Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Martha Hall-Findlay is looking better and better every day...

Justin Trudeau seems to be imploding lately with the revelation of old and very unfortunate 2010 quotes about Alberta and now an incoherent position on the gun registry. Suddenly, the quick fix coronation many Liberals expected seems like a very bad idea. Certainly, it needs major revisiting.

It's been said that Justin has been campaigning with an eye to the 2015 election with his right-leaning positions on the Nexen takeover and, clumsily, on the long gun registry. If true, he's taking a victory from Liberal members and supporters for granted. Doing so may be a fatal mistake for his leadership bid.

Liberals went for the quick fix with Ignatieff, a man judged by the public as wholly inadequate for federal leadership, and the results speak for themselves. Liberals ought not to be seduced by the superficial polling which shows Trudeau leading them back from the dead in an instant. We have to accept the fact that Justin may simply not be the right person for the job.

But who else can the Liberals turn to federally? I do agree that Marc Garneau is a great man. I will definitely be listening to what he has to say in this leadership race and will consider voting for him. I have my doubts about his political instincts though as well as his age. The Liberals need an energetic fighter who's going to have to devote at least 10 years to the unglamorous work of revitalizing a moribund party. Liberals need to re-define what being a Liberal means and what philosophy and positions we have to offer to Canadians. Flip flopping and pandering on important issues won't cut it. Will Canadians really buy Justin Trudeau as the new champion of the middle class considering his background? Does he come to his positions based on core, set principles? Or is he an empty vessel willing to say whatever he thinks we want to hear?

For me, I'm seriously considering Martha Hall-Findlay for the first time, not only because of this article, but also because she's someone who has earned through hard work her position in the party and the country. She's worked and lived as a member of the middle class. She's bright. She has never stuck her foot in it, to the best of my knowledge.

No more quick fixes, Liberals. It's a very long time until the April vote. I was leaning toward Justin, but now that has changed. I'll be watching very closely. The last thing that Justin should do is take a win from Liberals in this 2013 race for granted.

UPDATE: A reader has reminded me about Hall-Findlay's stated support for the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal as well as the Keystone pipeline. As I oppose the Northern Gateway, I will have to reconsider any support for Hall-Findlay for sure. Suddenly, Justin's stance on that issue seems much more nuanced. This race remains extremely interesting. A tough battle where Justin takes some knocks and is forced to defend his positions will make all the candidates stronger and ensure the eventual winner is battle-ready despite past unfortunate statements. No candidate is perfect, least of all Stephen Harper and Tom Mulcair.


The Mound of Sound said...

Hasn't she spoken out in favour of Northern Gateway? That would make her and any party she led enemies of my province.

There'll be no Liberal leader worth a shit who doesn't have a progressive policy on dismembering Canada's corporatist media cartel; on fighting inequality (wealth, income and opportunity); and on decarbonizing our economy and our society despite the obvious consequences to the bitumen trade.

As far as I can tell, she's just fine with the Conservative-Lite transformation of the LPC initiated by Ignatieff. That's the reason the Liberal Party went from Sussex Drive to Stornoway to Motel 6 on the road out to Gloucester.

Matt Guerin said...

Don't know what her stand is on Northern Gateway. She has spoken in favour of a carbon tax as good policy (which I agree), against supply management which increases family costs at the grocery store, etc. She wants to clearly define what the Liberal Party stands for and not be all things to all people, etc. I urge you to seek out the correct information and not spread misinformation or vast generalities about a candidate's position that has little semblance with reality (and more just exposes your partisan motives.) To say she's just fine with the so-called Conservative lite transformation initiated under Ignatieff doesn't jibe with what I see. By the way, the Liberal transformation into a Progressive Conservative party happened in the 1990s.

The Mound of Sound said...

Matt, I don't have any "partisan motives." I have parted company with the LPC because I couldn't be Liberal and progressive. And, please, don't get uppity about "spreading misinformation" until you inform yourself about the whole bitumen trafficking business and MHF's position on it.

I was a committed Liberal for more than 40-years. I never regretted that until the past four or five. Now I stand for the Green Party and my British Columbia along with a good many other former progressive Libs. Do the math. You could've won with us but you went the other way.

Matt Guerin said...

My apologies. I have informed myself and did find her op-ed on supporting the Northern Gateway, Keystone and so-called ethical oil. Hmmm. So I will reconsider any support for her, for sure. Suddenly, Trudeau's waffling, pro-oil sands, anti-Northern Gateway stance looks more nuanced.

I hear you about the difficulties being both a progressive and a "Liberal." I consider myself quite progressive. But also a pragmatist. I myself am more interested in supporting political parties that can actually implement their policies instead of just advocate for them. I choose the lesser evil over the greater evil. Canada is never going to implement a PR voting system. Even in B.C. that option is dead in the water. So we have to consolidate progressive voters into a realistic option that doesn't destroy the economy and can win broad support from the public against the conservative option, in my opinion. I do agree that Canadians would've suffered greatly economically the last few years without the strength of the oil sands. It's up to us to find effective ways to develop them responsibly. That includes finding new investment and distribution. I do oppose the Northern Gateway though as the land and sea in that area are too fragile and local opposition in B.C. is too strong.

I am a progressive free agent. I'll support any party that looks well-positioned to defeat the Conservatives. That includes the Greens. Should they ever challenge the conservative option, I'll vote for them. So far they've shown no ability to do that, except in Elizabeth May's riding.

Unknown said...

I think it's probably fair to say she'll support pipelines east and west, if and only if they can meet the environmental standards of, in this case, BC, and cleanup/reliability standards as well.

The globby mail had her saying "We need better environmental regulation, not less of it, which Mr. Harper wants. We need the best contingency plans technologically available, and clear lines of risk accountability."

--dave (an old Martha supporter from Willowdale) c-b