...But it was a little one-column sidebar, on Ignatieff's rules of the road for another Quebec referendum, that raised eyebrows in the political class. It's a pretty hard line he's taking. A future Parti Quebecois government would, as La Presse put it, "have to agree with Ottawa on the wording of the question," which would "have to be on the independence of Quebec, nothing more." Furthermore, a simple majority of 50 per cent plus one would not give "legitimacy," in Ignatieff's own choice of words, for the founding of a new country.
"There have to be rules in this business," Ignatieff said. "We have to have clarity. Why? Because we want to avoid civil war, and I'm very confident we will avoid it."
Whoopsie! Threatening civil war in Quebec! Quite the little no-no.
As the Gazette notes, "Michael Ignatieff has a habit of opening his mouth to change feet."
And then another defense out of the Ignatieff campaign to the effect that "Iggy is changing the way politics is done in this country" (he prefers to do politics very poorly).
I don't have the energy to pile-on Iggy this morning, and frankly I'm getting bored of it. It's like beating up your little sister...there's no challenge. In fact I'm starting to think I might just support the guy out of pity. But no! You don't pick the next leader of the nation based on the fact they remind you of a helpless little bird found struggling in the snow!
Update, 8:30 AM: As mentioned, I'm starting to feel a little bit guilty over constantly bashing Iggy. So I am self-imposing a one week moratorium on the topic. I won't write about the hapless Ignatieff campaign unless he does something really stupid like accidentally setting his tie on fire.
3 comments:
You never can tell whether someone will snap out of this sort of thing -- after all, there is a PM Harper.
Hadn't seen the Gazette column. Enjoyed it.
BCL:
Where do you see a threat of Civil War in all of that?
What he seems to be saying is that Ottawa would impose the wording on the Parti Quebecois and not recognize a 50% plus one vote, because to do otherwise might result in a civil war. But on the other hand, he is confident that he, Iggy, were he PM, could avoid a civil war.
An ultra-hard line and, frankly, more likely to give rise to seperatist feelings rather than otherwise.
Post a Comment