Martin vs Warren Kinsella

[Kliege]

Martin can't blame McGuinty

Warren Kinsella

National Post

May 31, 2004

And so begins the blame game. With every major daily newspaper in Canada publishing polls which suggest the inevitability of a Liberal minority government -- or, even worse, an actual election loss -- some Grits are starting to look for someone to blame.

In politics, that sort of behaviour isn't particularly unusual. As President John F. Kennedy noted following the Bay of Pigs debacle, defeat is an orphan, but victory has 100 fathers.

But it is noteworthy, just the same, when a Prime Minister is willing to start subtly pointing an accusatory finger or two at a fellow Liberal.

Thus the revealing scene in Sault Ste. Marie on Saturday, when Paul Martin -- while touring a health care facility -- was asked about the recent budget of Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty. The Prime Minister stated: "I believe that it is very important for political leaders to keep their promises."

Well, yes, that much certainly is true. And it is also true that Mr. Martin did not mention Mr. McGuinty by name. But, for the reporters who were following the Liberal leader in Sault Ste. Marie, it was clear to whom the Prime Minister was referring: the Ontario Premier. The implication was "blunt," even, in the assessment of one Canadian Press scribe.

As nuanced as the Prime Ministers statement was, it was newsworthy, and for a couple of reasons. Firstly, and until recently, Mr. Martin had taken the position (and correctly so) that the tough measures contained in the Ontario Liberal Party's first budget were the legacy of reckless tax cuts of Conservative premiers Mike Harris and Ernie Eves. Why now the change?

The second reason Mr. Martin's musings were significant is this: Mr. Martin's gentle jab suggested that federal Liberals were now willing to blame their provincial cousins for their declining electoral fortunes.

While Ontario Liberals certainly anticipated that their budgetary measures would present political challenges in the short term, few of them foresaw that the federal party -- much less its leader -- would start to scapegoat them for the slumping polling numbers that now beset the Liberal Party of Canada.

It's not fair, and it's not accurate, for starters. After all, the Ontario budget was made public well before the election was called, and the federal party had ample time to put off the vote, had they believed it to be so very harmful to their prospects. It's not as if any of it was a surprise, either: the Prime Minister's most senior advisor, David Herle, conducted top-notch public opinion research on the budget prior to its release. Presumably, Mr. Herle could have picked up the phone and suggested to Mr. Martin that dropping the writ was not advisable in the wake of the McGuinty government's budget.

If the Liberal Party of Canada is headed towards a minority government -- or worse -- the reasons for that are not so easily laid at Mr. McGuinty's doorstep. The seeds of declining federal Liberal support were sown long before the Ontario Liberals tabled their budget in the provincial legislature.

Polling conducted by the firm in which I am a principal, for example, showed the federal party's support levels have plummeted by approximately 20 percentage points since December, 2003. All of our colleagues in the polling community have found precisely the same thing.

The problems being experienced by the Liberal Party of Canada have been well-known for at least six months.

That's not all: many of the federal party's wounds are of the self-inflicted variety. Through my Web site, www.warrenkinsella.com, I am in regular contact with many, many unhappy Liberal Party members across Canada. These are the sorts of things they tell me:

- The small circle around Mr. Martin has conducted a self-defeating internecine war that has potentially fractured the Liberal party for years to come -- and left it ill-prepared for an early election call.

- The new regime has appeared equivocal on Kyoto, campaign finance reform, same-sex marriage and other policies that are central to the progressive Liberal tradition -- thus potentially bleeding support to the NDP.

- They have promised too much and delivered too little. Where, now, are the predictions of a 250-seat Liberal majority in the House of Commons? Where is the promise of resurgence in the West and Quebec?

- Appallingly, the party has actively recruited separatists to run as candidates, thereby turning their backs on the cardinal Liberal principle of a strong central government -- alienating, in the process, Liberals who subscribe to the Trudeau-Chretien vision of federalism.

- Promises of a slew of exciting new policies have come to naught; and, concurrently, many of those found in senior positions in the new regime have shown a pronounced preference for spin over substance -- leaving many in the federal public service feeling both frustrated and despairing.

Can the Liberal party turn around its fortunes? Certainly.

But it must move quickly, before the leaders' debates. End the civil war; embrace the Left; put together a modest, do-able platform; and -- most of all -- don't blame Dalton McGuinty.

It isn't all his fault. You know it, I know it, and so do Canadian voters.

Warren Kinsella is a political consultant a former assistant to Jean Chretien.

© National Post 2004

[takeanumber]

The small circle around Mr. Martin has conducted a self-defeating internecine war that has potentially fractured the Liberal party for years to come -- and left it ill-prepared for an early election call.

- The new regime has appeared equivocal on Kyoto, campaign finance reform, same-sex marriage and other policies that are central to the progressive Liberal tradition -- thus potentially bleeding support to the NDP.

- They have promised too much and delivered too little. Where, now, are the predictions of a 250-seat Liberal majority in the House of Commons? Where is the promise of resurgence in the West and Quebec?

- Appallingly, the party has actively recruited separatists to run as candidates, thereby turning their backs on the cardinal Liberal principle of a strong central government -- alienating, in the process, Liberals who subscribe to the Trudeau-Chretien vision of federalism.

- Promises of a slew of exciting new policies have come to naught; and, concurrently, many of those found in senior positions in the new regime have shown a pronounced preference for spin over substance -- leaving many in the federal public service feeling both frustrated and despairing.

Agreed.

[Argus]

Kinsella was and is a sleaze of the first order, Chretien's dirty tricks and smear guy. He's never had anything good to say about Martin, which is why he's basically been turfed from the party.

This is just sour grapes. Unfair to blame McGuinty? What a load of BS. The two major issues which have damaged Martin's chances for another majority are Chretien's corruption and McGuinty's budget. To suggest that Martin could have called off the election at this late date, when hearing about McGuinty's budget is also nonsense. Things were simply too far along. Advertising was already running, facilities rented, nomination meetings held. Stopping everything after McGuinty's budget would have been just about impossible.

Kinsella is sputtering when he suggests Martin's hesitancy on Kyoto is causing problems. He is right that a lack of new promises and action are causing a lack of enthusiasm, but where were new policies and action when his beloved Chretien ruled the roost?

The column is just bitterness from a has been.

[takeanumber]

Kinsella was and is a sleaze of the first order, Chretien's dirty tricks and smear guy. He's never had anything good to say about Martin, which is why he's basically been turfed from the party.

This is just sour grapes. Unfair to blame McGuinty? What a load of BS. The two major issues which have damaged Martin's chances for another majority are Chretien's corruption and McGuinty's budget. To suggest that Martin could have called off the election at this late date, when hearing about McGuinty's budget is also nonsense. Things were simply too far along. Advertising was already running, facilities rented, nomination meetings held. Stopping everything after McGuinty's budget would have been just about impossible.

Kinsella is sputtering when he suggests Martin's hesitancy on Kyoto is causing problems. He is right that a lack of new promises and action are causing a lack of enthusiasm, but where were new policies and action when his beloved Chretien ruled the roost?

The column is just bitterness from a has been.

Agreed.