Topic
Party leaders vie to see whose yarn grabs the audience.
The absurdly close vote on the budget in the House of Commons this week has bought the federal Liberal government what it needs more than anything else if it has hopes of winning yet another term in office – time.
The Paul Martin government needs time to tell a story to Canadians, a story that they’ll believe and that will persuade them to vote Liberal in enough numbers for the Liberals to retain its status as governing party. Only a few years ago, political parties did well if they had a “message” to pass on to voters – a message about what good things could be expected from them or what awful things could be expected if their opponents managed to gain power. Now, however, parties have found there’s something even better than just a simple message – and that’s a whole story. People are so accustomed to the narrative structure they meet daily in the movies, on DVDs and on television that they feel much more comfortable if they can fit the “real life” of politics into a similar structure.
Premier Gordon Campbell had his campaign fitted into a good narrative structure at the beginning of the just-past provincial campaign (although later the Liberal campaign deteriorated into a pure “message” of how the NDP should be seen as “negative, destructive and pessimistic.”) Campbell’s original story had a plot, a beginning, a middle and an end: “We, the Liberals, took over a province that was in the tank economically; we made tough decisions that were hard on people but necessary; now we have a happy ending because the economy is booming and we’re looking forward to a Golden Decade.” This story may well be considered grossly overly simplistic by anyone with any serious interest in political science or economics, but that is not the point. The point is that it was a story that the Campbell team could successfully sell to the voters.
At the moment, on the federal scene, the Conservatives have been telling the best story. Or perhaps more accurately, they have been repeating carefully the most devastating testimony from the Gomery Inquiry, and using that as their story. The testimony has told a story of corruption, pay-offs and possible criminal conduct – and the Tories have been working hard to convince voters that that is in fact the story of the federal Liberal party.
A flexible yarn
With the time they have now been given, however, the Liberals have the opportunity to persuade Canadians that there is another, more important, story to be told. The story the Liberals want to tell is that a Conservative government would institute policies that the majority of Canadians would find unpalatable and positively scary.
The Liberals have some advantages as they try to develop this alternative narrative structure.
The first is the view that a significant number of Canadian voters will take towards the findings of the Gomery Inquiry. They will take the view that this is a problem that is confined to Quebec and not of great relevance to the rest of the country. Fair or not, many Canadians who learned of Quebec history from the days of Duplessis during their Canadian history courses in school, believe that this is just the way business is all too often done in Quebec. They would doubtless look at the Liberals much more cynically if it could be shown that similar sorts of activities were taking place in other provinces. (In fact, the Liberals could be in much greater trouble here in B.C. if the trials of Dave Basi and Bob Virk were to show that they were involved in unsavoury shenanigans with the federal Liberals as well as in their roles as ministerial assistants with the provincial government.)
Second, the corruption being uncovered by Gomery does not directly affect the lives of most Canadians. It may have been an appalling waste and misuse of tax dollars, but for those of us in B.C., the only change it has made in our life might be that we’ve paid an extra $20 or so in income tax to fund wasteful and corrupt programs. It’s certainly not something anyone could approve of, but neither has it made a huge difference in everyday life.
The Liberals have the opportunity to create a story in which a Conservative government could have a great deal of effect on the everyday life of many Canadian citizens. Moves to cut social programs, to allow the privatization of more health-care services, and to make major changes in the justice system would all affect ordinary citizens far more than anything that has happened at the Gomery inquiry.
There is also the perception that many of the Conservatives are not particularly tolerant of the diversity that most Canadians value. It is not only the issue of gay marriage, although that would certainly be on the front burner during any election campaign. Even more, though, it is the increasing number of Conservative candidates who are adopting what most Canadians would see as extremist positions on a range of social issues.
‘War’ story?
Here in B.C., Darrel Reid, the Conservative candidate in Richmond, has described parents of an evangelical perspective as being “in a war” when it comes to what children are taught in the public school system. He worries about children being bombarded with messages about permissive sex education, evolution, or a curriculum that encourages young people to understand Islam.
Cindy Silver, another nominated candidate, has written articles criticizing governments in Canada for protecting child rights as defined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Silver argues against allowing “the best interest of the child” as defined by government to trump parental rights to treat their children as they think best.
The Conservatives think that they have the best story in the one that convinces voters that the Paul Martin government is a sleazy bunch. But the Liberals now have the chance to tell a story painting the Conservatives as a scary bunch whose values don’t match those of most Canadians.
And a lot of Liberals think that when election day comes, scary will trump sleazy.
Veteran journalist Barbara McLintock is the Victoria-based contributing editor to The Tyee. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
16
Login or register to post comments
Tyee Site Manager
8 years ago
Comments on "For Martin, It's Story Time"
Hi, this is a new thread starter. People who have already commented, I'll try to move your old ones to this thread. We (I) have a few technical difficulties this morning.
Thank you.
filthy1
8 years ago
Talk about the Conservatives being scary check this out from straightgoods.com
The Hidden Agenda
HealthCare:
Manning and Harris recommend "critical surgery" for Medicare. But if it is surgery it is of the type that would kill the patient. They say Ottawa should cease funding the system and transfer tax powers to the provinces. They also say the Canada Health Act should be scrapped to eliminate all barriers to private services. Healthcare would be handled by the provinces and they would experiment with private health services.
In health care they want to enforce incentives for individuals and families to practice illness prevention or healthy lifestyles. Read that to mean if you get sick you'll be branded as a wrongdoer and denied services or hit with user fees. Health care will only work for the healthy and wealthy.
Cuts to Social Programs:
Manning and Harris urge the transfer of $300 billion from the public sector to the private sector over six years, through tax cuts and cuts to social programs.
Downloading:
Downloading of the type that has been loathed in Ontario under Mike Harris is recommended. The report calls for a devolution of power, responsibility, and revenue sources from the federal government to the provinces and from the provinces to the municipalities where appropriate. And though this sort of downloading is intended to reduce state power it doesn't. Under Harris nearly every good social and related program was mercilessly cut while the government granted itself dictatorial enforcement powers.
The Security/Free-Trade State:
The federal role under Harris/Manning is to be a sort of Homeland Security State that also pushes Free Trade. Defense, foreign affairs, and ensuring free inter-provincial trade will be the federal role.
The Law of the Right:
The role of the judiciary will be usurped as Parliament takes over as complete law-maker.
Loss of Sovereignty:
We would be swallowed by the USA through a Customs Agreement. This agreement would be presented as a security measure as well as a trade measure, meaning that we would lose basic civil liberties in the way the Americans have under the Homeland Security State and post 9/11 hysteria. We would have joint administration of common tariffs and trade regulations, and be integrated into American security apparatus for border security.
Free Trade for Foreign Aid:
Harris/Manning believe foreign aid does more harm than good and that a more effective strategy for assisting poor countries is through freer trade — that is, by giving them easier access to our markets. This means that Canada would help no one. More jobs would be exported as the race to the bottom continues in nations receiving no aid other than IMF restructuring plans.
Education for the Rich Only:
In education Harris/Manning seem to want to increase federal powers to bring about meddling in provincial education areas. They support the freedom of parents to direct school taxes to the school of their choice. They believe Canadians should be responsible for their own education, and this is formula for a future Canada where a tiny wealthy minority would be educated. The rest of us would be the starving masses.
Poverty for Retirement and an End to Nearly All Assistance to the Disadvantaged:
Canadians will accept personal responsibility when it comes to providing for their retirement, and "in order to avoid government limitations on freedom, individuals will take more responsibility for providing for themselves." Read that to mean the gutting of Canada pensions, employment insurance and countless other programs for the disabled, elderly, women, children. ...
Te Aro Arahina
8 years ago
Good, filthy1, except that the Liberals are good Harris-Harper mimics as a rule. That's why Harper claims he doesn't want to talk policy in public anymore, a valid enough argument.
So, how should we strategize for the next election?
There are three more opportunities for the opposition to introduce nonconfidence in parliament. I say that Jack Layton should leverage those opportunities for the best possible deal we can get.
Then what?
sail_junkie
8 years ago
Interesting comments, filthy1. However, Mssrs. Manning and Harris rode off into the sunset some time ago. Are you trying to suggest that Harper will adopt many of these ideas?
Further, McLintock is right about the next Liberal game plan: once again, they will paint the Tories as being extreme and scary. You have to admit that Harper & Co. seem to be doing their best to give the Liberal material to work with.
However, the joke is on us, as the comments right above mine show. The Liberals DO have this nasty habit of campaigning from the Left while governing from the Right When you combine this with the unprecedent level of Liberal corruption, it is bad enough to turn a tea-totaller into a roaring drunk.
StanM.
8 years ago
My prediction is that the next Federal Election will result in another minority government. Further I expect that the majority party under this arrangement will once again be the Liberals and that they will be supported by an increased number of New Democrats.
The Liberals and New Democrats are ideologically more aligned with each other than either one cares to admit to. The Conservatives, regardless of whoever their leader is, have a major problem these days in that the Progressives have for the most part gone elsewhere, either to the PC Party, the Liberals or New Democrats. The sad part for the current Conservative Leader is the perception that he was prepared to lie in bed with the devil to bring the current government down.
When there were two Conservative Parties (Alliance and PC's) there was the opportunity for potential allies with similar but not identical viewpoints in the House of Commons to prop each other up without endangering Canadian Unity. Therein lies the Peter McKay legacy, a merged Party, that appears to be doomed to opposition for a good long time.
Funny how things work out!
satyricon
8 years ago
I agree that with you Sail_Junkie, both Manning and Harris have aquired too much baggage for the Harper crew to associate too closely with anymore. Yet, I think it is the social issues more then the economic ones that put the Conservatives at a disadvantage. Canadians like to be seen as a progressive country, we pride ourselves on that distinction especially with our neighbours to the South. However, Canadians get cold feet when it comes to social spending, debt accumulation, and raising of taxes. We seem to want the Government to manage our nation fiscally not morally. That's why the Liberals, despite their best efforts, are still in power. I must say that despite my leftward leanings I am actually happy with our current federal arrangement. We have good money managers in power who have the NDP pushing through much needed social spending, and neither the NDP nor the Liberals want to take us down the fractious moral road that has split the U.S. in half. Fortunately, the conservative base will ensure that moral arguement plagues the Conservative party for a long while yet. Our increasingly immigrant populations are to diverse to support a party with obvious christian roots. God willing anyway.
StanM.
8 years ago
Tongue in Cheek, note to self:
Next time I see either Grewal in my neighborhood, which is possible, must make sure to have them frisked for hidden microphones.
redrivergirl
8 years ago
Oh, Grewal is in big trouble.
Doesn't it make you wonder how we spawned so many Canadians who have so little empathy, so little personal integrity and are so foolish?
I mean backlash is one thing, but this wickedness is another.
I understand Alice Miller's theory about how children grow up to be this way and I understand the cult like indoctrination these people are receiving, but I wonder that they are so susceptible.
Oh well, everything passes and this shadow will too.
sirjohna
8 years ago
filthy 1 = the new king of fearmongering. what else can the lefties possibly say about the conservatives? their entire vision is to tax and spend. how innovative. and how devoid of creativity have the left become? pitiful.
redrivergirl
8 years ago
The 'lefties' aren't saying this sirjoha. It is Neo-Conservative policy. It can easily be found anywhere.
Banquos ghost
8 years ago
As presently constituted and as currently led the Conservative party disagrees with Canada being a parliamentary federation.
That's public record.
Spin it how you like, deny it how you wish, the fact remains that according to their own party documents this Conservative party would very likely begin to actively engage in the process of dismantling confederation.
That, as far as I am concerned, would be an act as near to traitorous as to defy distinction.
Nationalist
8 years ago
The story the Liberals want to tell is that a Conservative government would institute policies that the majority of Canadians would find unpalatable and positively scary.
-----------------------------------------------
Got that right! The conservatives are excatly that (scary).
would any of us want Norman Spector as priminister?
I hate Harper! I hate him with every fiber of my being. I hate the Conservatives! they are a bunch of prudes, bigots, hypocrites.
Paul Martin is a million times the leader than Harper is. When Belinda Stronach crossed the floor I actually laughed loudly. The last thing we need to represent Canada is a intolorent bunch of wingnuts that have the mentality of a bunch of JR high school football players. The Federal Conservitives are too much like and even worse than the Gordon Campbell Liberals or should I say ConservLibs. At least the Federal liberals have the balls to let the information of the inquiry get out to the Canadian people before an election unlike the BC Liberal Conservatives
that did everything to keep the raids silent till well after the Provincial election.
We have to stop being sheep to these scum bags whatever party they may be in. E-mail the bastards and tell them to shut up already! (them being Harper)
Percy
8 years ago
Whew! Nationalist! I've never seen the word "hate" used so many times. Good for you for hating the "intolorant" (sic), but you may want to examine who that really is. A mirror might come in handy.
It's curious, but the same spin was put on Preston Manning, a PhD with several children working on aid projects in Africa. If you invent stories about your opponents, you never have to deal with issues, hee hee.
Banquos ghost
8 years ago
Preston has what is referred to as "a degree" in Economics. That usually refers to an undergrad degree. He has one honourary doctorate from Tyndale University College and Seminary.
If you invent phony accreditation for your idols you never have to watch their feet dissolve in the rain.
BC Mary
8 years ago
Sleazy or scary, Paul Martin's story is one I look forward to hearing from David Basi.
"A risk-taker, very adept at the shuffle" is how Tom Axworthy described our prime minister today. I'm reluctantly beginning to agree. Mr Dithers is just his nervous persona whenever he allows himself to think of what's really going on.
Twice we've watched Mr Martin hit Vancouver on the days (April 1/04; April 1/05) when Justice Dohm ought to have had centre stage to reveal why he signed the Search Warrants for the RCMP raids on the BC Legislature.
Twice Paul Martin gave a dazzling prime ministerial display which succeeded in diverting attention away from Justice Dohm. To himself. He was, in my opinion, taking a breathtaking risk.
But for those of us who refuse to forget or even to be diverted, Paul Martin's whole story has yet to unfold as it must.
I live in hope that David Basi will sing the lead in the libretto. The people's theatre opens (again) on 30 May in Vancouver.
Watch Paul, that day.
Jack's
7 years ago
Why is it that, over the years, the most uncharismatic (to me) parties usually have the most charismatic leaders...... (Layton, Broadbent, Douglas)? The one exception could be the Bloc. However, can the Bloc be really considered a federal party? It is restricted to Quebec (by candidates) and dedicated to the breakup of Canada and it galls me to concede that it is supported by the tax dollars of Canadians nationwide. However, now that I am started on Quebec, I have forgotten my main topic.
My main big bitch of our government is that we are pumping wasted billions into Healthcare. Anyone who has tested the system is woefully aware that it doesn't work except possibly in emergency situations. If we insist on wasting money then wouldn't it be wiser to invite U.S. Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs)into Canada and subsidize their operation? At least we would then have the diagnostic equipment we urgently need.
My point here is that the most charismatic and practical program a party can employ is a sound financial platform - that might be equal to all Canadians.