Sunday, March 28, 2010 marked the final day of the federal Liberal’s Canada at 150 policy conference in Montreal. While it’s still early and many pundits are mulling over whether the weekend can be called a success for the Liberal Party, some poor Liberal staffer in Ottawa is likely going to have to right up a report on the positive and negative aspects of Canada at 150. Perhaps the following could help:
Pros
- The medium is the message: The high-tech, digital media conference frames the Liberals as engaging (53 town halls across Canada), innovative (Twitter, Skype, chat rooms), youthful (this wasn’t run by 70 year olds), genuine and transparent (it was completely uncensored) and positive (like one big brainstorm). This is in stark contrast to the narrative from the past few months that the media’s woven for the Conservatives, suggesting they are anti-democratic (the whole prorogation issue), old-school (only one Youtube video?), fake (cancelling break-weeks so they can be “hard-at-work” for Canadians) and negative (check out the Tories critical press release in response to the conference).
- Meat on the policy bones: While Michael Ignatieff has always been viewed as cerebral (remember Rick Mercer’s video, “No paucity of merit, he”?), the Liberals have been accused of running empty on ideas. The convention put meat on the bones,proving that at least some policy substance exists. In fact, “thoughtful” was among the words of CBC’s Don Newman, while Maclean’s Aaron Wherry reported live, “I don’t see any way this weekend can be described as a bad thing… [it] seems rather unimpeachable. Actually, it seems like the sort of thing a major political party should be convening on an annual basis.” To this point, it may also help differentiate the Liberals from the Conservatives who have been called on their oversimplification of complicated issues, and resorting to gimmickry on the policy front.
- Organized: After the Liberal’s contraception motion debacle this past week, the conference concludes with Michael Ignatieff and the Liberals looking like they are disciplined and organized after all.
- Measurable results: One of the beautiful things about digital media is that you can track your results that in turn drives media interest. For example, media was quick to pick up on how the targets for unique visitors were surpassed not only over the course of the weekend, but in a matter of hours. This use of measurable results not only drives media attention, but also – overall – demonstrates that interest and engagement across the country actually exists. Momentum - “the Big Mo” - is born out of these sorts of results.
- The Yes We Can Effect – encouragement for the Liberal base and excitement around the brand: Both Liberals and the general public have been reminded over the past few days that this was done in 1960 (Kingston) and in 1991 (Aylmer), and that by doing it again they are going through the same meaningful process that could put them on the road back to government. This is liquid hope for Liberals and reminds Party and public alike that the Grits are a government-in-waiting .
Don Newman comments on the outcome of Canada at 150.
Cons
- Action speaks louder than words – is it all just talk? Fostering healthy debate and putting a bunch of capable heads together is one thing, but it’s all for nothing unless concrete action comes of it. With the end of the Conference, many have been left asking how does all this talk effect change, get the Liberals back in power, and get Canadians the public policy solutions they want and need? Even the Star is headlining with, “Tough questions, few answers”, and within the time it’s taken me to write this entry, media interest in the Conference will have dropped further down the list of news stories. Will it all be a big non-story?
- Escaping the Liberal bubble: It’s still too early to tell whether the Liberals really escaped the bubble of the Party and had an impact outside the halls of Ottawa. Stories such as the involvement of more Liberal MPs than would have been liked by senior party officials, along with the Conservative accusations of “elitism” and the Liberals being simply “the bureaucrats party”, are currently at odds with a story of 53 town halls across the country where participants actively and constructively engaged in person and online.
- The resurfacing of some electorally unpalatable subjects: The resurfacing of the carbon tax issue cannot be good for a party that is said to have lost the last election on that very issue. No matter how good an idea it might be, its repeated mention over the past three days is not going to play well among many voters (including those in the West) who had thought Liberals had gotten the message in 2008.
- Failure to differentiate with the Conservatives on some issues: Some media have suggested it’s become apparent that on at least a few policy issues (e.g., economic policy on deficit to GDP ratio), there really is no difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives. This suggestion could expose the Liberals on their left flank, providing room for the NDP to swoop in and pick up votes. The recent stance taken by Michael Ignatieff and Stephen Harper on the veil ban issue in Quebec only serves to reinforce this point.
- Public “tongue-lashings”: Similar to the carbon tax, nothing good can come from the parts of former senior diplomat Robert Fowler’s speech where he claimed, “The Liberal Party has lost its soul” and “Liberals today don’t stand for much in terms of principles”. No matter how well Michael Ignatieff handled these comments and the credibility they brought to a Conference that allowed them to be heard, ultimately these words can only serve to remind voters that they may be better off sticking with the horse that they’ve got.
