Bob Rae's exit will yank Liberals to the right
SOD'S OPERA / Progressives rallied around flawed candidate
Marcus McCann / National / Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Share |

POLARIZING. Rae would have put the boots to Harper — and progressives would have applauded. But if Rae had been chosen leader, we still would have had lots to gripe about.
(bobrae.ca)
The left wing of the Liberal Party was dealt a blow Dec 9 by the departure of Bob Rae from the Liberal leadership race. Rae, a polarizing presence in the contest, was hardly an ideal candidate for lefties, especially gay lefties, but he represented the last holdout for a party shifting to the right.

Some in the party were undoubtedly spooked by the spectre of a left-leaning former NDP premier taking the helm. It would have been a shock to a party that's been drifting — toward fiscal conservativism, cozying up to law-and-order types and abandoning social programs — for the last 25 years, under Turner, Chretien, then finally Martin.

The disastrous election results of Stephane Dion, a left-of-centre leader with links to the environmental movement, were quickly followed by calls that the party shift to the right. It now appears to be their game plan.

In the last two weeks, the push-and-pull of the Liberal factions were laid bare in the face of a Liberal-NDP accord signed Dec 1.

Lefty Liberals, who can scarcely stomach the idea of another term of Stephen Harper in office, rejoice at the plan. The bounty is double, since Harper would be replaced by a coalition whose policy accord is full of goodies for manufacturing, the environment and Quebec (see their policy platform here.)

The more conservative faction of the Libs are less scared by a second Harper term. Instead, they've been utterly aghast at the idea of working with New Democrats on anything — they see the NDP not just as political foes but far-left socialists, separated from the Liberals by an ideological gulf a kilometre wide.

So, the reactions of Rae and leadership rival Michael Ignatieff were hardly surprising. Rae, buoyed by his supporters, became the short-lived defender of the coalition. Ignatieff expressed reservations, saying that he's willing to follow through only "if necessary."

Now, Ignatieff appears to have cinched the leadership. There's an irony here. The Liberals are in a hurry to install a new leader so they can oppose Harper's speech from the throne and January budget. However, they've selected a guy who's likely going to rubber stamp the government's agenda — if they make some concessions — in January.

So, the outlook for January is Harper or Harper-lite.

Rae would have put the boots to Harper — and progressives would have applauded. But if Rae had been chosen leader, we still would have had lots to gripe about. Rae, who represents the gaybourhood riding of Toronto Centre, broke his promise on spousal rights for gay couples while premier of Ontario in the early 1990s. It was a dramatic failure that galvanized anti-Rae sentiment among the provinces' gays and lesbians.

Among straight Ontarians, Rae is known for his unsteady hand during and following the 1990-1991 recession, which many thought would be his Achilles heel during an election.

Even before the Liberal leadership decided to opt for an abbreviated consultation with the party's grassroots, it appeared that Ignatieff had the bid locked up. But Rae's presence in the race was an important moderating influence for his chief rival.

Indeed, public debates between Iggy and Rae would have pushed the Ignatieff camp further to the left on the economy, social programs and minority issues.

Had Rae been named the next leader of the Liberal Party in Dec or Jan, he pledged to proceed with plans for a coalition. It would have been an uphill battle. He would have again found himself on the wrong side of unflattering public opinion polls, this time about the coalition.

It would have required an extensive public-relations campaign to shore up support among Canadians. Could he have done it? It's hard to tell. But with Iggy at the helm of the party, it's almost certain that the PR campaign can only limp along. His halfhearted "maybe" will make it hard for Liberals to articulate their message, especially through the haze of Conservative attack ads.

And so, with mixed feelings, Canadians will put their visions of a Prime Minister Bob Rae to bed tonight. For progressives — even ones with strong reservations about Rae — it has not be been a good day for politics.
 



Share |


Reader Comments


 
here's my read
Rae was unelectable as PM and so was Dion, so the Libs had to move to supporting Iggy, who is likely electable in the future. I'm betting Iggy never lets the coalition happen and that he won't take down the Tories until their popularity is in the toilet due to the legacy of being in gov't during the worst period of impact of the financial crisis, which still hasn't hit yet. So...Iggy's poised to be swept to power in the next election, which will be timed, if he can help it, to his advantage. I don't think there's a chance in hell of a coalition taking power. Why would Libs want to govern during such a period of political risk? they'd have so much to lose and not a lot to gain. even if they seized power via coalition, the benefits of being seen to be a great PM/leader may well be far too little to overcome the likelihood that voters will punish whoever is in power when things really crash into the toilet economically. I wish I could read it differently, but that's how I see it. and GLB folks don't matter a whit to any of them, just like trans folks don't seem to matter a whit to any of our supposed 'natural allies' like the NDP, queer communities (or their newspaper), labour unions, the womens movement or you name it. so for Xtra's community of gays and lesbians...bon appetit.
SB, Ottawa Ontario
12/09/08 2:34 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Annoyed at Ignatieff
I withdrew my support of Ignatieff after he waivered at a time when we, the coalition, could most definitely remove Harper. I don't like this weak position he holds baiting the center and center right of the Liberal party away from a united front with the NDP. There is room for many voices at the table on the left, and anyone that assumes that dividing us by refraining from representing these viewpoints at the leadership level is going to be detrimental to all of the parties that are not Conservative or in other words Harper's.
Annoyed with Ignatieff, Winnipeg Ontario
12/09/08 3:27 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
to state the obvious
I've never voted Liberal or right-of-the-Liberals in my life and probably never will unless its for very specific strategic reasons of defeating a right-wing candidate in my riding. But even with an Ignatieff-led rightist Liberal Party in power, we'll still likely be better off than we would under any possible Harper or Conservative Party Government. Maybe a lot better, maybe just a bit better, but still better. At least there is *some* progressive (or at least moderate) base within the Liberal Party to act as a lobby and measure of countervail. There is no such element in the Conservative Party of any size anymore is there? The CPC doesn't really have any Red Tory types do they? The deeper into the base of the CPC one travels, the more and more frighteningly conservative a crowd one finds. I like the idea of a coalition..but pragmatically, it could be a short term gain and high, in return for handing Harper a majority in the not so distant future. the coalition will be a fragile thing, and if it goes badly and falls or calls an election, Harper could get his majority quite potentially, out of the electorate's desire for stability in a time of economic crisis. if it were up to me, the coalition would take power, then pass one major piece of legislation, that being the introduction of proportional representation...and it would then dissolve parliament and have an election under a prop rep system. we don't need a constitutional amendment to introduce prop. rep. do we? so it's doable. and it would rock and just be an amazing ride and transform our country for the better, because all those over-seated rural bible-thumping, anti-freedom folks would have their unnatural dominance removed, and the real majority could have its will expressed in parliament. oh well..a girl can dream.
SB, Ottawa Ontario
12/09/08 4:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Liberal no more
On confidence votes, Iggy has four choices. Liberals can vote Yes, making themselves complicit with Harper, and therefore irrelevant. Liberals can be Absent, making Iggy into an English-speaking Dion, and therefore irrelevant. Liberals can vote No, and become the government as per the coalition agreement they all signed. Or Liberals can vote No and go to another expensive election they can't afford to campaign in properly, and lose some more seats. The choice is pretty obvious, right?
Randy, Windsor ON
12/10/08 7:59 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Good Choice
First of all, there is nothing wrong with "cozying up to law-and-order types" since those types are the ones that keep us from getting bashed to death and try to put those offenders behind bars when they do. Just to let you know................... I voted Conservative because I want a strong Canada. This new leader gives us a chance to usher in a new era of Conservative Liberal coperation. That will probably lead the country back to being relevant (relevant and "well liked" are very different things, by the way) on the world stage. There are other issues besides gay rights (which are not really a priority of Rae anyway) like millitary spending so that our soldiers can have better equipment to fight our enemies and protect people living in failed sates who's human rights are horibally abused. With Iggy working with Harper this is more likely to happen. With Rae and the NDP we would cut the military and send our soldiers on useless BS peacekeeping missions. This is an opportunity to reform the justice system so that criminals actually get what the deserve rather than getting out after a year on the "faint hope" that they won't break the law again.
Happy gay!, Edmonton Alberta
12/10/08 2:28 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Strength comes from more than guns
a strong Canada...hmm........Let's see under Conservative governments we ussually see a cowering before the US. The last Liberal government stood against the US in their war in Iraq, The last Liberal government set up a stable economy that didn't even phase through the last mini recession in the US. I guess we have different opinions on a strong Canada...
S.Wilson, Calgary Alberta
12/11/08 1:57 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Oh, really?
quote: "First of all, there is nothing wrong with "cozying up to law-and-order types" since those types are the ones that keep us from getting bashed to death and try to put those offenders behind bars when they do." AND, they ALSO leave the bigotry intact in the age-of-consent laws (re: anal intercourse), AND their caucus (and membership) is widely and DEEPLY homophobic (Cheryl Gallant, Stockboy Day, Vic Toews, ad nauseum.) Quote: "...so that our soldiers can have better equipment to fight our enemies and protect people living in failed sates who's human rights are horibally abused" AND WHO would be our "enemies" (other than the Harpokons?) and which "failed state" where "human rights are horribly abused" do you have in mind? The one-party state of Alberta, maybe, where asshole bigots like Ted Morton sit in cabinet, the government STILL drags its heels over adding queers to the human rights legislation (despite court rulings), the "Environment Minister" states that one of his top priorities is that environmental regulations not interfere with the economy, and despite a booming economy and vast surpluses homelessness abounds, Calgary and Edmonton transit is hopelessly inadequate, and the infrastructure crumbles while spending on it lags? Quote: " This is an opportunity to reform the justice system so that criminals actually get what the deserve..." WOULD THIS INCLUDE lawbreakers such as Vic Toews (convicted), or Brian Mulroney, with his money-stuffed envelopes of cash? Or did you mean "criminals" who must now use the Harpokons' BS reverse-onus provisions to explain why they should get bail, rather than the time-honoured precedent that requires prosecutors to explain why they *shouldn't* get it? Presumed guilty until you prove your innocence, eh? Take your Harpokon talking points and crawl back under your bridge, troll.
Nathanial, Slocan Valley BC
12/11/08 8:49 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Pardon me?
Quote: "The last Liberal government stood against the US in their war in Iraq" Ummm, no. That would be the CHRETIEN government that did that. The *last* Liberal government was presided over by the waffling and ineffectual Paul Martin, another "Liberal" who veered so hard to the right that it was hard to see daylight between him and the conservatives at times. Quote: "The last Liberal government set up a stable economy that didn't even phase through the last mini recession in the US." Again, that would be the *same* Paul Martin, who as Finance Minister under Chretien registered his ships offshore to avoid paying Canadian income tax, whilst paying down the deficit by eviscerating social programs. And who then consistently low-balled surplus estimates, allowing the feds to build up massive surpluses... while at the same time screwing over unemployed Canadians by making it harder for them to get UI -- thus building up a massive UI/EI surplus, which the Harpokons subsequently plundered. See: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/cbc/081211/canada/canada_ei_scoc (All while STILL keeping his ships registered offshore!) And this would be the SAME Paul Martin who continued the Liberal practice of only giving way on the issue of queer civil rights when dragged to that point by the courts, kicking and screaming all the way. Yeah, whether as Finance Minister or as incredibly inept Prime Minister, we SURE have a LOT to thank Paul Martin for!
Nathanial, Slocan Valley BC
12/11/08 9:09 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Yikes!
As usual, Marcus, I like your writing, but WHAT happened to your picture?! You are a cutie, but that current photo! Ugh! Loses the glasses and the five-o'clock shadow, and let's see the yummy old Marcus back that I know you can be! (Sorry for being such a shallow bitch, but you startled me!)
Nathanial, Slocan Valley BC
12/11/08 9:20 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
save the coalition
I'm so crazy about the Liberal leader. With Bob Rae i knew what I was getting. I don't know Michael. He appears to be much more to the right and that is worrisome. That said, I hope he sees the light that is the coalition. The coalition would be able to get Canada on the right track. We could work on our queer agenda, trans protection, on HIV/AIDS funding, on drug laws, on sex workers and eventually on age of consent. The list is longer but lets get it started.
Ricky Barnes, Toronto ON
12/11/08 9:25 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.