The Globe and Mail's online edition (the only one I will henceforth have access to, given my termination of our subscription) today has an article by Bruce Anderson entitled 'Michael Ignatief faces daunting enthusiasm gap' offering a variety of reasons that the Liberal leader has failed to 'catch fire' with perspective voters. In my humble view, none of them fully explains his failure as leader.
As I have written before, I am convinced that Ignatief's failure to convey any semblance of integrity, given his repeated practice of ensuring an insufficient number of Liberals in the House of Commons when key votes occur, votes with the potential of bringing down the Harper Government, are at the core of the Liberal Party's problems. I am of the view that, even worse than contending with a government whose views and policies may run counter to one's core values, is contending with a political party that ultimately stands for nothing but the acquisition of power for its own sake.
Even though the electorate may at times be befuddled, apathetic, even misguided, I am certain that they can spot insincerity and hypocrisy very adeptly, qualities that the Liberal leader has displayed in abundance since his ascension to the leadership.
Showing posts with label michael ignatief. Show all posts
Showing posts with label michael ignatief. Show all posts
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Michael Ignatief's Fecklessness - Part 2
In yesterday's post I wrote about the lack of principle that is manifest in Michael Ignatief's leadership of the Liberal Party. Time and time again, he has chosen to take the expedient route by consistently failing to back bills whose principles he has claimed to support, ever-fearful that a real stance against the Harper Government might trigger an election.
On Wednesday night, he ensured that a sufficient number of his MPs, including himself, were absent for the vote on Bill C-300, a private member's bill that would have imposed sanctions on mining companies violating human rights and environmental laws in countries whose resources they are extracting. The vote result: 140 against to 134 in favour.
Just prior to the vote Mr. Ignatief, as reported in the Globe's Ottawa Notebook, once again proving his unfitness to lead a once-great party, had the hypocrisy to claim he supported the objectives of the bill in a memo he sent out:
Liberals recognize the importance of the mining, gas and oil industry to Canada. We believe that a commitment to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) – at home and abroad – makes good business sense and is a Canadian advantage. We are sending a strong message of the government that they cannot continue to ignore CSR for Canadian companies.
Perhaps one of the most odious aspects of his behaviour is that he seems to think that none of the electorate that would like to support the Liberals will notice or care about his lack of integrity. That may be true for some, but it essentially ensures that I and others like me who insist on a modicum of morality in the political arena will not be supporting him in the next election.
On Wednesday night, he ensured that a sufficient number of his MPs, including himself, were absent for the vote on Bill C-300, a private member's bill that would have imposed sanctions on mining companies violating human rights and environmental laws in countries whose resources they are extracting. The vote result: 140 against to 134 in favour.
Just prior to the vote Mr. Ignatief, as reported in the Globe's Ottawa Notebook, once again proving his unfitness to lead a once-great party, had the hypocrisy to claim he supported the objectives of the bill in a memo he sent out:
Liberals recognize the importance of the mining, gas and oil industry to Canada. We believe that a commitment to Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) – at home and abroad – makes good business sense and is a Canadian advantage. We are sending a strong message of the government that they cannot continue to ignore CSR for Canadian companies.
Perhaps one of the most odious aspects of his behaviour is that he seems to think that none of the electorate that would like to support the Liberals will notice or care about his lack of integrity. That may be true for some, but it essentially ensures that I and others like me who insist on a modicum of morality in the political arena will not be supporting him in the next election.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
Just Another Example of the Fecklessness of Michael Ignatief's Leadership
It was hardly surprising to read in The Globe and Mail's online edition that Michael Ignatief is ambivalent over Bill C-300, introduced by Scarborough Liberal John McKay, which would impose sanctions on Canadian mining companies that are found guilty, as a result of investigations initiated by Ottawa, of violating environmental or human rights in the countries they do business in.
Frightened by the predictable Conservative rhetoric that if such a bill were passed, mining jobs would be lost, the Liberal Leader has said that “there are problems in the bill,” code, I suspect, for fears that the next poll might show decreased support if he supports it.
Strange how he doesn't even consider that taking a principled stand for a change might actually earn him some respect and support instead of the widespread scorn so many express over the opportunistic stances he has regularly taken since assuming leadership of the party, a leadership that seems to be defined by little else but a bald and avid thirst for power.
Frightened by the predictable Conservative rhetoric that if such a bill were passed, mining jobs would be lost, the Liberal Leader has said that “there are problems in the bill,” code, I suspect, for fears that the next poll might show decreased support if he supports it.
Strange how he doesn't even consider that taking a principled stand for a change might actually earn him some respect and support instead of the widespread scorn so many express over the opportunistic stances he has regularly taken since assuming leadership of the party, a leadership that seems to be defined by little else but a bald and avid thirst for power.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
It's Too Early for The Federal Liberal Party to Start Celebrating
Despite the fact that the latest poll shows the federal Liberal Party virtually tied with the Harper Government, may I suggest that it is far too early for celebration?
While I have generally voted Liberal throughout my life, I have, over the past year or so become increasingly disenchanted with the party's performance under the stewardship of Michael Ignatieff, the main reason being that he has displayed very little leadership and provided almost no reason for support.
Whether accurate or not, historically the Liberals have been seen as the party of the centre, incorporating policies from both sides of the political spectrum but usually avoiding the kind of polarization that has been so characteristic of the Harper Government. Unfortunately, since being in opposition in the latest minority situation, they have emerged as the Opposition Party that wants to form the next Government because ….. well, because they crave the power that comes from being the Government.
Absent, as far as I can see, is any overarching vision that would inspire people to trust them with governing this vast country. Time and time again, either through House of Commons votes that support the Government or by engineering the absence of sufficient House numbers to allow them to vote against confidence measures without bringing down the Government (which would force an election), the Liberals have shown themselves to be hypocritical and without consistent principle.
The most recent example, although I could cite many, is the Conservative's American-style budget omnibus bill which the Liberals rightfully strenuously opposed and voted against, carrying as it did many items that had nothing to do with the budget, including reductions in environmental assessments, selling off parts of Canada Post, selling Atomic Energy Canada without Parliamentary approval, etc. However, because it was a vote of confidence, and because polls showed that the Liberals wouldn't benefit were an election called, the party ensured that 30 Members were absent from the House so the Government wouldn't fall.
At the time, Liberal Bob Rae said that the Senate was the best venue for amending the budget bill. Those amendments were made, with the contentious items removed; however, shortly before the Senate vote on the amendments, a spokesman for the Conservatives said that any Senate amendments would be viewed as an election issue by the Government. So what happened? Predictably, the vote on the amendments saw an inadequate number of Liberal Senators in the Red Chamber (12 were absent), and the bill was sent back unamended.
Michael Ignatief, Bob Rae, and the rest of the Liberal Party will have to do much better than that if they are to have my vote.
While I have generally voted Liberal throughout my life, I have, over the past year or so become increasingly disenchanted with the party's performance under the stewardship of Michael Ignatieff, the main reason being that he has displayed very little leadership and provided almost no reason for support.
Whether accurate or not, historically the Liberals have been seen as the party of the centre, incorporating policies from both sides of the political spectrum but usually avoiding the kind of polarization that has been so characteristic of the Harper Government. Unfortunately, since being in opposition in the latest minority situation, they have emerged as the Opposition Party that wants to form the next Government because ….. well, because they crave the power that comes from being the Government.
Absent, as far as I can see, is any overarching vision that would inspire people to trust them with governing this vast country. Time and time again, either through House of Commons votes that support the Government or by engineering the absence of sufficient House numbers to allow them to vote against confidence measures without bringing down the Government (which would force an election), the Liberals have shown themselves to be hypocritical and without consistent principle.
The most recent example, although I could cite many, is the Conservative's American-style budget omnibus bill which the Liberals rightfully strenuously opposed and voted against, carrying as it did many items that had nothing to do with the budget, including reductions in environmental assessments, selling off parts of Canada Post, selling Atomic Energy Canada without Parliamentary approval, etc. However, because it was a vote of confidence, and because polls showed that the Liberals wouldn't benefit were an election called, the party ensured that 30 Members were absent from the House so the Government wouldn't fall.
At the time, Liberal Bob Rae said that the Senate was the best venue for amending the budget bill. Those amendments were made, with the contentious items removed; however, shortly before the Senate vote on the amendments, a spokesman for the Conservatives said that any Senate amendments would be viewed as an election issue by the Government. So what happened? Predictably, the vote on the amendments saw an inadequate number of Liberal Senators in the Red Chamber (12 were absent), and the bill was sent back unamended.
Michael Ignatief, Bob Rae, and the rest of the Liberal Party will have to do much better than that if they are to have my vote.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)