The Problem with the Liberal Party of Canada

[August1991]

While listening to a CBC radio interview with Sheila Copps this morning, I reflected on the troubles of the federal Liberal Party.

To wit, some apparatchik (Jamie Carroll) said something objectionable and then people, well, objected.

According to witnesses and a Montreal newspaper report, Carroll suggested that if he hired more Quebecers, he'd also have to hire more Chinese staffers.

The president of the Liberal Party's Quebec wing, Robert Fragasso, was at the closed-door meeting earlier this week where the remarks were said to have been made. He said Carroll was out of line.

"These were comments that horrified me, that disgusted me, to tell you the truth," Fragasso told The Globe and Mail.

"It's unacceptable ... I will ask for his resignation."

CTV

This specific anecdote has been mixed up with Dion's leadership and the federal Liberal standing in Quebec.

In response, I have heard this same refrain now from three "senior" apologists of the federal Liberal Party. Dissension, so they say, does not help win elections.

Ignatieff was the most direct:

Ignatieff urges Libs to come together, says 'united we win, divided we lose' The deputy leader of the federal Liberals is issuing a rallying call to his fellow party members.

Michael Ignatieff told a party gathering in Sarnia, Ont., on Thursday night, that when the Liberals are united they win, but when they're divided they lose.

His comments echoed those of party leader Stephane Dion who admitted last week, after the party's three stinging byelection losses in Quebec, that the Liberals need to rebuild in the province.

But Dion said the losses were due to the Liberals' well-known "difficulties" in Quebec and not a crisis of confidence in his leadership.

He also called for Liberals to be united in order to be relevant to Canadians.

CP

Jason Cherniak was more direct:

Then we saw a report of anonymous people complaining that Michael Ignatieff's team had torpedoed a by-election in Quebec. Who were these people? I don't know. What I do know is that those people really screwed the pooch. They questioned the loyalty of just under half the Liberal Party and accused the Quebec Liberals of being either incompetent or disloyal.

...

What did all the complainers do? They made the memo public! They got just about everything that they asked for, yet still it was not enough. You know what? I'm sick of them. I'm sick of their tactics. I'm sick of their stupidity. I'm sick of their inability to do their jobs. The goddamn National Executive is responsible for PRIVATELY organizing the party. Whoever leaked Jamie Carroll's memo should have the words "STUPID FUCKING IDIOT" engraved on his or her tombstone.

Or Copps herself in her column:

The Liberal civil war has officially started. With party-inflicted land mines exploding in the face of leader Stephane Dion, history seems to be repeating itself.

The opening salvo came from former Outremont Member of Parliament and key Michael Ignatieff supporter, Jean Lapierre. Lapierre minced no words in blaming Dion and his entourage for all aspects of the defeat, including a haphazard local organization. Lapierre said when his own departure provoked the byelection, the riding bank account was full and more than 1,000 volunteers were ready to go.

Methinks he doth protest too much.

If Dion alone is to blame, why did Lapierre limp to such a tepid victory in the last general election? This time, Liberal star nominee Jocelyn Coulon, with 29% of the popular vote, was trounced while Lapierre eked out victory with 35%.

...

With a byelection bump for the New Democrats, Dion needs to move quickly before a trend line develops. He must first staunch the bleeding by gathering all good Liberals under one tent. Second, he needs bold moves on liberal policy initiatives. If he cannot out-green the left, he can certainly draw a line in the sand on Afghanistan. Dion foreign policy pronouncements this week were exactly the right approach.

During the rebuilding phase, Ignatieff needs to call off his dogs. Supporters should be told in no uncertain terms they need to get behind their current leader -- now.

If they don't, and more voices of criticism and dissent follow, Liberals will be digging their own graves. With the NDP surging on the left and the Tories steady on the right, the last thing the Liberals need is a frontal assault on their own.

Toronto Sun

The basic refrain here is that party unity is paramount and if there's any dirty laundry, the Liberals must not wash it in public. The underlying premise is that the Liberals must present an organized face if they are to gain the trust of Canadian voters.

----

Well, the Liberals just don't get it. These three Liberals are sorely mistaken.

As far as I'm concerned, these disputes between Fragasso and Carrol, or even around the leadership of Stephane Dion, simply remind me that the Liberal Party has no other reason for existing except to get power. As I listened to Copps in the interview, or as I have read about the others, the message is loud and clear: "What do we do to get power?"

Let me draw a small parallel. When Harper had to silence one of his loose-cannon MPs, the Toronto media would use it as a reminder that the Conservatives had a hidden agenda.

Well, every time the Liberals speak as Liberals now, they expose their hidden agenda. And what is the Liberal hidden agenda? "We want power. We are concerned about our image and dissension because it may make it difficult to get power."

From Ignatieff, Cherniak, Copps and the others, that's all I hear in this kerfuffle of words. They expose to all their hidden agenda to get power.

Does this matter? I think so.

Despite what some people sometimes argue, we live in a time when politicians and political parties must stand for something. People want direction. Whether Bush Jnr, Reagan, Blair, even Mitterand, Yeltsin, Rae, Harris, Sarkozy or - heavens, Levesque and Trudeau - politicians offer choices.

Pierre Trudeau was the last Liberal leader who offered any kind of direction. The federal Liberal Party can no longer rely on Trudeau ideology. In Quebec, this time is now passed. So, what does the Liberal Party now stand for? Power. That's it. Power so that the apparatchiks can have limos and feel important. Power so that a few can enjoy the spoils.

Mackenzie King lived in a different era. I don't think there's a place for such a party in the Canadian federal landscape today. The problem with the federal Liberal Party goes far beyond the public infighting over remarks of an insider or the supposed posturing to depose a leader. Public disunity is not the problem.

The problem with the federal Liberal Party is that it no longer stands for anything relevant in Canada today.

Edited October 5, 2007 by August1991

[mikedavid00]

Wow that was quite the research.

I think everyone knows that Dion is just a fall guy right now.

I believe Rae should take another shot at Liberal leadership when it comes around so the party can move forward.

[Topaz]

Wow that was quite the research.

I think everyone knows that Dion is just a fall guy right now.

I believe Rae should take another shot at Liberal leadership when it comes around so the party can move forward.

Yes, I agree and was surprised when he didn't get it. I hope that Iggy doesn't because I don't trust a guy who lived outside of Canada and than comes back a run for government. I think he 's too america and he would just be another Harper!

[capricorn]

Yes, I agree and was surprised when he didn't get it. I hope that Iggy doesn't because I don't trust a guy who lived outside of Canada and than comes back a run for government. I think he 's too america and he would just be another Harper!

Except not as fat.

[capricorn]

Thanks for that post August. The whole situation of where the Liberals are at is truly disconcerting. It's like everything going on in the inner sanctum of the party is open for all the world to see and criticize. IMO more and more Canadians are getting disgusted with being privy to all the internal bickering and back-stabbing going on with them. And all the while, no credible policies coming from the Liberals for Canadians to mull over.

If nothing is done about this, and quick, the Liberals will sink even further. And I'm not talking polls. I'm talking about the bad taste left in our mouth from Adscam which has now been transferred to this constant in-fighting. It will come to a point that many Canadians will completely tune out of the Liberals regardless of the worthiness of any policies they put forward in the future. The better the job Harper does in governing, the less Canadians will feel the need for a healed and reconstituted Liberal party. That is not good news for this country.

[mikedavid00]

The better the job Harper does in governing, the less Canadians will feel the need for a healed and reconstituted Liberal party. That is not good news for this country.

What's the status of Justin Tredeau right now?

I've been out of the loop. Last I heard he was given a riding.

[Keepitsimple]

The better the job Harper does in governing, the less Canadians will feel the need for a healed and reconstituted Liberal party. That is not good news for this country.

I think it would be the best thing for this country. The only way that Liberals can heal themselves is to take a walk in the wilderness and gain some humility. Their thirst for power was only satisfied by the divisions on the center-right. It's time for Canadians to get comfortable with something other than the Liberals - it's not such a scary dilemna - and the longer Harper is our PM, the more people will understand that. Pundits have said that Liberals campaign from the Left and govern from the Right. What that really means is that they campaign on things like "eliminating poverty by the tear 2000", "fixing healthcare for a generation", signing a pledge on Kyoto to make it look like we are heros and then embarrassing Canada on the world stage by doing nothing, promising to cancel the GST - and it goes on and on. As for governing from the Right - it simply means that they do none of the above. Much like the Conservatives under Kim Campbell were annihilated down to 2 seats, the Liberals need a similar thrashing - it's the only way to get rid of the old guard - the behind the scenes power hungry cabal. Give the Liberals 8 or 10 years to get their act together and they'll come back as strong as ever - but they have to earn it. The Liberals are the party of yesteryear and Dion is Yesterday's Man.

[capricorn]

I think it would be the best thing for this country. The only way that Liberals can heal themselves is to take a walk in the wilderness and gain some humility. Their thirst for power was only satisfied by the divisions on the center-right. It's time for Canadians to get comfortable with something other than the Liberals - it's not such a scary dilemna - and the longer Harper is our PM, the more people will understand that. Pundits have said that Liberals campaign from the Left and govern from the Right. What that really means is that they campaign on things like "eliminating poverty by the tear 2000", "fixing healthcare for a generation", signing a pledge on Kyoto to make it look like we are heros and then embarrassing Canada on the world stage by doing nothing, promising to cancel the GST - and it goes on and on. As for governing from the Right - it simply means that they do none of the above. Much like the Conservatives under Kim Campbell were annihilated down to 2 seats, the Liberals need a similar thrashing - it's the only way to get rid of the old guard - the behind the scenes power hungry cabal. Give the Liberals 8 or 10 years to get their act together and they'll come back as strong as ever - but they have to earn it. The Liberals are the party of yesteryear and Dion is Yesterday's Man.

I'm a Conservative Party supporter. What I want is a strong opposition to keep them on their toes. What would really scare me is the NDP in that role. This is why I hope the Liberals hurry up and get a (political) life. As you say, that may take a while and IMO this is a bad scenario for Canada. Ten years if too long to wait for a viable opposition.

[Canadian Blue]

I think the Liberal's simply need to do alot of soul searching. I still have trouble knowing what they exactly stand for as they have waffled on many issues, the common one being Afghanistan.

However Dion may be able to win an election, you never know in Canadian politics. I remember commentators talking about how Stephen Harper would never have a chance to become PM.

[August1991]

I believe Rae should take another shot at Liberal leadership when it comes around so the party can move forward.

That reminds me of the PQ. Many believe that the Liberals' problems stem from the choice of leader. Like the PQ, they believe that a different leader would give different results.

By blaming Dion (like blaming Landry or Boisclair), people miss the deeper problem.

----

Under Trudeau, the federal Liberals could argue that they stood for National Unity. The Liberals united the linguistic divide. Indeed since Laurier, this has been the Liberals one credible claim to substance. (Similarly, the PQ thrived on this dichotomy.)

Well, in any case anyone hasn't noticed, Quebec politics are undergoing a shift at the moment. People are leaving both the PQ and the Liberals. The federal Liberals will be left, at best, with a rump of anglo/allo seats in west Montreal and maybe Hull. I'm beginning to think that they may even lose these seats.

I repeat, as I listened to Copps speak, all I heard was the voice of a master political operative discussing how to get power. It was the sound of a sophisticated high school student council president discussing power plays. All intrigue, no substance. Like this guy:

Inside the federal Liberal party's backrooms, which increasingly seem as dangerous as a tour of duty in Kabul, Mark Marissen survives. It might even be said that it's in these moments, with Liberal politics at their internecine nadir, he actually thrives.

Vancouver's political wunderkind, credited with steering Stephane Dion to the leader's chair in a brilliant underdog campaign, was sitting in the Hotel Vancouver bar quietly sipping a scotch Tuesday night. Meanwhile in our distant, federal capital, the nation's political class was abuzz as the news leaked of the shakeup within the Liberals' brain trust.

Vancouver Sun

IOW, the Liberal Party no longer even stands for National Unity. The power-brokers have full run of the shop.

If the Liberal Party loses its connection to French Canada, then it loses all credibility in many Ontario ridings. The only thing that will keep it going is the sheer political acumen of its John Rae, Mark Marissen and Jason Cherniak power-brokers.

----

When things shake out in Quebec, there will likely be two parties standing. At present, I'd say it could be a leftish but neutered PQ and a rightish, but nationalistic ADQ. How will things shake out at the federal level? Dunno. But the problem of the federal Liberal Party (and the Liberal Party of Quebec) go well beyond a bad choice of leader or the loss of a few by-elections - or the objectionable words of an insider - or washing dirty linen in public.

Edited October 5, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

Pierre Trudeau was the last Liberal leader who offered any kind of direction. The federal Liberal Party can no longer rely on Trudeau ideology. In Quebec, this time is now passed. So, what does the Liberal Party now stand for? Power. That's it. Power so that the apparatchiks can have limos and feel important. Power so that a few can enjoy the spoils.

Mackenzie King lived in a different era. I don't think there's a place for such a party in the Canadian federal landscape today. The problem with the federal Liberal Party goes far beyond the public infighting over remarks of an insider or the supposed posturing to depose a leader. Public disunity is not the problem.

The problem with the federal Liberal Party is that it no longer stands for anything relevant in Canada today.

I think if the Liberal party were to vanish tomorrow, the Canadian public would gravitate towards a party that occupied the same space.

The debates I am seeing now are not different than the ones I saw when the Liberals were defeated by Mulroney and no different when the Tories were defeated by Chretien.

Talk of the death of the Liberals is premature.

[Visionseeker]

The basic refrain here is that party unity is paramount and if there's any dirty laundry, the Liberals must not wash it in public. The underlying premise is that the Liberals must present an organized face if they are to gain the trust of Canadian voters.

Well, the Liberals just don't get it. These three Liberals are sorely mistaken.

As far as I'm concerned, these disputes between Fragasso and Carrol, or even around the leadership of Stephane Dion, simply remind me that the Liberal Party has no other reason for existing except to get power. As I listened to Copps in the interview, or as I have read about the others, the message is loud and clear: "What do we do to get power?"

A house divided against itself cannot stand. Now where did I here that before?

Let me draw a small parallel. When Harper had to silence one of his loose-cannon MPs, the Toronto media would use it as a reminder that the Conservatives had a hidden agenda.

Though I see what you are trying to get at, this is not a solid parallel IMO. Trying to quiet internal party warfare is quite different from letting elected representatives speak their minds. Though both can be extremely damaging, one at least has the legitimacy of being a public figure to justify going public. Nevertheless, some peoples’ minds are sometimes best unspoken.

Well, every time the Liberals speak as Liberals now, they expose their hidden agenda. And what is the Liberal hidden agenda? "We want power. We are concerned about our image and dissension because it may make it difficult to get power."

From Ignatieff, Cherniak, Copps and the others, that's all I hear in this kerfuffle of words. They expose to all their hidden agenda to get power.

Tell me you are not so naïve. Every party wants power. That’s the nature of party politics. The party is a means to an end.

However, the Liberal party has to put an end to such squabbles if they are ever to mount an effective campaign. The Carroll matter has actually provided them with an opportunity to do so.

Carroll was extremely instrumental in helping Dion win the leadership. Problem is, those who bring you to a position of power are the least capable in helping you keep it. Such soldiers create too many enemies and stand as symbols of division rather than assets for unity.

Carroll should’ve been made to go when Diebel’s book came out, but Dion stood by him and showed a strong willingness to reward loyalty by doing so. In the latest controversy, Dion again stood by his guy but obviously others in the inner circle pointed-out that Carroll needed to go for the benefit of his leader.

In the end, the events have lead to Dion naming Senator Smith (the man behind Iggy) and John Rae (yes, there is a relation) to key campaign posts and has also brought back Johanne Senecal (his key aid during the Chrétien years) to advise him. In short, amateur hour is over, now it’s time for the “A” Team.

The Conservatives know they are in the weaker position in terms of election timing, and the Liberals intend to take advantage of this. If I were a Conservative strategist, I'd be quite disappointed with the recent turn of events. Because I would know that I now face a formidable foe.

Interesting times...

Edited October 5, 2007 by Visionseeker

[jdobbin]

IOW, the Liberal Party no longer even stands for National Unity. The power-brokers have full run of the shop.

If the Liberal Party loses its connection to French Canada, then it loses all credibility in many Ontario ridings. The only thing that will keep it going is the sheer political acumen of its John Rae, Mark Marissen and Jason Cherniak power-brokers.

Here's what Nik Nanos says about the Tory strategy.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/reuters/071004/...politics_ca_col

Harper's challenge is to turn his confidence into extra votes. Polls show the Conservatives locked at around 33 percent, three points less than their score in the January 2006 election and well short of the 40 percent they need to stand a chance of winning a majority.

The Liberals are only one or two points behind, showing the attacks on Dion seem to be having a limited effect.

"The Conservatives are actually fighting the Liberals, not Stephane Dion ... The Conservatives have to be careful that they don't kick this easy target and make it too much of a diversion," Nanos told Reuters.

"The Harper bravado will probably reinforce the core but it's not necessarily a growth strategy for the Conservatives."

Harper, a cold and rather reserved personality, needs the Conservatives to gain another 28 seats to win a majority and very few observers believe they stand much of a hope.

"Does it make sense to have an election? Absolutely not. There will be no winner," said Nanos.

If the Liberals are all about power, what are the Tories? What is their agenda now? Is it on their website? Is Harper making speeches about it?

[capricorn]

If the Liberal Party loses its connection to French Canada, then it loses all credibility in many Ontario ridings.

I think this is key. I believe this swing in credibility has been at play for some time and was expedited with Adscam and other Liberal transgressions. At one time, francophones in Quebec and the ROC saw the Liberals as the protectors and the defenders of francophone minority rights. The "maudis anglais" were the enemy. Loyalty to the Liberals was passed on through generations.

At this point in our history, francophones feel more secure with their place in our society and this has become less of an issue for them. Their priorities have shifted and the Conservatives have positioned themselves, consciously or not, as a more likely ally aligned with their revised aspirations. I can't yet put my finger definitively on what these altered priorities might be. I suspect it has mostly to do with concerns linked with the economy, law and order, and immigration.

Thinking they had the francophone vote tied up, the Liberals gradually turned their sights on securing the ethnic vote. It could well be the Liberals did not anticipate francophones turning their backs on them.

[August1991]

Tell me you are not so naïve. Every party wants power. That’s the nature of party politics. The party is a means to an end.

However, the Liberal party has to put an end to such squabbles if they are ever to mount an effective campaign. The Carroll matter has actually provided them with an opportunity to do so.

Carroll was extremely instrumental in helping Dion win the leadership. Problem is, those who bring you to a position of power are the least capable in helping you keep it. Such soldiers create too many enemies and stand as symbols of division rather than assets for unity.

Carroll should’ve been made to go when Diebel’s book came out, but Dion stood by him and showed a strong willingness to reward loyalty by doing so. In the latest controversy, Dion again stood by his guy but obviously others in the inner circle pointed-out that Carroll needed to go for the benefit of his leader.

In the end, the events have lead to Dion naming Senator Smith (the man behind Iggy) and John Rae (yes, there is a relation) to key campaign posts and has also brought back Johanne Senecal (his key aid during the Chrétien years) to advise him. In short, amateur hour is over, now it’s time for the “A” Team.

The Conservatives know they are in the weaker position in terms of election timing, and the Liberals intend to take advantage of this. If I were a Conservative strategist, I'd be quite disappointed with the recent turn of events. Because I would know that I now face a formidable foe.

There you go. A demonstration of what I meant to say.

Visionseeker, Every party wants power? Really?

Let me put this in terms a Liberal might understand. Pierre Trudeau wanted power but not at any price. He wanted power on his terms. He wanted to change things.

The people currently running the federal Liberal Party are intelligent analyzers who will do anything, say anything, advise anything to get power. And that's it. It's as if Keith Davey were Liberal leader - without Trudeau.

What's the status of Justin Tredeau right now?

He won the Liberal nomination in Pierre Pettigrew's old riding. I admire this in a way. The riding is now Haitian immigrant and "middle class" French. If Justin had wanted a seat in the House, he could have chosen an easier way.

Like many Harvard/Brebeuf students, Justin lives in the shadow of his father. Having everything is like having nothing. He wants to stake his own claim. Unfortunately, his own, personal claim will likely defeat the dreams of several other federal Liberal candidates.

People in Quebec are really, really, really tired of this PQ/Liberal, Trudeau/Levesque debate. The last thing they want to see is another Trudeau in Ottawa. As Oprah would say, if Justin wants to solve his personal family-name issues, he should probably do it elsewhere.

Edited October 5, 2007 by August1991

[Michael Bluth]

Like many Harvard/Brebeuf students, Justin lives in the shadow of his father. Having everything is like having nothing.

Ahhh, words that can only have come from the mouth of someone who has never been remotely close to "having nothing". Justin has no idea what having nothing is like either. Probably a reason why a safer/richer riding would have been a much shrewder move for him.

He's accomplished a lot in his life. He was a teacher for a few years. Mid 30s and working on his MA.

Wow, I don't think the family name has helped his political career at all.

[Visionseeker]

There you go. A demonstration of what I meant to say.

Visionseeker, Every party wants power? Really?

So you are naïve, thus, let the record show.

[jdobbin]

Let me put this in terms a Liberal might understand. Pierre Trudeau wanted power but not at any price. He wanted power on his terms. He wanted to change things.

This conversations keeps coming back to the Liberals. After the five priorities, the Tories ran out of ideas. What they have done all summer is spend like the Liberals they used to complain about as well as run surpluses on par with the most excessive the Liberals had.

Where are the new ideas of the Tories? It seems the ones that he does have are not entirely embraced by the public. I don't see huge support for their environment plan, Afghanistan, their daycare plan or on the so-called fiscal imbalance.

The Liberals are struggling just as they did after Mulroney won. At that time many pundits were saying that they should merge into the NDP. We know what eventually happened.

As they discussed tonight on CBC's political panel, the Liberals still are a brand that people gravitate to. When Mansbridge asked the panel about how it was that the polls showed the Tories still tied with the Liberals after all that happened in the last weeks, none really had a good answer other than Canadians were not buying into Tory plans.

We'll see how far Harper wants to push things. The Liberals might abstain from the throne speech vote. If Harper wants to make a bill on federal spending limits, the Liberals will vote against that but the Bloc will support it. And it is there that the Liberals will have a major issue to fight on.

Two different versions of federalism is the idea will set many minds on fire.

[Michael Bluth]

This conversations keeps coming back to the Liberals. After the five priorities, the Tories ran out of ideas. What they have done all summer is spend like the Liberals they used to complain about as well as run surpluses on par with the most excessive the Liberals had.

Thread topic? The Problem with the Liberal Party of Canada

And the discussion on the thread "keeps coming back to the Liberals".

Maybe anybody using that as a jumping off point for a critique on the Tories really needs to get their heads outta their arses and realize that the Liberals are in serious, serious trouble. The Liberal Party of Canada has the lowest number of seats in Quebec in their history. They are barely ahead of the NDP in number of seats in the West. This is a party that has support from two niches of Canadian society. The big three cities, plus suburbs, and the maritimes.

The Tories and NDP are slowly squeezing them out of the big cities. Doesn't leave much of a chance at a win for the Liberals next election.

[August1991]

This conversations keeps coming back to the Liberals. After the five priorities, the Tories ran out of ideas. What they have done all summer is spend like the Liberals they used to complain about as well as run surpluses on par with the most excessive the Liberals had.

There you go again.

The Liberals want power. That's it. One way to get power is to remind everyone that the Conservatives (or other parties) also want power. Above in this thread, Visionseeker openly stated that the purpose of all political parties was - power.

When the Liberals have no agenda to present or they are bereft of policies - they can seek votes by arguing that all political parties are sharks who seek power.

Dobbin, let me be crude and explain what I heard when I listened to Copps discuss the federal Liberal Party's fortunes.

Ignatieff/Cheniak/Copps: "We're all whores. But Canadians prefer a blonde - even a dyed-hair blonde if it's well-done. We don't need other Liberals reminding everyone that we're not a natural blonde. Please, other Liberals, shut up "

----

If the purpose of the exercise is to dye your hair and get married and do good in this world, then fine. But that's not what I hear. Rather, I hear that the Liberal Party has no other purpose other than go blonde, get the rich guy and then drive the Rolls.

If there's an arc to this story, it's Anna Nicole Smith - not Madonna.

Edited October 5, 2007 by August1991

[jdobbin]

There you go again.

The Liberals want power. That's it. One way to get power is to remind everyone that the Conservatives (or other parties) also want power. Above in this thread, Visionseeker openly stated that the purpose of all political parties was - power.

When the Liberals have no agenda to present or they are bereft of policies - they can seek votes by arguing that all political parties are sharks who seek power.

Of course the Liberals want power. Unlike the national NDP and BQ who seem content on being permanent forces in opposition, the Liberals don't want to forever remain a protest party. They are determined to be either the government or the government in waiting.

Let me repeat that: the NDP and the BQ seem determined to be protest parties forever. The BQ by its regional nature knows it can only oppose or try to influence but never govern. The NDP by contrast has resisted attempts to move to the center and expanding its base. It seems content to be the voice of protest on the national level.

It is your opinion that the Liberals don't have policies. We certainly know that the Tories don't have a policy platform. If they did, they would not have said "mission accomplished" in the spring and then floundered until now. It is why they are stuck in the polls. By that same token, the Liberals don't have a new policy platform beyond opposing the Tories and that is why they are stuck as well.

You seem to want a national vision and think the Tories by their very nature represent that. You've been disappointed already by how they spend and how government has increased under them. What makes you so certain that a majority will make them perform differently?

I'm not sure what the new policy platform will be for the Liberals but I know what I liked about the last one and how I want some of those polices back. I want the income tax decrease back. I want the daycare program back. I want the Kelowna agreement back and I want the 2009 departure from southern Afghanistan confirmed.

One thing is certain: If the Liberals remain out of power, I won't be seeing many of those policies in the foreseeable future.

[Canuck E Stan]

Of course the Liberals want power.........

I'm not sure what the new policy platform will be for the Liberals but I know what I liked about the last one and how I want some of those polices back. I want the income tax decrease back. I want the daycare program back. I want the Kelowna agreement back and I want the 2009 departure from southern Afghanistan confirmed.

One thing is certain: If the Liberals remain out of power, I won't be seeing many of those policies in the foreseeable future.

What you want is the "ideas" of the the Liberal party,those that remain in the Liberal "idea" policy paper for years and never get implemented because the Liberals are too busy being in power.

Where is the new policy platform? Like a true Liberal,even you are ready to support them without knowing what they are.

First we must get the power.

Sorry, but August hit the nail on the head,Liberals are only there for the power.

[Michael Bluth]

Sorry, but August hit the nail on the head,Liberals are only there for the power.

Just like with Paul Martin as leader, the Liberals can't win at this point in time because they have no vision as to why they want power.

[jdobbin]

What you want is the "ideas" of the the Liberal party,those that remain in the Liberal "idea" policy paper for years and never get implemented because the Liberals are too busy being in power.

Where is the new policy platform? Like a true Liberal,even you are ready to support them without knowing what they are.

First we must get the power.

Sorry, but August hit the nail on the head,Liberals are only there for the power.

And where have the Tory ideas been since the spring? Why are you supporting them? They don't even have policy papers as far as I know. True Tories are willing to support them even though they had no plan for governing for six months?

I can't recall an Opposition policy platform being laid out months before an election, do you? Did the Tories present their platform back in fall of 2005 or did they wait till the election?

In any event, if an election is going to be called this fall/winter, there will be policy platform presented by the Liberals and it will be up to the electorate to judge and compare them to whatever the Tories are offering.

It is possible that the Liberal campaign will implode and Dion and the party will wilt under the pressure and not present any worthwhile ideas or simply muddle through. I'm sure that is what Harper is hoping for. But what if that doesn't happen? What if a minority is the best that Harper can hope for? Will the need for majority power push him to make a deal with the NDP or BQ?

[daniel]

Just like with Paul Martin as leader, the Liberals can't win at this point in time because they have no vision as to why they want power.

I recall someone on these forums stating that "Moral victories are for wimps." and he wasn't a Liberal supporter either. So it becomes very apparant that some people would be content that Canada has a one-party system.