H. Payne
September 15th, 2009 at 5:44 am
I did say “if”. Layton did pull something similarish off with with Martin in his dying days.
Hey Scott,
Great post. And kudos to you and all the commenters for having such a polite and reasoned discussion about this. It is a welcome change from many other sites. I tend not to agree with the NDP, but I do have an affinity for Layton, and I prefer a strong NDP voice in the political dialogue. It’s best for the country.
In case you’re interested, I referenced this post over at ThePolitic.com.
Cheers,
Jon
Scott H. Payne
September 15th, 2009 at 9:15 pm
Thanks, Johnathan. Looks like a good site. I’ll endeavour to check it out more regularly and would recommend a peak to our Cdn commenters who haven’t already stopped by (or our interested American readers).
As the resident American in Canada who watches Can. politics with an interesting if not totally understanding eye, let me throw out a real curveball–the Liberals win. Maybe not by much and maybe they go into minority party status, flipping with the Cons. In that case, I think the NDP still sits pretty, but we’ll see.
It would be two ‘ughs’ (for lack of a better term) against one another. 1. Not another election ‘ugh’ (to which Scott rightly points) but also 2. The personal ugh factor relative to Harper (also pointed to by Scott).
That ad with Ignatieff is the best thing the Liberals have done this decade, (which might not be saying much but there ’tis). It’s goofy as all political ads ultimately are, but it finally represents something forward looking. It has the greenery without being “Green” or the Carbon Tax debacle of Dion. It references global business (a major constituency Ignatieff could pull back in away from “Harperian Liberals”, my play on Reaganite Democrats) without necessarily sounding like Harper’s totally pro-corporate stance (hence the reference to help Canadians). And the white and red at the end of the ad, in horizontal bar, bespeaks the Maple Leaf, it’s a nice touch.
I’m of the school that elections are completely determined by party affiliation, party message/emotion, and sense of leadership/charisma (or lack thereof) of party leader. Conservatives win when the Liberals are fractured. Potentially Afghanistan still keeps the Left in this country divided (??) and would be enough to keep the Liberals from taking power. But I think domestic politics is dominating now and that is the wheelhouse of the Liberals. [Assuming they don't shoot themselves in the foot by proposing a carbon tax].
If the Libs get a half-decent speaking Ignatieff and a good message I don’t know, I could see some interesting things happening.
I think the real question given the economic state in places like Ontario (battleground province) is whether Iggy would have to go populist.
Scott H. Payne
September 15th, 2009 at 9:21 pm
If Iggy were to trigger an election this month he and the Libs would pay for it in seats, Harper ugh notwithstanding, there was a Globe and Mail article I’m too lazy to find and link with an iPhone that demonstrated a significant drop in Iggy’s support based on discontent over his saber rattling. If he held off for a bit, though, I think some interesting things could happen. And by a bit, I mean 1.5-2 years.
North
September 16th, 2009 at 7:27 am
Your analysis is good Chris but I believe you’re leaving out some factors. The big one is that the electorate is Election fatigued. They’re tired of election coverage, very tired of campaign adds and very very very tired of election expenses. The phenomena of “blame for the election” is completely absent in the US because of their set schedule of terms in office. But in Canada there is always a game of “who’s fault is it that we’re doing this again?” which the parties toss about. After as many recent elections as Canada has had, the hot potatoe of blame for the election is very hot indeed, radioactive in fact. If the Liberals are blamed for the election (and if there is one lets face it, they’ll get the blame) they will be punished harshly for it by the voters.
The other factor is that at least in my own circles of Canadian relatives and friends there is a perception that the Liberals as a party need to be out of power for a while more. As I’ve heard frequently in political conversations a lot of people, even Liberal stalwarts, think the party needs more time out of power to shake the crumbs and kooks out. “A lot of people need to be fired still.” Judging by the obtuseness the party has shown in the last year I’m worried they’re right.
When the people think that the Liberals have their house in order the party is going to sweep back in. But I don’t know if the perception is that they’re over the hangover from their previous long stint in power.