Gerard Kennedy heads strong into convention
Grammar be damned - things are looking great for Gerard.
Of course, he recently added Tom Axworthy's endorsement to Justin Trudeau's, which pretty much makes him the official candidate of the Trudeau school, if there is such a thing. He has also been making headlines for his position on the Quebec resolution. And before I get started on it, let me merely say that whatever your personal position, I think these figures are relevant:
Four times as many Canadians say they would be less likely to elect a liberal leader who supported it compared to those who would be more likely; within the liberal party the ration is 3:1.
Even within our own party, we should have at least one credible candidate who is opposed; and one might idly wonder how we will presume to lead the country when the party's leadership is so out-of-touch with ordinary Canadians.
Which brings me to the issue itself.
Firstly, Kennedy is right that it's dangerous and divisive. We as Liberals were basically freaking out that this was going to humiliate us at the convention and leave the party more wounded than before. The only silver lining is that now Harper has adopted a similar motion in the house, the Tories are showing the same divisions. So, thank goodness he chose to borrow our gun and shoot himself in the foot, but I don't think we get much credit for that.
Secondly, Kennedy is right that it's vague and therefore dangerous. What is this saying "Quebecois" in french and "Quebeckers" in English? What does distinct mean? What does nation mean? What kind of nation is it? Who is included? If they get one, who else should? Is theirs more important, so it deserves recognition while the Cree do not? Should they be recognized in the constitution while the Metis and Inuit are not? Is the language and culture of Quebec more distinctive than the language and culture of Toronto's Chinatown? Shouldn't Chinese Canadians be recognized as a distinct society forming an ethnic nation in Canada, now that we finally got around to apologizing for the head tax? This is the sort of BS that gives politicians and liberals a bad name. Good for Kennedy and Ken Dryden for refusing to give in.
Let's get on with making this country a better place. We can start by electing Gerard Kennedy as the leader of the Liberal Party, and the next Prime Minister of Canada.
Of course, he recently added Tom Axworthy's endorsement to Justin Trudeau's, which pretty much makes him the official candidate of the Trudeau school, if there is such a thing. He has also been making headlines for his position on the Quebec resolution. And before I get started on it, let me merely say that whatever your personal position, I think these figures are relevant:
Four times as many Canadians say they would be less likely to elect a liberal leader who supported it compared to those who would be more likely; within the liberal party the ration is 3:1.
Even within our own party, we should have at least one credible candidate who is opposed; and one might idly wonder how we will presume to lead the country when the party's leadership is so out-of-touch with ordinary Canadians.
Which brings me to the issue itself.
Firstly, Kennedy is right that it's dangerous and divisive. We as Liberals were basically freaking out that this was going to humiliate us at the convention and leave the party more wounded than before. The only silver lining is that now Harper has adopted a similar motion in the house, the Tories are showing the same divisions. So, thank goodness he chose to borrow our gun and shoot himself in the foot, but I don't think we get much credit for that.
Secondly, Kennedy is right that it's vague and therefore dangerous. What is this saying "Quebecois" in french and "Quebeckers" in English? What does distinct mean? What does nation mean? What kind of nation is it? Who is included? If they get one, who else should? Is theirs more important, so it deserves recognition while the Cree do not? Should they be recognized in the constitution while the Metis and Inuit are not? Is the language and culture of Quebec more distinctive than the language and culture of Toronto's Chinatown? Shouldn't Chinese Canadians be recognized as a distinct society forming an ethnic nation in Canada, now that we finally got around to apologizing for the head tax? This is the sort of BS that gives politicians and liberals a bad name. Good for Kennedy and Ken Dryden for refusing to give in.
Let's get on with making this country a better place. We can start by electing Gerard Kennedy as the leader of the Liberal Party, and the next Prime Minister of Canada.
posted by Gavin Magrath at 11/28/2006 10:23:00 PM
2 Comments:
I couldn't agree more. I have to admit, I was pretty disappointed that Rae and Dion supported Harper's motion. A purely political decision by them and Harper. I hope it doesn't come back to haunt them or the country.
Exact Leger question (Nov. 16-26): “Currently, there is a political debate on recognizing Quebec as a nation. Do you personally consider that Quebeckers form a nation or not?”
77% AGAINST in Rest of Canada
77% AGAINST Francophones outside Quebec
72% AGAINST Liberals
62% AGAINST Non-Francophone Quebeckers
29% AGAINST French Speaking Quebeckers
Gerard and Dryden and Volpe speak for the majority of Canadians.
Post a Comment
<< Home