Stéphane Dion = Jean Chrétien?

[August1991]

Dion was a senior Liberal cabinet minister under Chrétien. Dion was a Chrétien protégé. But Dion didn't know about Gagliano, sponsorship and kickbacks? Hein?

If the Liberal Party chooses Dion as leader, it will be the "same old, same old". Dion was there when all of this happened. He must have known. It's the same old way that the federal Liberal Party works.

Corruption? Choose a new face. They'll use Dion as a "clean" guy, a new face.

Pierre Trudeau got involved with the Liberal Party but famously said to his son Justin: "Don't go into politics. There are too many dirty deals."

-----

How far can Stéphane Dion accept the criminality of the federal Liberal Party because he believes the federal Liberal Party is the only way to have a federal Canada? Dion knows that Harper has created a federal alternative in Quebec.

If Dion becomes federal Liberal leader, how will he explain Chrétien and sponsorship money?

[jdobbin]

Dion was a senior Liberal cabinet minister under Chrétien. Dion was a Chrétien protégé. But Dion didn't know about Gagliano, sponsorship and kickbacks? Hein?

Where in the report did it say Dion knew about the sponsorship scandal?

[munsinger]

Or for that matter...........Paul Martin.

[Rue]

Dion was not a Chretien protege. He was brought in with Pettigrew because Chretien was considered a bafoon in Quebec and the Liberals were desperate for some intellectuals to offset Chretien. Dion did not get along with Chretien and held his own with him during cabinet meetings. I wouldn't describe him as his clone at all. And he did not get along with Martin at all. He like all Liberals in Chretien's cabinet can not claim innocence as to Chretien's coruption. They are all marked by it. Its not a coincidence that Rae, Iggy, Kennedy threw their hats in the ring thinking they could claim they were claim and outside the Chretien dirt. Dion will not get appointed for the simple reason he is a Francophone and the next leader will be an Anglophone. He is actually their best debater and public speaker. At this point I think Harper could easily defeat any other candidate but Dion. And Dion is the only one who can give it back to those blockheads. But I am afraid this Iggy is gonna win, either him or Rae. Then you can kiss off the Liberals for good.

[kimmy]

Dion was a senior Liberal cabinet minister under Chrétien. Dion was a Chrétien protégé. But Dion didn't know about Gagliano, sponsorship and kickbacks? Hein?

Where in the report did it say Dion knew about the sponsorship scandal?

Or for that matter...........Paul Martin.

Yes yes. Nobody ever *proved* that Paul Martin or Stephane Dion knew anything about anything.

The part that Liberals fail to understand, though, is that even though it hasn't been proven that they did know, people don't really trust them when they say that they didn't know.

There's a big gulf between "not proven guilty", and "proven innocent". But casting a vote isn't the same as putting somebody in jail. If I was on a jury I couldn't convict Stephane Dion for having knowledge of that mess... but I still don't have any trust in him.

As August notes, he was a Chretien protege, one of Chretien's "lieutenants" in the upper echelon of the party. Why would I believe he was outside the loop of all those shenanigans? Why would I trust that he has different philosophies? Why would I trust that the padawan is any different from the master?

If the Liberals pick somebody from that same old clique, it will bring up the same old questions.

-k

{"Screw the rules! We're saving the country!!!"}

[bradco]

Dion was a senior Liberal cabinet minister under Chrétien. Dion was a Chrétien protégé. But Dion didn't know about Gagliano, sponsorship and kickbacks? Hein?

Where in the report did it say Dion knew about the sponsorship scandal?

Or for that matter...........Paul Martin.

Yes yes. Nobody ever *proved* that Paul Martin or Stephane Dion knew anything about anything.

The part that Liberals fail to understand, though, is that even though it hasn't been proven that they did know, people don't really trust them when they say that they didn't know.

There's a big gulf between "not proven guilty", and "proven innocent". But casting a vote isn't the same as putting somebody in jail. If I was on a jury I couldn't convict Stephane Dion for having knowledge of that mess... but I still don't have any trust in him.

As August notes, he was a Chretien protege, one of Chretien's "lieutenants" in the upper echelon of the party. Why would I believe he was outside the loop of all those shenanigans? Why would I trust that he has different philosophies? Why would I trust that the padawan is any different from the master?

If the Liberals pick somebody from that same old clique, it will bring up the same old questions.

-k

{"Screw the rules! We're saving the country!!!"}

Although Im sure most of the senior liberals knew about the sponsorship program I doubt many knew about the scandal (especially while it was still in operation). People invovled in illegal behaviour like to keep it quiet and invovle as few people as possible. When will conservatives stop trying to paint every Liberal as a criminal?

[Bakunin]

Chrétiens and Dion = dumb and dumber...

Honestly, Chrétiens was not popular at all in quebec but Dion is considered a big joke in quebec...

I am definatly not a liberal supporter but Ignatieff looks like the best federal option to me if i wasn't voting for the bloc.

However, i would like Dion to win because i and many quebeckers could laugh our ass off the liberal... Even more than we did with chretiens .

[fellowtraveller]

If the Liberals pick somebody from that same old clique, it will bring up the same old questions.

With one big difference: only a minority of Canadians will pay any attention now to the questions, much less the answers.

Your comment implies an interest in the gory details by the Canadian electorate that does not exist for the most part. Even the theft of our money by the Liberals has little interest for too many of us. Heard anything about the sponsorship scandal recently? Has the Liberal Party actually paid back any of the money they determined that they owed? Any sign of an accurate, forensic reckoning of what actually happened, what were the final destinations of the $250 million or so that was spent? Any criminal charges laid on other than the few bagmen and flunkies? See what I mean?

Nope, the past has already been whitewashed from our collective memory, an unpleasant interlude that many politicians, and just as many voters are quite willing to forget.

The sponsorship scandal will get as much attention in the next election as it does now in the Liberal leadership campaign - almost none.

So, it doesn't matter what, if any, Dions involvement was in the scandals. All is forgiven and especially within the Liberal Party itself.

But... he still cannot carry a general election.

That doesn't mean he won't win the leadership, because he will. But he won't win the next election.

I suspect the Tories are quietly cheering for him.

[kimmy]

Although Im sure most of the senior liberals knew about the sponsorship program I doubt many knew about the scandal (especially while it was still in operation). People invovled in illegal behaviour like to keep it quiet and invovle as few people as possible. When will conservatives stop trying to paint every Liberal as a criminal?

Why do you people always say that conservatives are "trying to paint every Liberal as a criminal"?

I didn't think we were talking about "every Liberal", I thought we were talking about Stephane Dion. Dion was hand-picked by Chretien, he was one of the top Quebec members of the party, he was in prominent cabinet member throughout the time, he was directly responsible for combatting Quebec sovereignty and defending federalism.

Why wouldn't people speculate about his role in the program? What's more likely: that he was in the loop, or that he was out of the loop?

-k

[jdobbin]

As August notes, he was a Chretien protege, one of Chretien's "lieutenants" in the upper echelon of the party. Why would I believe he was outside the loop of all those shenanigans? Why would I trust that he has different philosophies? Why would I trust that the padawan is any different from the master?

If the Liberals pick somebody from that same old clique, it will bring up the same old questions.

The same questions that might come up from having Mulroney as an adviser and appointing Michael Wlson as an ambassador?

[kimmy]

As August notes, he was a Chretien protege, one of Chretien's "lieutenants" in the upper echelon of the party. Why would I believe he was outside the loop of all those shenanigans? Why would I trust that he has different philosophies? Why would I trust that the padawan is any different from the master?

If the Liberals pick somebody from that same old clique, it will bring up the same old questions.

The same questions that might come up from having Mulroney as an adviser and appointing Michael Wlson as an ambassador?

If I recall, the Liberals and their supporters did indeed try to make an issue of Mulroney during the last election, and found zero traction with voters on that front.

But no, the questions are not quite the same. The question concerns knowledge of and association with ongoing corruption.

In Harper's case, at the time when Mulroney is alleged to have accepted bribes, Harper was working as the secretary to one of Mulroney's most prominent opponents.

In Dion's case, throughout the 7 years of corruption of the Sponsorship Program, Dion was a prominent cabinet member, prominent federalist supporter, prominent sovereignty fighter, one of the chief Quebec lieutenants of the party. Stephane Dion sat at the same cabinet table as the principals for 7 years, and the corruption primarily took place in Dion's own Montreal home turf.

So no, I don't really see it as the same kind of questions.

-k

[jdobbin]

If I recall, the Liberals and their supporters did indeed try to make an issue of Mulroney during the last election, and found zero traction with voters on that front.

But no, the questions are not quite the same. The question concerns knowledge of and association with ongoing corruption.

In Harper's case, at the time when Mulroney is alleged to have accepted bribes, Harper was working as the secretary to one of Mulroney's most prominent opponents.

In Dion's case, throughout the 7 years of corruption of the Sponsorship Program, Dion was a prominent cabinet member, prominent federalist supporter, prominent sovereignty fighter, one of the chief Quebec lieutenants of the party. Stephane Dion sat at the same cabinet table as the principals for 7 years, and the corruption primarily took place in Dion's own Montreal home turf.

Didn't suggest that Harper was involved in some of the corruption scandal with Mulroney. However, when Mulroney showed up this past election, the past was forgotten. Given the taint and Harper's own personal antipathy to Mulroney and Wilson, it find it surprising that he had anything to do with them. Afterall, Harper had no problem turning on old Tories like Jim Hawkes.

I remember many members of the public saying they would never vote Conservative again because of everything the party did under Mulroney.

If Liberal delegates want a completely clean slate, then they'll vote for someone not involved in the party at the time like Rae or Ignatieff.

I personally don't believe that Dion was involved in the scandal and if the Conservatives believe he was, they certainly had ample opportunity to open an investigation in the months they were in power.

[August1991]

I remember many members of the public saying they would never vote Conservative again because of everything the party did under Mulroney.

And in 1993, many people didn't vote Tory. It took about 13 years and several permutations for the Conservatives to get back into power.

If the Liberals pick Dion, it's because they believe that he will get them back into power after a hiatus of just one year.

But Dobbin I agree, it is the Canadian public that will render judgment. And I'd be surprised if Dion escapes this so easily. He was closely associated with Chretien and when Martin kept him in his cabinet, it was considered a nod to the Chretien wing.

I think we'll see more comments such as this:

Dryden wasn't a member of the government that brought us Adscam. Dion was, and yet he scored 12% on the ethical scale.

Ottawa Sun columnist

Heard anything about the sponsorship scandal recently?

Good point. Sponsorship is out of the news. I imagine that's Harper's doing. I'm impressed how Harper has moved so smoothly from being an opposition critic to being a governing Prime Minister.

OTOH, the Tories will certainly criticize the Liberals during an election campaign and I would expect they are now developing strategies depending on who the Liberals choose. With Dion, questions about Adscam are inescapable. I believe too that there will soon be an Auditor-General report about environmental policies of which Dion was responsible.

[On a related note - have you noticed how scandal-free and even quiet Ottawa has been in the past nine months? Compare that with what was happening last year. Then, there were frenetic rumours, deals, changes in policies. Paul Martin drank too much coffee.]

[jdobbin]

And in 1993, many people didn't vote Tory. It took about 13 years and several permutations for the Conservatives to get back into power.

If the Liberals pick Dion, it's because they believe that he will get them back into power after a hiatus of just one year.

But Dobbin I agree, it is the Canadian public that will render judgment. And I'd be surprised if Dion escapes this so easily. He was closely associated with Chretien and when Martin kept him in his cabinet, it was considered a nod to the Chretien wing.

I'm sure there will be attack plans for any of the candidates who would be selected.

It shouldn't be a huge concern though. It will be how the new leader performs once they get power.

I can still remember the doom and gloom there was about the Conservative campaign, how they continued to trail in the polls and how no one seemed to be paying attention to what they were doing and who their leader was.

I have no idea who will be elected as leader. I'm still not sure who I support even at this point.

[August1991]

This is why Staphane Dion (and Bob Rae) should not become Liberal leader or Prime Minister of Canada:

Goldenberg is supporting longtime friend Bob Rae in the current leadership contest, although he also has praise in his book for another contender, Stephane Dion, Chretien's onetime unity minister.

Entitled The Way It Works: Inside Ottawa, Goldenberg's tome offers an inside look at the tensions between former prime minister Chretien and Martin, his finance minister and eventual successor.

It paints an unflattering picture of Martin as an ambitious, conniving and inept politician whose "colossal over-reaction'' to the sponsorship scandal -- at least in Goldenberg's view -- destroyed the Liberal brand name and reignited separatist forces in Quebec.

....

The book reveals that Chretien wanted to shuffle Martin out of the finance portfolio after an attempted leadership coup in early 2000. Goldenberg says he and Jean Pelletier, then Chretien's chief of staff, advised against a shuffle, fearing that Martin would quit cabinet altogether, splitting the party and hurting the government's credibility with financial markets.

"Over the course of the next two years, it became clear that Pelletier and I were wrong and that Chretien's political instinct to lance the boil immediately was the right one,'' Goldenberg writes.

CTV

Liberals like Dion, Goldenberg and Chretien just don't get that the political game has changed.

They started the scandal and then blame Martin for a "colossal overreaction". These guys just don't understand Quebec anymore. They are living in the 1970s.

In Goldenberg's mind, it's all about spin and media manipulation.

If Dion wins, these characters will be back in power in the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party needs a long time out to sort out the Martin/Chretien issues and decide what it is.

[jdobbin]

If Dion wins, these characters will be back in power in the Liberal Party. The Liberal Party needs a long time out to sort out the Martin/Chretien issues and decide what it is.

And yet you argue that Ignatieff and Kennedy and others aren't fit to lead either.

One of them will end up leader. At that time, I'm sure whoever it is, will judged on their own merits.

[August1991]

Liza Frulla has decided to back Ignatieff but she had this to say about Dion:

In an interview last night, she said Mr. Dion has something to offer the country, but it is not intensity.

"We need more passion and we need somebody who is not bruised like we have been bruised," Ms. Frulla said.

"I'd rather have somebody who can keep a cool head if there is an opportunity to give Quebec a legal status [in the Constitution].

"It doesn't mean we'll open up the Constitution tomorrow. But I don't want to be completely closed to an opportunity."

CanWest

I heard Dion being interviewed on CBC Radio's The Current the other day and I came away with the same impression. Dion is too tied up in the trench warfare Chretien-style. If the Liberals choose him, it will be the same old story all over again. He might get the Liberals into power but it won't get the country anywhere.

Increasingly though, I think Dion is going to be the default candidate when it comes down to the final ballot and there's only Rae, Ignatieff and Dion left. Delegates for Rae and Ignatieff will opt for Dion instead of the other rival.

Dion is a survivor. The Chretienites feel he's a good frontman and the Martinites can get along with him. Under Dion, the Liberal Party can be the way it used to be. Dion will somehow put the toothpaste back in the tube.

[August1991]

Dion may have committed political suicide. In responding to this bureaucratic report, Dion said:

Despite the report's hard-hitting language, Dion told CBC News he supported it and Gélinas's call for much stronger policies. He also called into question Prime Minister Stephen Harper's environmental policies.

"The prime minister does not believe in the science of climate change," Dion said, describing it as "the worst ecological threat that humanity is facing."

Dion said if he succeeds in winning his party's leadership this fall and goes on to win a federal election, he would "implement an even better plan."

Meanwhile, Liberal environment critic John Godfrey said his party accepts the findings of the report, feeling the criticisms are fair.

CBC

An "even better" plan? Dion was there, had the chance. Now he offers an even better plan? WTF?

Dion is just another academic flake - like Ignatieff. He'll say crazy things in an abject, amateur attempt to be popular. The dork goes public. You could fill Yankee Stadium with unpublished authors or academics who want to be politicians.

What did Jean-Luc Pépin say? He has no royal jelly.

----

I still think the Liberals will choose Dion as a faisable francophone compromise. The Jason Cherniak Liberals want to believe Canada is still like a Drapeau 1967 Montreal Canada and a Trudeau on the balcony of Montreal's City Hall will be a winner. Such Liberals are clueless. They're Gorbachev Communists, and they don't know it. Sad.

[fellowtraveller]

The Liberals have learned nothing from their ongoing and brief sojourn in the wilderness, they will ultimately pick Dion. Why? Because he is the safe choice, and the Party is adrift. He is the only candidate who can give enough of the national executive a warm and fuzzy feeling that they themselves are not threatened. Rae still has time to don sufficient camouflage to get the Lib braintrust to believe that he is safe and malleable enough, but none of the others has much chance .

The Conservatives must be feeling comfy about the whole thing, really none of this cast of lightweights is fearsome or likely to become fearsome.

They should be cheering for the cuddly but ineffective Dion.

Rae has the best prognosis for the Libs in an election, but should finish second to Dion in December.

[August1991]

The Liberals have learned nothing from their ongoing and brief sojourn in the wilderness, they will ultimately pick Dion. Why? Because he is the safe choice, and the Party is adrift.

I have to agree with you.

Dion's situation is not unlike the PC convention in 1976 when the Tories chose third place Clark over Claude Wagner and Brian Mulroney. At the time, Mulroney and Wagner were simply too different so they chose what they thought was a more comfortable leader. Clark was the guy with the lowest negatives.

[jbg]

Dion was a senior Liberal cabinet minister under Chrétien. Dion was a Chrétien protégé. But Dion didn't know about Gagliano, sponsorship and kickbacks? Hein?

Where in the report did it say Dion knew about the sponsorship scandal?

Or for that matter...........Paul Martin.

One can say that "if they knew they were responsible; if they didn't know they were irresponsible". I'm a bit more charitable. I think it was highly segmented from the rest of government business, and kept on a "need to know" basis.

[August1991]

With 17 of 18 meetings reporting, Dion has come 4th in Saskatchewan receiving 32 delegates out of some 200 odd delegates in total. Given such lacklustre results, I think Dion should be happy he's not beholden to Orchard. But it begs the question why Dion got in bed with Orchard to begin with. It's like Dion's comment about "Honest Joe Volpe". In English Canada, Dion's hooked up with whoever will take him.

Dion can speak as a federalist in Quebec but he lacks the courage or ability to speak his mind in English Canada. In short, Dion doesn't or can't speak for English Canada. That's sad and it should give serious pause to Liberals. To use "progressive" vocabulary, I think at this point in Canadian history English Canada really must speak with its own voice. Dion can't do that.

[August1991]

Andrew Coyne weighs in. Dion it'll be:

I stress: this is Canadian politics, where nice guys do not even get a decent burial, let alone the chance to finish last. Yet here we are, with three weeks to go until the Liberal leadership vote, and Mr. Dion -- decent, upright, clinically logical -- has as good a chance as any to win.

Coyne

He opens his piece with this quote of Dion answering Bouchard about the divisibility of Quebec:

“For example, you are no doubt aware that France insisted on portioning the island of Mayotte from the Comoros at the time the latter gained independence because the residents of Mayotte unequivocally expressed their desire to maintain their link with France.”

Myself, I have always preferred Trudeau's line about making the West Island the Danzig of the New World.

Which is to say that the Liberals will pick a French Canadian leader to put Quebec in its place (and that place is in Canada). If the Liberals pick Dion, it'll be deja vu all over again and I don't know if English Canada really has the stomach for that now.

Coyne then finishes with this comment about Dion:

If there is a politician he resembles, it is Stephen Harper. I think Mr. Harper has perhaps the broader strategic vision, and a greater capacity for ruthlessness. But Mr. Dion is at least a match in analytical rigour, and far more disciplined. Both men get tagged with that lazy journalistic cliché, that they lack “charisma.” But they are the furthest thing, either of them, from the cautious timeservers that would suggest. Both are risk-takers, aggressive in combat, unafraid of being unpopular, determined to prevail. The best minds in their parties, it would be a treat to watch them debate.

Harper studied economics, Dion polisci. Harper's Dad was a tax accountant, Dion's Dad was a university prof. Harper grew up in Toronto/Calgary, Dion in Quebec City and Paris.

Harper was part of the Reform Party, Dion was a senior part of the provincial wing of a federal Liberal Party enmeshed in a kickback scheme.

I'm a little surprised that Dion has not been touched by Adscam.

[geoffrey]

Where is Dion going to pick up seats?

Hmm... no where.

When I lived back in Ontario, at least where I was in the 905, the one thing we resenting is having French Canadians dictate life to us. It's worse out West. Dion is the sterotypical Chretien II. Can't speak a word of English and I say that in comparison to Quebec's criticism of Kennedy's French. Dion will not pick up a seat in Ontario, and that does the Liberals no good.

Being said, the practical candidates are Dion and Kennedy, so it really comes down to whether French or English is the most important language in this country. A party that elects Dion is obviously sending a message to the RoC that Quebec is all that matters to them, and we are back to the screw the west mentality of Trudeau and his group. And that's fine. The Liberals will suffer another couple years in opposition as a consequence of that choice, if they are to make it.

I'm willing to put money on a 4th ballot Kennedy win though. Despite my opinion of most Liberals in this country, I do believe they have the intelligence to elect the only leader there that can win seats.

[normanchateau]

Did Dion vote to extend the mission to Afghanistan?