The Liberal Titanic

Posted by admin on Nov 5, 2008 in Issues & Ideas | 0 comments

Following the Canadian federal election, there was much speculation on the future of the Liberal party. The Liberals received their lowest percent of the popular vote at 26 on record, and lost 19 seats on Oct. 14. After his concession speech, Stéphane Dion disappeared.

Dion remained in seclusion in Ottawa for nearly a week. Reportedly, he sought advice from past and present Liberal representatives on how to respond to the disappointing results.

His need for a week of contemplation suggests a failure to recognize, or unwillingness to acknowledge, that his party would not be forming the government. While polls varied on the exact numbers, each poll during the election showed the Conservatives ahead. Therefore, Dion should have theoretically been ready to respond to a loss immediately.

While campaigning on Oct. 12, Dion stated that, win or lose, “I will never quit.” Hence, one would think his response would be to remain leader of the party. However, his press release on Oct. 20 announced his resignation. This reflects that Dion was not alone on the Liberal Titanic, and his crew was about to commit mutiny.

When Dion was elected as leader of the Liberal party, it took until the fourth ballot for him to win. Thus amongst Liberal members, he was not highly supported from the beginning. Shortly after Dion became the leader, the Conservative party launched attack ads to further weaken his already tenuous support. Dion made reference to the various ads before and during the election as victimizing him. This is granted, but Dion did provide voice clips like “you think it’s easy making priorities?” the CTV interview that asked the same question four times and the famous Dion shrug.

When Dion retreated from the media, the media went on the prowl for signs of disunity amongst the party. Previous Liberal leadership candidates Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff responded diplomatically, but many people called for Dion’s resignation. Rather than Dion definitively declaring he would be leading the ship ashore, he sulked in his cabin under deck. This allowed for his crew to talk amongst themselves and the issue of his leadership abilities festered.

At the very time that his leadership was being examined, his indecisiveness caused a six-day hiatus from his party and the public. This was the deathblow and made it necessary for him to resign. Dion’s decision accurately reflected the democratic process: Dion created his own path, but Canadians chose another. Dion resigned, but has designated himself as the interim leader until the pre-planned Liberal leadership convention in May 2009. In his speech, he warned that the search for a new leader “will not be sufficient to understand what happened in the campaign.”

Dion declared that his biggest handicap was finances. According to him, this is the root of the modern campaigning the Conservative party took advantage of to distort Dion’s policies and reputation. If money is the issue, this points to a deeper problem within the party. The Canadian public is not supporting the party, a mess Dion inherited in 2006.

Dion continues to lead in title, but his authority will be questioned at every turn. However, his party cannot afford a leadership race such as the last one both for reasons both of money and unity. Rae and Ignatieff were vehemently opposed to each other, thus their agreement to be “civil” this time around.

So who will lead this sinking boat? The Globe and Mail identified nine possible contenders on the day of the resignation, further exemplifying the fragmentation within the Liberals. The party, as mentioned by Dion, needs to be renewed. It is essential that this renewal promotes unity, and connects with Canadians as well as their chequebooks. Otherwise, despite throwing the captain overboard, the Liberal Titanic will sink, leaving no survivors.