Why Canada needs a liberal party

[Colin Parkinson]

I came from a hardcore NDP family, supported the CPC mainly as they were the only party that cared even a little bit about me a gun owner. But now having served under both Liberal and CPC leadership, I am highly disappointed with both. I don't expect them to pander to my needs or even to get things right all the time. But we have gone from outright corruption, to incompetence/paranoia and a growing sense of entitlement. The CPC scapegoats me for being a Public Servant, the rest scapegoat me for being a gun owner, I can not win.

The problem is there is no viable alternative for me either Provincially or Federally, oh Rhino's where art thou?

 

[Remius]

I voted Conservative because of their Arctic Sovereignty plan.  Something that interested me and frankly will become amain issue this century.  But it's been all smoke and mirrors.  Plus they have been less than transparent in my mind.  it's going to be a tough choice come next election.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

I certainly haven't agreed with some of the stuff the CPC have done and am pissed about some of the stuff they haven't done.

It's still a no brainer for me though. There is absolutely nothing that any of the other parties have done, or promised to do, that has caught my fancy. Much also, that I am diametrically opposed to.

I'll still dance with the one that brung me. It's the devil I know, after all.

The CPC will get my vote.

Provincially, I'll also hold my nose and vote PC.

 

[a_majoor]

Sad but true assessment.

The current Liberal party has nothing to offer (based on the total absence of policy pronouncements, white papers etc.), while the NDP has the usual scary tropes against liberty, property ownership and Rule of Law (if anything they are the Anti-liberal party).

I believe it is Andrew Coyne who has suggested that the only way the LPC can survive is to actually become "Liberal" in the classical sense; advocating for policies that promote individual liberty, unfettered use of property and universal adherence to the Rule of Law (no "group rights" or special exemptions based on gender, ethnic origin, religion, regional residency etc.)

This would be fine by me, this is the definition not only of Classical Liberalism as defined by philosophers like Edmond Burke but also the starting point of my own small "l" libertarian philosophy. If nothing else, it would provide a very clear and distinct point on the political spectrum that isn't "Left" or "Right" in the current sense, and would not be crowded out of the public sphere by the centerist leanings of the CPC and NDP. The only downside is discovering how many Canadians are actually true "Liberals" and would vote for a transformative party based on these principles as opposed to "Liberals" interested in the spoils that a transactive party can offer them?

 

[Edward Campbell]

I was never a committed Conservative; in the 1960s I voted Liberal, as much against John Diefenbaker's policies as for Lester Pearson's, in the 1970s I switched and voted against the Liberals because Pierre Trudeau's values and policies were, in my view (which is unchanged after 40 years) antithetical to Canadian and liberal values.

If I had to qualify myself it would be as a Manley Liberal ... but there's no such thing so I support, at the maximum legal financial limit, the Conservative Party of Canada because I believe it offers the better choice for Canada, clearly superior in most (but not all) important policy areas to the Liberals. There are some, actually several things the CPC is doing wrong, but they are, I think, easily correctable; by contrast, the parts of public policy that are harder to change are, in my opinion, in safe hands with Prime Minister Harper.

 

[pbi]

Sad but true assessment...The current Liberal party has nothing to offer (based on the total absence of policy pronouncements, white papers etc.), while the NDP has the usual scary tropes against liberty, property ownership and Rule of Law (if anything they are the Anti-liberal party).

This is what I was driving at.

I'm not at all happy with the Tory party I see today: in fact I grow increasingly suspicious of it. Its almost paranoid approach to information policies is one of the things that really turns on the warning light for me. When a Tory minister speaks, you can  hear them almost robotically reciting their media training:

"CLICK"-now go to Bridging Technique".... "CLICK"-now disregard question and go to Messaging-"CLICK"- "Avoid Speculation"

Does everybody else do it? Yes, probably, but the argument that "everybody else does it" is possibly the weakest moral or ethical argument known to man,  which is probably why witless teenagers resort to it.

The tightening of the CF's media approach, arguably the most liberal of any Federal agency, was a case in point for me: it was almost palpable during my last few years in uniform.  I was recently told by a PAffO that "Connecting with Canadians" is a term we don't use anymore because it is a "Hillierism" (It predates Hillier as CDS by quite a bit, but anyway that is just one small symptom).

I guess, like a naive fool, I hoped for something better when I cast a Tory ballot (and not just once...). Maybe they have fallen victim to that toxic Canadian political syndrome "Multiple Term-itis" (a sub-genus of the "Natural Governing Party"  disease).  The "slow boil of arrogance" referred to earlier.

I agree that right now there's no really good alternative on the political radar screen. And that's the sad thing.

 

[Kirkhill]

My sense is that I want the Tories around for a little longer, one election definitely and not more than two, so that they can continue to cause the unsettling of the bureaucracy (my condolences Colin).

I'm a firm believer that there was far too much stasis in the bureaucracy resulting in and from not just a Laurentian Consensus but a Trudeau - Boomer consensus. Trudeau's boomers are "shuffling off to Buffalo" or more precisely Arizona and Florida.  That makes this an opportune period for remaking the underpinnings of governance by resetting the bureaucracy.  Even if the resetting is as ham-fisted as chucking a grenade in a closed room and sorting out the pieces afterwards resetting is necessary from time to time.

With respect to the parties themselves, I've demonstrated my cynicism in the past.  As used to be said of disreputable young ladies: "They're no better than they ougtht to".  They are all about egos and followers and hangers-on.  Policy is a vehicle to power, fame and fortune.

 

[a_majoor]

My sense of CPC "messaging" is they are attempting to break the power of "narrative" which currently drives news and entertainment (and they have become almost the same thing) today. The Media wishes to run stories which support the "narrative", such as the age old "hidden agenda" trope, and the government wishes to present stories which support their programs (and their own "narrative" as well), leading to the battle we see in the media today.

In my opinion, Prime Minister Harper had hit on a brilliant strategy several years ago when he took the summer Barbecue circuit time to go to local radio stations and participate in call in shows. (This was prior to the 2006 minority victory, if I remember correctly). This allowed him to connect directly with the local population, bypass much of the media "narrative" and I also suspect to discover a great deal about the issues that voters are interested in as opposed to the "Laurentian Consensus" values of the Parliamentary Press Gallery and Toronto Centric media conglomerates (see "The Big Shift" for the origin and meaning of the term). Perhaps spending a lot more time "on the road" with senior cabinet ministers and MP's might provide that level of conectivity again, even if bypassing the national media drives the holders of the Laurentian Consensus crazy.

 

[pbi]

Perhaps spending a lot more time "on the road" with senior cabinet ministers and MP's might provide that level of conectivity again, even if bypassing the national media drives the holders of the Laurentian Consensus crazy.

I think the Tories desperately need to do this, but I don't think they are inclined to right now. They know populism is a two-edged sword.

 

[PuckChaser]

Perhaps spending a lot more time "on the road" with senior cabinet ministers and MP's might provide that level of conectivity again, even if bypassing the national media drives the holders of the Laurentian Consensus crazy.

Completely agree. Talk shows as you suggested are fantastic. In fact, take advantage of social media and do a few AMAs on RDDT with senior cabinet ministers. Let the population ask direct questions and get direct answers. Twitter does something similar to this as well. Young people are very connected now adays, and that's the votes you want to grab.

 

[GAP]

Completely agree. Talk shows as you suggested are fantastic. In fact, take advantage of social media and do a few AMAs on RDDT with senior cabinet ministers. Let the population ask direct questions and get direct answers. Twitter does something similar to this as well. Young people are very connected now adays, and that's the votes you want to grab.

Actually, that would be a show in of itself.....the questions tend to be preapproved and selected to put on a good show and not embarass the speaker... :

 

[pbi]

Actually, that would be a show in of itself.....the questions tend to be preapproved and selected to put on a good show and not embarass the speaker... :

Sadly, I would replace "tend to be" with "are always".

 

[Journeyman]

Let the population ask direct questions and get direct answers.

Not going to happen.  The "news" would be the heckling idiots and protesters rather than any analytically-capable voter actually seeking information.

 

[a_majoor]

Actually, that would be a show in of itself.....the questions tend to be preapproved and selected to put on a good show and not embarass the speaker... :

Depends on the market and the show. Smaller markets can't support a staff of pre screeners to vet calls, and some producers won't bother anyway. I recall fielding some pretty bizarre questions on local radio shows when running for municipal office (and even on panel shows when all the candidates were on), so it was clear there was no vetting to make some people look good or bad....

Proper field work and preparation is going to be needed by anyone attempting to do this successfully.

 

[Colin Parkinson]

My sense is that I want the Tories around for a little longer, one election definitely and not more than two, so that they can continue to cause the unsettling of the bureaucracy (my condolences Colin).

I'm a firm believer that there was far too much stasis in the bureaucracy resulting in and from not just a Laurentian Consensus but a Trudeau - Boomer consensus. Trudeau's boomers are "shuffling off to Buffalo" or more precisely Arizona and Florida.  That makes this an opportune period for remaking the underpinnings of governance by resetting the bureaucracy.  Even if the resetting is as ham-fisted as chucking a grenade in a closed room and sorting out the pieces afterwards resetting is necessary from time to time.

With respect to the parties themselves, I've demonstrated my cynicism in the past.  As used to be said of disreputable young ladies: "They're no better than they ougtht to".  They are all about egos and followers and hangers-on.  Policy is a vehicle to power, fame and fortune.

My read is that the CPC actually had some sympathy in the PS, most level headed people were sick and tired of the Liberals and insulted by the corruption and arrogance. They were willing to give the CPC a chance. But the PR stranglehold, the out of the blue re-writes of legislation has burnt off that support. Re-writing legislation is a government prerogative, however claiming everything is a crisis and the re-write must be done overnight is weak and creates poorly written laws and regs. Listening completely to one side of an issue also creates bad law. For my own Act, they indicated that they wanted changes in 2009, so they had lots of time to go through public consultation on both sides and come up with good law with a fairly broad support of it. Instead most was done behind closed doors. Even with the Environmental law changes, many of the consultants and proponents were surprised at the sweeping changes, here in BC, we went from 500 environmental assessments to 12. Now industry is nervous that the First Nations may resort to court actions and civil disobedience.
Don’t misunderstand me, the Federal CEAA needed many changes, in particular the “Lawlist triggers” and going to thresholds was a good idea, but I think by the level of changes they made, they actually cut off at the knees many of the FN leaders that pushed for controlled development under that EA protection. These changes may weaken these leaders, causing many of the younger generation to seek other more direct ways of challenging the level of development in their traditional territories.
Ottawa is realizing they are limited in how much they can impose onto the communities in these regions with Endbridge. 

 

[The Bread Guy]

.....the questions tend to be preapproved and selected to put on a good show and not embarass the speaker... :

.... or rigged to do nothing but make the guest look bad.  Check CBC's "As It Happens" on the radio sometime - it's hard not to get the impression that guests are either 1)  the underdog who can do no wrong, or 2)  the devil incarnate who can do no right.

At least the BBC lets you know ahead of time you're getting nothing but (2) in shows like "Hard Talk" - worth listening to a podcast or two.

Depends on the market and the show. Smaller markets can't support a staff of pre screeners to vet calls, and some producers won't bother anyway. I recall fielding some pretty bizarre questions on local radio shows when running for municipal office (and even on panel shows when all the candidates were on), so it was clear there was no vetting to make some people look good or bad....

True, that.  The downside of some smaller-market "work around the major media" outreach is that sometimes, the audience reached is like the folks who post comments on online stories - an .... eclectic .... bunch of listeners, indeed.