Politics: Canada: Libs lose another candidate as Volpe bites the dust

.
The glow is off another candidate in the crowd hustling to win the leadership of the federal Liberal Party of Canada, which lost the government in the thick taint of finanicial scandal dating from the days of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien and Finance Minister Paul Martin, neither of whom went to jail like hapless civil-servant Guité who was implicated up to his eye-balls but who also was the scapegoat for all the rest. Call them the Unprovables. Yet, the public is aware that the Liberals had not just one bad egg, but a system of financial legerdemain.

That's why, the appearance of Joe Volpe among the 11 assembled candidates at the first debate for the leadership, held in Winnipeg, Manitoba, yesterday, marked him off as the second pin to fall, after the belated Belinda Stronach. She had only money going for her, and is widely viewed as incompetent to run a government. Joe Volpe on the other hand has a growl for a visage and had been taking very large lollipops from extremely wealthy kids with drug industry parents, as campaign contributions. So, that's two definitely down.

Joe tried to pre-empt any call for accountablity by holding a press conference before the debate, all butch and huffy about being smeared. That generated a fracas around the debate with Michael Ignatieff, until now the leader of the pack. Ignatieff had made a remark about the inappropriateness of any candidate running without an impeccable financial record. Carolyn Bennett and Ken Dryden (previously of hockey fame). In reply to Ignatieff, the huffy Volpe wrapped himself in the flag--not quite the Maple Leaf, but that of "Canadian nationalism"--as tho that excuses his unusual appeal to wealthy children. Why, after all that the Libs have been thru, Volpe would play the game in the way he did, is utterly unscrutable, really a way that appears as an evasion of the campaign-contribution laws. Remember, perception is important. Were he of no evasive intent, he still showed lack of judgment in avoiding the appearance of possible bad intent. He's out.

Oh yes, the fracas.

"I'm a Canadian nationalist. I don't apologize for it and I think it's important for us to distinguish ourselves from the current government, which has essentially a made-in-Washington policy on foreign affairs and Mr. Ignatieff supports the [Conservative] government's position [which supports the American position]," said Volpe, the Toronto MP and former immigration minister.

"Within a leadership position, if you're going to support Conservative issues and you're not going to differentiate yourself from the Prime Minister, then you're not going to be in a position to fight for Liberal principles against the Conservative government," Volpe added.

But that was only a subtext for the reality that Ignatieff not only has the guts to stay the course in Afghanistan (into which fray Canada entered under the Liberals at the behest of the UN) but also has had the guts to insist on financial transparency, to Mr. Volpe's shame. Bravo!, Ignatieff!

The interplay between Ignatieff and Volpe had a bitter undercurrent in the wake of the controversy over Volpe's campaign contributions. Ignatieff and his organizers have raised questions about the wisdom of Volpe remaining in the race after it emerged that the Volpe campaign had accepted $27,500 in donations — later returned — from five donors under age 18.

Yesterday, Volpe singled out Ignatieff while complaining that he was the subject of a smear campaign over the donations issue by Liberals who have suggested he hurt the party's image.

The outcome of all this is twofold:

1.) Volpe won't win the leadership contest--but we should remember he could never have won, and was in the race to retain his status as a potential cabinet member should the Libs gain back the govt in the the next fed election. What happened is that Volpe will remain as much as possible in the thick of things simply to bring Mr. Ignatieff down. Volpe and his people will jockey to discern who among the serious candidates to align with, in exchange for leading the negative campaign against Ignatieff.

2.) Ignatieff has probably slipped from the lead to par with former NDP Premier of Ontario (and previous to that NDP leader in the Federal Parliament), Bob Rae. Appearances in this case will bring to mind that Mr. Rae and the present fed NDP leaders will de facto constiute a Liberal-NDP coalition. Many Liberals loathe any such idea. Or, we should consider that possibly now Rae has the lead for being most articulate in opposing Ignatieff's support for Canada's War for democracy in Afghanistan. A whole line up of Warriors, no! Peacekeepers, yes! will be taking the cudgels to Ignatieff, who now stands out quite singularly from the pack Rae leads.

That Ignatieff is alone among the candidates does not mean he is alone among the Liberal voters, but it may mean that he will not be able to command enuff of the Liberal Party appartus and activists who, after all, may not have the wisdom to commit to the fite for demoracy against the resurgent Taliban, so as to secure a free democracy in Afghanistan.

The long line aganst Ignatieff's principled stand consists of these candidates for the leadership, some serious, most nominal: Carolyn Bennett, Maurizio Bevilacqua, Stéphane Dion, Ken Dryden, Hedy Fry, Gerard Kennedy, Bob Rae, and Joe Volpe. So there will be further jockeying among these ladies and gentlemen, with Volpe out of the picture except as hatchet man, to bring down Bob Rae. It's difficult to see among them anybody of the calibre of Rae among the clutch, but there has to be--because Rae did not spend a political lifetime in the party, but in another one. He just doesn't have the roots. The same could be said of Ignatieff except that he didn't lead another party, the socialist party which many Liberals dislike intensely (rather, Ignatieff spent years as professor at Harvard). So, Rae has a rootless quality, a former enemy quality, but an articulate nationalism and "peacekeeper" ideology (it's not all its touted to be). The "peacekeeper" ideology means that most Liberal leadeership cand's won't fite for the new democratic regimes in Afghanistan, certianly never Iraq.

Now, current candidate Scott Brison voted recently, along with Ignatieff and 22 other Liberal Members of Parliament to support the war. But Brison is not a serious candidate. He is the Gay candidate (tho he isn't playing that up, still it's recognized that his candidature helps secure the Gay vote for the Liberals, no matter who the leader is). On the other side of the coin, Brison is a turncoat Conservative like Belinda. Like her, he got a cabinet post in exchange for his new livery, but unlike her he had been dogged by a number of his temper tantrums--most unseemly for his office as Minister of the Crown at the time (yet he was re-elected, only to go down with the sinking ship of his new party, while his old party came to power as a minority govt without him). Brison is not a serious candidate, but will be looking to align with the Lib most likely to succeed. It will be interesting to note whether he sticks with Ignatieff on the issue of support for the troops, thus keeping faith with his constituents; or whether he aligns with Rae (the marriage of a former Tory with a former NDPer, that's doubtful), or aligns instead with whom? among the remaining scrappers, the better to position himself. My guess is that, since Ignatieff is likely to vote pro-gmarriage in the fall, Brison would be clear to support him and maintain his previous vote for support of the troops.

Among the other definitely non-serious candidates are Bennett, Bevilacqua, Dryden, and Fry. Dion has a personal following among Quebec Liberals and respect in many other provinces; while Kennedy has some respect among Ontario Liberals, where he was a lackluster Minister of Education until his recent resignation, and formerly was the leader of the volunteer Food Bank movement in Toronto where he still has a considerable well of goodwill which may possibly translate into convention votes. But I doubt it. - Politicarp

Further Resources:

Ignatieff takes heat over military support of democracy in Afghanistan
Ignatieff vs. Volpe