CKNW Editorial
for August 15, 2000

I’m tending more and more to the notion that Jean Chretien might go to the people this October. Since his only goal, naturally, is to defeat the opposition it might make sense to have an election before the Alliance can get its act together. The trouble is, on what issue? Issues are important when governments are weak on the ground. Take, for example, the last federal election where the Liberals only just managed a majority, Because there was no obvious issue, what became an issue was whatever the media or the opposition could dredge up for the moment.

I know a little about issue-less elections having gone through one back in 1979. Because there was no theme to the campaign, government candidates fought literally dozens of disconnected local issues … there was little or not continuity from constituency to constituency. I well remember Pat McGeer returning during the election from China mentioning, in passing, that he was rather interested in experiments in nuclear fusion. It took a week for him to be heard, shouting above the opposition and media din, that he was talking about fusion, not fission. By that time confusion in the ranks was all but incurable.

Way back in 1972 the Liberals wanted a fresh mandate for Pierre Trudeau and lacking anything to fight on, invented the slogan "the land is strong." The result was a razor-thin two seat edge over the Tories and two years of minority government. The likely issue this Fall would be, do you like Jean Chretien enough for four more years of him? That’s not an especially inspiring election program. The danger for the Liberals is that the polls, federally, have always been out of synch with reality in the run-up to an election call. For whatever reason, people seem to park their votes with the government until election time. To further compound things, sometimes people leave their votes there. It depends upon whether or not a credible alternative presents itself.

In more recent years, 1984 was a good example. In May and June of that year John Turner actually had a moderate lead over Brian Mulroney. In the election that Fall, Mulroney piled up a huge landslide.

Similarly, the Tories in 1993 were leading the Liberals with just a couple of months to go before they were wiped out as a government and as a party.

Jean Chretien, in spite of leaping staircases at a single bound and looking as if his next move would be to ski down the Matterhorn backwards, has worn thin and looks and sounds old. And he will be facing a new, fresh face in Stockwell Day.

The election will be settled, of course, in Ontario. What issue can Mr Chretien bring into a fight with the Big Blue Machine which probably will have Premier Mike Harris’ blessing to support Mr Day? Healthcare? I somehow doubt it because the people know that if the answer is money, the question is where the devil has Ottawa been? I don’t say the Liberals can’t win this Fall. Of course they can. Anything can happen in elections and often does. But the way it comes up in my admittedly hazy crystal ball, the Liberals win virtually nothing west of the Lakehead and not too much in Atlantic Canada. The Bloc will dominate in Quebec and although it seems outlandish unto certifiable to say it, the Alliance might just win a couple of seats there. This means that the Liberals have to win all Ontario again and I just don’t think they can do it. With the Tories, led by Joe Clark a sorry parody of the ancient Conservative Party, and the NDP simply not a player, it leaves Jean Chretien duking it out with a fresh face with a fair bit of voter appeal.

What if the Liberals change leaders? It depends upon whom. If they went with Brian Tobin, maybe. I think that Paul Martin’s the John Turner of 2000 – his chance has been too long in coming. If I were advising the Liberals – and you can be sure that if I was they wouldn’t be listening – I would wait until the Spring ‘01, hope something turns up, and in the interval, pave the way for a change at the top to Brian Tobin.

Let me add this addendum. Premier Ujjal Disanjh is making a serious mistake cozying up to the feds. I know the media always dump on BC premiers for "Ottawa bashing" but the media doesn’t vote – people do. One of the obstacles Gordon Campbell must overcome is the sharing a party name with Jean Chretien. He fights the appearance of being snuggled up to the federal Liberals and if I were the NDP I’d be finding a way to get Chretien or perhaps even better Sheila Copps to endorse Campbell and the BC Liberals.

It’s not a question of doing the statesmanlike thing – though I question that it’s even good statesmanship to kiss Ottawa’s backside – but whether or not it helps politically.

Old rules are often good rules. Damon Runyan once said, "the race is not always to the swift nor the contest to the strong … but that’s the way to bet." Similarly one might say that the way to get votes in BC may not always be to bash hell out of the federal government but most times, if you want to win, that’s a pretty good start.