Ignatieff’s presser: It’s a good start, but get out of Ottawa!

I wanted to watch the unfiltered video of Michael Ignatieff’s Friday press conference before commenting on it (alas, the GG didn’t prorogue my workplace so I was on the job at the time) and I got a chance to do that Saturday. And now there are also print and radio ads launched today by the Liberal Party as well, I’ll save that for the next post.

First, to the press conference. I saw some good messaging there from Ignatieff. He led with the prorogation, tied it to Stephen Harper’s demonstrated disdain for parliament and democracy, and said that the Liberal caucus is coming back to work on January 25th, when parliament was supposed to be returning. Canadians want them to be working through to the Olympics, and that’s what they’ll be doing, he said. That’s the right message.

And emphasizing that it’s not going to be a stunt, he said they would be holding pre-budget consultations and public policy forums, focusing on issues such as jobs and the economy (particularly happy to see him mention youth unemployment), governance (tying the prorogue into a larger pattern by the Conservatives), and the environment.

I like all that, but with one major caveat: it can’t be just about attacking Harper inaction on these issues, and mouthing general platitudes about how important these issues are. These forums need to include real ideas for action, meat on the bones about what we could or would do on some of these issues. Specifics, not “the children are our future” generalizations are what’s needed. And be ready to acknowledge we haven’t done all that we could have in the past, but that we must do better in the future.

So I like all that, but I do have one significant concern: my impression based on Ignatieff’s presser is that the Liberal caucus will be spending the entire period up until the Olympics “working” in Ottawa. As I wrote earlier, that’s a mistake, and I hope they revisit that.

Spend a few days in Ottawa, maybe a week, with the agenda that you’ve outlined. But after a few days you’ll have gotten the bang for your buck. The public and the media will lose interest after a little while. If you want to seize this opportunity you have got to get out of Ottawa.

There may be more genuine discord brewing around the prorogation than I’d originally thought there would be. The anti-prorogation Facebook group now has over 138,000 members. And in an amusing cross-society illustration, last night Ron MacLean was making prorogue jokes on Hockey Night in Canada while 75 university professors released a letter condemning Harper’s prorogation.

That anger may be out there, but we will not tap into it with the entire Liberal caucus spending the next few weeks on Parliament Hill. Send out the caucus in groups, each with a headliner (Bob Rae, Gerard Kennedy, Martha Hall-Findlay, Ken Dryden) to hold some of these public policy forums on the road. Get out of Ottawa and meet with Canadians, particularly in swing and unheld ridings.

The longer they spend in Ottawa, the more momentum is lost. And maintaining momentum is going to be key; Harper is banking on people losing interest by the Olympics. Plus the longer they're in Ottawa, the national media will begin to turn on them, for virtue of being the only show in town to lob questions at. (I find David Akin’s explanation of how he decides to use his very limited opportunities to question Stephen Harper an interesting parallel to this.)

We saw a taste of that with Julie Van Dusen’s ridiculous questioning/taunting of Ignatieff on Friday: “What you’re saying is that he can push you around and get away with it! There’s no threat of an election! You’re not saying like you did in September that your time is up! You’re just saying you’re going to have a big gab-fest here and come back when you feel like it!”

This was after multiple questions and answers in both languages, I’d note, on the certainly relevant question of would he force an election over this and if not, why. So the issue was covered-off thoroughly. Van Dusen seemed to have her own narrative to fill though, annoyed the story wouldn't fit it, and it was a vivid demonstration of the dangers of the parliamentary bubble: everything there is about the horse race, treat and bluster, whose is bigger. And it demonstrates just how out of touch the bubble is with the rest of the country.

Thankfully, Ignatieff handled it with more grace that I or Josh Lyman would have, but he was clearly, to use his own word, “astonished.” Canadians want us working, he said. We can’t threaten elections every time Harper acts like a dufus, even if it does make for better television.

Anyway, I say again, do a few days to a week in Ottawa and then get everyone out on the road, in groups, to tour and meet with Canadians. Stay in Ottawa and the national media will get bored and move on to other things. Going to talk with every local media outlet that will have you will keep the issue alive, tie it into the larger narrative, and connect it to real issues that matter to Canadians more than threat and bluster reporting.

Get out of Ottawa!

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Look beyond the polls

Two polls out this morning that will no doubt give some comfort to the anti-perogie forces, but both should be taken with a grain of salt and should only be considered a conformation that while there is opportunity around the Conservative decision to shut down parliament and take a two-month vacation, converting on that opportunity is both challenging and uncertain.

The first poll is from Angus Reid and the Toronto Star and surveyed specifically on the decision to prorogue parliament, and it found a majority (53 per cent) opposed the decision, either strongly or moderately. Just 19 per cent agreed with the decision, while 28 per cent were unsure. Support was highest in Manitoba/Saskatchewan at 31 per cent, and opposition was highest in Atlantic Canada at 61 per cent and Ontario at 59 per cent. Along party lines, naturally opposition supporters were opposed, but so were 35 per cent of Conservative supporters (46 per cent of them agreed).

Asked if they believed the government that the decision to prorogue was just about gearing-up for the next stage of the economic plan, or the opposition that it was about hiding from the Afghan detainee abuse scandal, 23 per cent believed the government, 38 per cent sided with the opposition, and 39 per cent didn’t know who to believe. The party line numbers are predictable.

So, Angus Reid tells us Canadians disagree with the decision to prorogue (and that most aren't really paying that close attention either). That’s all well and good, but in isolation it means little. The real question is, what impact, if any, will this disagreement have on their voting intention? Just because I disagree with something doesn’t mean it will change my vote.

That’s where the latest poll from Ekos and the CBC comes in to play. Here’s the latest Ekos numbers on voter intention:

Conservatives: 33.1 (-2.8)
Liberals: 27.8 (+1.1)
NDP: 16.0 (-1.0)
Green: 13.4 (+2.2)
Bloc Quebecois*: 9.8 (+0.6)
Undecided: 14.7

So, an outside the margin decline for the Conservatives, a small within the margin gain for the Liberals, a slight drop for the NDP and an unusual increase for the Greens. What does it all mean? Who knows for sure, but here’s my take:

Since not much else has been happening lately, it’s safe to say based on the Conservative dip that the prorogue story is putting a crimp in their numbers. And it’s also safe to say the opposition parties have yet to benefit much at all from the public disapproval of the Conservative decision.

These numbers largely echo what I’ve been saying since this began: even if people are annoyed at the Conservatives, the Liberals haven’t done the necessary spadework to be able to convert that dissatisfaction into support. We’re still languishing below 30 per cent, and only got a small bump. That’s because while there is anger with the Conservatives, they’re not enamored enough with the alternatives to make the jump. If the Liberals were a more credible alternative, you’d see a larger Conservative decline and a higher Liberal increase. But just because someone dislikes one choice doesn't mean they automatically like another.

Instead, you see a relatively small but still significant Conservative decrease, as those that are really dissatisfied park their support temporarily with the Greens, a traditional holding-basin for the temporarily annoyed, or with the undecided.

If the opposition parties, in particular the Liberals, don’t do anything to begin converting those dissatisfied former Conservative supporters into Liberal supporters by giving them a reason not just to be mad at the Conservatives but to support the Liberals, then over the next few weeks and months that support will slowly trickle back into the Conservative support column, and we’ll be back where we started.

That has been the clear pattern for several years now. They know what they need to do to break it. If they will or not remains to be seen.

UPDATE: For more on the polls see Scott and Scott, as well as Impolitical.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Back to work: How to not make it a stunt

I’m cautiously optimistic reading the news that the Liberal caucus will be “reporting for work” on Parliament Hill on January 25th, the day parliament was scheduled to resume before Stephen Harper decided giving politicians a two-month vacation was more important than passing anti-crime and (pro) consumer safety legislation.

This is a good move in theory, but they’ve got to tread very carefully to avoid making this seem like a stunt. So no banging on locked doors, as the article said, and no rhetorically asking questions you would ask in question period, or sit-ins/mock parliaments in an empty chamber. That's a recipe for mockery.

I’ve argued since the start of this perogy business that, even if it was an issue that could turn the public from the Conservatives, they’re not ready to turn to the Liberals yet – not liking the other guys is not a reason to support us. So if we just bring the caucus back to Ottawa and spend the whole time complaining about Harper’s two-month winter vacation, that’s a one-day story that ultimately changes little. In fact, the Conservatives would love if it if we spend the next two months doing nothing but kvetch about the shuttering of parliament.

There is an opening here. A great deal of media attention (thanks to the vacuum created with the Harper vacation) and an increased level of public attention is now being paid to the issue. Certainly the media will be out in force for the January 25th “return to work.” The question is, what do we do with that attention? Our message needs to be about more than the prorogument.

It’s perennially hard to get attention as an opposition party. Well, here’s the chance. Seize it. Use it to say we’re here because we believe our parliamentarians should keep working for Canadians, even if Stephen Harper doesn’t, because there are many important issues Canadians want us to be working on.

And then talk about those issues. The economy and jobs. The environment. Education. Health care. Child Poverty. The deficit. And so on. Talk about what we’d like to do on those issues, not just what the Conservatives aren’t doing, or are doing wrong. Bring in experts to talk about why action in these areas are important, and suggest actions that could be taken to help if only parliament was still meeting.

Use this opportunity to show not just that the decision to prorogue was wrong, but why: these are all the issues we should be in parliament working on. This is what we would do were we calling the shots in parliament. Give people a sense not just that there is an alternative to the Harper approach, but a sense of WHAT that alternative is.“Upset with prorogument?” you ask. “Well here’s what we’d do differently. Maybe give us a try?”

Most importantly though, after a day or two get the heck out of Ottawa. Michael Ignatieff already has his university listening tour scheduled, build on that. But it needs to go further. Draft the entire caucus and get them out on the road.

I’d like to see the caucus break into groups of, say, five Liberal MPs, all touring the country. Put a headliner in each: Bob Rae, Gerard Kennedy, Martha Hall-Findlay, and so on. Give them an issue area and send them out into the country to speak with Canadians about our ideas in that area, and to listen to the ideas of Canadians about what they want to see the government do on health care, or the economy. Have them meet with every local newspaper and radio station that wants to talk with them. Hang out in coffee shops. Listen and be visible and let the contrast speak for itself: we’re listening and working, the Conservatives are on vacation.

Bottom line: these two months Harper has given us can be an opportunity, but only if we seize it. Don’t get bogged down in the prorogurment, but instead use it as a spring board to define ourselves and connect with Canadians.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Thinking about: Education

We bloggers are usually quite good at identifying the problems, myself included. That’s easy enough to do. I’ve long kvetched about the Liberal Party’s focus on the tactical and the scandal while ignoring the strategic, the policy, the vision thing. Over the next little while, in the lead-up to the much hyped Thinker’s Thingamajig, I’m going to try offering some suggestions on that front.

First up in this series, I’d like to mention education. Long-time readers will know education is an issue I’ve long been concerned about and have long been writing about. And I continue to believe education is a fundamentally core issue that is critical to the success and future health and prosperity of our country, and is of great importance to Canadians. It’s an issue area in which the Liberal Party must absolutely claim a visionary, forward-thinking leadership role.

Perhaps uniquely, education plays across so many other issue areas. Want a strong, competitive economy? You need an educated workforce. Want to fight child poverty? Education goes a long way to lifting families out of poverty. Improved health care? You need more trained doctors, nurses, technicians. Improved standard of living? Compete internationally? New jobs and industries? Going green? Education underpins it all.

And education is only becoming more important in the 21st century. We can’t compete with emerging economies on the price of our labour. We have to compete with our brains, and yet we’re falling behind the world. Companies such as Cisco Systems are opening facilities and moving jobs to place such as India not for labour cost, but for skilled workers. China and India and other emerging economic powerhouses are investing in their education systems, and it is paying results. Jobs will go where the brains are, and with the jobs go economic prosperity.

We need to make it easier for Canadians to attend post-secondary education, be it university, college or skilled trades. Not harder. And we should ensure that we no longer burden them with crippling, life-long debt loads in the process. We need to increase government investment in post-secondary education, and we need to begin to look at it not as a cost centre, but as an investment.

Because that’s what it is. A more educated Canadian will find a better job, earn a better salary, and pay higher taxes to the government. They may even create their own business, paying business taxes and creating jobs for other taxpaying Canadians. They’re also less likely to be a drain on government services. In short, our investment in the education of our citizens will pay great dividends. We get back our investment many times.

Let’s be bold. Why can’t we explore free undergrad or college tuition for every Canadian? Or a lifetime entitlement for XX hours of skill training for every Canadian? If not, we should at least consider it for certain targeted professions and skills that are highly in demand.

At the very least, we need to throw out a student loan system that is fundamentally flawed and build something that works. It's become a commercial money-making venture for banks. That's wrong. Far better would be interest-free loans or, better yet, do away with loans all together for a system of bursaries.

We need to work with the provinces, who have constitutional responsibility for education, to rethink the system and ensure that national standards are maintained and that any funding increases do filter down to the universities students and aren’t eaten up by the provinces. And colleges and trades training must absolutely be a critical part of the discussion.

It goes wider than just this though. Too many immigrants come to Canada with skills we need but aren’t able to get work in their fields. Foreign credential recognition has long been a swampy topic. The Conservative government recently made some progress on this topic. We need to build and expand on that.

And education also needs to begin, well, at the beginning, with early learning and childcare. Studies show children that set out on the right path early develop a life-long love of learning, and will go on to greater success and prosperity in their lives.

After many years, the previous Liberal government under Paul Martin, thanks to the hard work of Ken Dryden, had finally made a good start on this front, negotiating long-term agreements with many of the provinces. Unfortunately, that work has been abandoned by the current government in favour of a flawed tax-credit system. With the Liberal funding agreements now ending we’re seeing just how flawed: precious child care spaces are disappearing.

We need to pick up that squandered momentum and make early childhood learning and childcare a priority once again. But we can’t stop there. We need to acknowledge that what we had proposed earlier was incomplete. Flexibility, and options for those who wish to stay at home to care for their children, or have a family member do so, must be built into the system. Choice is crucial.

Finally, it’s all well and good to have high-minded discussion about the importance of education in broad strokes. We also need to bring it down to the ground and make it understandable and saleable. We’ve always been good at the idealism in the past, but the Conservatives have kicked our asses on the realism, on the distilling it into something people can relate to.

We need a package of proposals and initiatives that will not only make the systemic reforms we need, but will have an impact in the daily lives of Canadians: such as XX lifetime hours of free skill training, or free tuition, and so on. Make it relatable and understandable if it’s going to be successful.

Otherwise, it really will just be an academic gabfest, and we don’t need one of those.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Sound and fury signifying what, exactly?

I share the displeasure of my Liberal and progressive brethren with Stephen Harper’s decision to prorogue parliament. And going back to the first leadership race, Michael Ignatieff does have a definite history of taking vacations and going on media blackouts at the most inopportune times. I think there was a week in 2006 his staff couldn’t even find him. And it happened again last summer until he launched the Hiding in Plain Sight Tour. Opposition leaders don’t get vacations, Michael.

So it’s been left to the likes of Ralph Goodale and Bob Rae to go in front of the cameras and provide the obligatory clips of outrage about how upset we are about the decision to prorogue, how it’s an affront to democracy, how he’s hiding from his incompetent and duplicitous handing of the Afghan detainee, thwarting the democratic will of parliament and its order to produce documents, and so on. And they've done that well. But it was certainty a missed opportunity for Ignatieff to have been front and centre in the media spotlight.

My question though is still what it was a few days ago: to what end? Whether it’s Rae and Goodale or Ignatieff up front providing the outrage quotes (probably more so if it’s the leader and not a surrogate) I’m still left to wonder “OK, you’re pissed off. Me too. Now what are you going to do about it?”

Putting Ignatieff up on this issue would have made that question even more pointed, and I’ve yet to hear any credible suggestions on that front. Short of forcing an election which we’d most likely lose (although the Conservatives may want to precipitate a spring vote anyway, is the latest speculation) our options are decidedly limited. Apparently some folks are planning protest rallies for Jan. 23. And Coyne wants opposition MPs to hold their own unofficial parliament in a bowling alley or something; interesting, and theatrical, if a bit (lot) of a stunt.

I’m all for raising the issues that need to be raised, and for calling attention to grievous injustices and perversions of democracy. And I'm open to creative suggestions on that front. My bigger concern though is that we’re in no position to actually do anything about it. Even if people were ready to turn on the Harper Conservatives, even if this could be the proverbial straw that breaks the camel’s back, four-plus years of farting around as a party means it’s very unlikely we’d be able to capitalize. We haven’t done the work needed for Canadians to turn to us when they’re displeased with Harper.

That’s because for far too long now long (going back multiple leaders) we’ve been focused on the tactical. We’ve hungrily lept at every scandal and Harper miscue and bitten-in hard, wanting to believe it was our ticket back to our rightful place in the seat of power.

Yet, at every turn, we’ve been unable to capitalize on each of a litany of Conservative scandals, faux-pas, screw-ups, miscues and arrogant decisions. No bump in the polls. No lasting increase in support. Why is that? It’s not because Harper is so dammed loveable. It’s because, compared to the alternatives, he still has more appeal to most Canadians because a) he’s the devil they know, and b) we haven’t given them a reason to vote for us.

Until we do, until we finally, at long last, stop looking for the easy home-run, but instead re-build our brand and develop our leader and start giving Canadians a reason not just to vote AGAINST the Conservatives, but to vote FOR us, then we’re just spinning our wheels. And all the Conservative scandals in the world won’t help us. He gets away with it time and time again not because we won’t fight, but because we’re too weak to stop him.

I want Harper gone as badly as anyone. That’s why, while we can get rightfully worked-up over this prorogument, I’d much rather we ALSO finally move past the tactical and do the strategic heavy-lifting around policy, vision and leadership (like finding some) so that when Harper pulls crap like this, we can call him on it and be in a position to actually do something more about it then provide soundbites of outrage for the political magazine shows.

It’s all well to fight and die for the noble cause. I’d rather fight and win.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers