Who will be the next Speaker?

My colleague and fourth-floor neighbour here in the Press Building, Aaron Wherry from Macleans, has been featuring on his blog some job applications/interviews with candidates for the Speaker's job.

One of those candidates is Lee Richardson, one of the Commons' most cordial and gentlemanly folks, and here's the letter he sent out today to make his case for the job. He talks about his long history with this place and fondness for more civil dealings -- on this, I can attest from long acquaintance, Richardson walks the talk. He is not an MP known for nastiness or overt partisanship -- far from it, actually.

Here's the text of his letter, in its entirety. (And if any other candidates want to send on their letters, happy to run them here too.) A French version is available here: Download Richardson Bureau du President 2011

Lee Richardson
MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT
May 27, 2011
Dear Colleague,
I am writing to you today to ask your support for making this 41st Parliament the place we restore respect for the House of Commons and for each other as Members.
By entering public life, we have all made a strong personal commitment to making our country a better place. Each of us also has a strong interest in making the House of Commons a better, more honourable place. I think it is time we do exactly that.
I am letting my name stand for the position of Speaker of the House of Commons, this place I have loved since first coming to the Hill as Executive Assistant to the Rt. Hon. John Diefenbaker in 1972. I believe change is due, and that change has to start with respect.
I fondly remember following razor sharp debate from the Opposition gallery. My boss, Mr. Diefenbaker, and NDP Leader David Lewis engaged in fierce oratory. During evening sessions I sat with Sophie Lewis, often it was just the two of us, quietly cheering our respective heroes. The combatants didn't agree on much but there was mutual respect and civility as well as eloquence.
It was a time, before excessive partisanship and 10 second TV clips, when Members practiced mutual respect and earned the respect of Canadians. It was not only an honour and privilege to be a Member of Parliament but an honourable profession held in high regard. Members strove to uphold that reputation.
My goal, my reason for seeking the office of Speaker, is to restore that respect for Parliament and parliamentarians.
Over the years, and more so recently, I have had discussions with former Speakers about the increasing difficulty they appear to have in preserving order and decorum in the House and why they seem reluctant to impose the discipline and sanctions they have available to them. There are many reasons given as well as possible remedies. In speaking to my Parliamentary colleagues over the past few weeks I have found a strong willingness to work together and make the changes necessary to restore civility and respect. I will outline the specifics of my proposals to achieve this goal in my remarks to the Members on June 2nd.
Foremost I would seek by example to establish, fairly but firmly, a correct tone in the House that would encourage and reflect a probity and, simply put, "good manners" that the Canadian public should rightly expect from their parliamentarians.
I believe we have an opportunity now to turn the corner. While the House always will be combative, my clear goal as Speaker will be to restore dignity and mutual respect, and make this Institution an honourable place for the people's representatives to debate policy once again.
Lee Richardson, MP
Calgary Centre

 

Stories behind the stories

 Patrick Gossage's  op-ed column in today's Star  has inflamed some Liberals, if my email inbox is any indication. Gossage has traced the Liberals' problems back to the infighting of the Martin-Chretien years and pinpointed Martin's battle against Sheila Copps as one of the  moments when things started to go badly. 

After covering the Liberal party for most of the past  23  years or so and writing a book or two about Liberals, I think it's fair to call this a distinguishing feature of the party -- every  development  can be traced back to a moment when someone's feelings were hurt.  Long before Copps' feelings were hurt, Martin supporters were feeling rejected by Chretien, and before that, Chretien's gang was offended by its treatment under John Turner. And on and on it goes, winding its way back into history, perhaps as far as the Paleozoic era, as far as I know. (By the way, Gossage knows this history well, and in my view, his choice of the Copps' exclusion is kind of an arbitrary spot to pick for backdating the Liberals' troubles. Jane Taber and I were just discussing all the nastiness we witnessed when we started reporting on the Liberals back in the 1980s.)

After I mentioned this business of old grudges to one Liberal on email last night, I started to wonder whether this is something particular to politics generally -- and whether it helps explain what turns people off this world all together.

You can't really understand Stephen Harper and his Conservatives either, for instance,  unless you know what's hurt their feelings in the past. Harper became put out with Mulroney's Conservatives in the 1980s, then he had a falling out with Reform Party leader  Preston Manning, then he became the official Opposition  leader and nursed grudges over how he was being treated by Liberals and the media, and so on and so on. And this explains a lot,  if you have to work in this world every day, as we do.

I'd imagine it's difficult for anyone  outside this world, however, to understand all this angst without a guidebook. And many people may well say: hey, I'm supposed to get over my grudges and hurt feelings when I go to work, why can't these folk?

Of course it proves the point that all politics is personal, but it also may prove that it's ALL personal -- in the absence of serious discussions over policy, vision and values, we are left with only stories of grudges and feuds.

As I write this, the Liberals are in the midst of a caucus meeting where they're choosing their new, interim leader. I don't know whose feelings are going to be hurt in this process (Garneau and Rae have gone to some lengths to say it isn't a contest, just a "choice.") But it being a Liberal gathering, chances are that some old divisions will have to be revisited. That's just how it goes.

 

Bob Rae's job application

Here's the letter Bob Rae has sent to Liberal caucus, seeking the interim leader's job.

Colleagues and friends,

I want to advise you that I am willing to let my name stand for the position of interim leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.  It is my understanding that this issue will be discussed by the caucus on May 25, 2011, and by the national board of the Liberal Party before the deadline of May 30.

After the worst election defeat in our history, it is vital that we come together as a party, and engage directly with Canadians about what matters to them.  The pursuit of social justice and a sustainable prosperity in a united Canada has to remain our focus.  We cannot afford to get caught up in internal wrangling.

Canadians want a progressive party that is committed to building the country.  At our best we can be that party.  We have to be the party that can take the country forward.

The task facing us is great, but you know I am a "glass half full" person.  We have a talented and hardworking caucus in both the House and the Senate.  We have much goodwill in the country.  There is a strong need for a party that is not caught in the trap of ideological excess.  We need to use the talents of every member of the Liberal team right across the country.

I shall abide by any rules about the interim leadership, agreed to by the caucus and the Board.  I have made it a watchword of my time in public life to practice the politics of unity and principled compromise.  I shall continue to do so.

The party has to make a choice between having a leadership convention soon, and having a period of rebuilding and then a leadership 18-24 months from now.  I favour the second option, and that is the context within which I would accept the appointment as Interim Leader.  If this longer period is agreed to, it is my understanding that the exact timing of the leadership election will be recommended by the caucus to the national board.

I look forward to discussing these issues with you in the days ahead.

Hon. Bob Rae

MP for Toronto Centre

Good (old and new) boys in Canadian politics

Here at the Canadian Political Science Association's annual conference in Waterloo, a couple of studies have been delivered, confirming a stereotypically male tilt to politics in this country of late. As Don Cherry would say, they're all "good boys." 

Today, for instance, two UWO researchers are going to release their paper on Don Cherry as the common link between hockey, soldiers and politics. I've written about their findings in today's Star -- you can see it by clicking on the link. 

I also wrote about the results of a new survey of the Canadian political blogosphere. Again, surprise -- most bloggers are male, partisan and educated.

These studies confirm what many of us, especially of the female persuasion, have been feeling anecdotally over the past few years: that politics has become more of a man's game, with a sharper focus on sports and fighting and partisan/team aggressiveness. And before anyone's back gets up, yes, I recognize that women are soldiers and hockey fans too, and are certainly capable of getting their elbows up in political battle. But the rock-em, sock-em spirit is definitely ascendant, I'd say at the expense of collaboration and the gray area in between black and white.  

Lots of other insights are being churned out by the hour here at Wilfrid Laurier. I'm trying, when the Internet permits, to file some of them by Twitter, as are others. Best bet is to go to the @CPSA Twitter feed. 

Politics out of the way, now the science

Blog posts have been light here since the election, but this week I'm diving back into politics again -- this time political science. 

The annual meeting of the Canadian Political Science Association is being held at Wilfrid Laurier University, and I'll be roaming through the meetings, filing interesting bits for the paper and this blog from Monday through Wednesday. The program and the lineup of papers looks interesting, and I'm sure we'll be able to gather up some insights about the recent election from the assembled academic minds -- even though the past few years haven't exactly been kind to the mix of politics and academia. 

Not so fast

The Liberals have found a little loophole in their quick transition to a new leader, as  you can read in the Star or in Joan Bryden's piece in Canadian Press or on CBC's website. It also sets out the terms by which Liberals believe that someone can be interim leader. Here's the document that led us believe this... (sorry about the highlighting... that's my glitch.) 

No rush

Though Jean Chretien has been out telling folks that Liberal MPs are choosing an interim leader this week, this note   from Deputy leader Ralph Goodale, circulated this afternoon to the slimmed-down Liberal ranks,  appears to indicate that it's  a bit more complicated (and long-term) than that.

May 9th, 2011

 

TO ALL CURRENT LIBERAL MPs and SENATE LEADER JIM COWAN

 

Colleagues:

 

As you know, Mr. Ignatieff asked me to convene national Caucus meetings this Wednesday to begin the process of transition. I want to thank the Whip's Office for making the necessary arrangements and sending out the notices.

 

The social event on Tuesday evening, among other things, will provide us an opportunity to say thank you to the staff members who have served us so well and will soon be leaving the Hill.

 

The meeting of former and current colleagues on Wednesday morning will let us begin the process of rebuilding by hearing from departing MPs who, unfortunately, will not be able to continue with us.

 

Then, on Wednesday afternoon, our meetings will conclude with CURRENT Caucus members ONLY considering how best to handle immediate administrative matters with the return of Parliament likely only 2 or 3 weeks away, and issues related to interim and longterm leadership.

 

On this latter point, I have asked senior LPC officials to be available on Wednesday afternoon to brief the Caucus on the Party's planning to date. In this regard, I will be forwarding to the Caucus a letter that I expect to receive, in both official languages, today from LPC President Alfred Apps.  We will all be interested in the outcome of the National Board meeting tonight.

 

I will do my best to keep everyone informed. Senator Cowan will do the same with our Senate colleagues.

 

Thanks to everyone for your great cooperation through this difficult period.

 

Best wishes,

 

Ralph Goodale

Deputy Leader

So you're new here

Apparently there's a bit of fuss about MPs being elected to Parliament with inappropriate backgrounds for the life of a parliamentarian. I think this is largely directed toward the NDP and its Quebec caucus. 

You should absolutely take this fuss seriously if  wisdom and experience were  the measure of success in Parliament or electoral contests. Unfortunately,  they are not.  

 Let's recall who were among the losers on Monday night:  a world-renowned international author and academic;  a  foreign affairs  minister who's served in Quebec's legislature and Parliament;  an NHL legend and thoughtful author; two food-bank founders, one of them a former Ontario cabinet minister, the other a fireman and international-aid expert;   a United Church minister, well, you get the idea. 

Forgive me for dashing any lingering  illusions, but the CV has almost nothing to do with winning and losing elections. And it has even less to do with how well MPs fare once they arrive on Parliament Hill. Geography and gender are equal, if not more important considerations in choosing cabinet.  Good looks and an ability to repeat party talking points  will score MPs  those  sought-after spots in Question Period and on TV panels. Doing what you're told counts more than talking about what you know. 

It strikes me that it's a bit late to complain now about the qualifications of new members of Parliament, or worse, to argue that  we want wise, experienced folks to fill those seats in the Commons.  

Politics is actually ideally suited for young people, barely out of their teens, totally disconnected from the ridings. In Ottawa, we call those people "political assistants" and last time I checked, they actually had more power than MPs anyway. Don't believe me? Have a listen to former MP Keith Martin, or check out the most recent report from Samara, and the "exit interviews" with former parliamentarians. 

 

The day after (part 1)

Last night (and this morning) I've been in Toronto, watching the free-fall and collapse of the federal Liberal party. There will be plenty to write about on this topic in days ahead, but for now, as  a place-holder of sorts on this blog, I'll say I stand by the predictions made in a previous post (Trading Places).  

Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff is holding a news conference at 10 a.m.,  and the general speculation is leaning  toward his immediate resignation. If that's so, and my reading of the party constitution (Section 54) is correct, Liberals  would be then forced to have an  immediate leadership contest too. 

I'm not entirely sure that the Liberals are in any mood to plunge into yet another leadership race. My bet is that they'd like to take their time, now that they're facing at least four years in the wilderness. So look for Ignatieff to try to find a way to leave, without automatically triggering a leadership race as required under the constitution. 

Get out and vote

If you haven't voted already, step away from the computer, and get to the ballot box. Canada simply can't have a turnout lower than our personal worst of 58 per cent in 2008.  If you have voted already, or need some musical motivation to make the trip, have a look at this video. (h/t to Rick Mercer for circulating.)