Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Quebec Compromise in the Works

In fact, several seem to be on tap. Martha Hall Findley has one suggestion:

...a joint statement would clarify how the resolution would be interpreted by the next leader. It would also highlight the large degree of consensus among the candidates over Quebec's identity, smooth over their differences and defuse a potentially ugly debate that could ruin the party's electoral prospects in Quebec and even potentially spark another national unity crisis.

She acknowledged that not all camps are convinced that a joint statement will solve the problem; many continue to believe that the resolution must be amended to clarify its meaning.

Another issue is: would Ignatieff would get on board with this particular compromise. In fact, Iggy's camp is apparently working on an escape plan of their own:

...an amendment, jointly proposed by all leadership camps, that would call for creation of a task force to advise the next leader on the impact that recognition of Quebec as a nation would have on party policy.

Such wording would be closer to that used in a recent report by a party renewal task force, co-chaired by former justice minister and prominent Rae supporter Martin Cauchon.

Although I wonder how this option would play with the Quebec wing. Presumably, the task force would now attempt to determine if Quebec's "Nation" status should be "officialized", not just how.

And I wonder if either compromise proposal deals with possible First Nation resolutions asking for similar consideration (as reported here).

Andrew Coyne gives us a preview of the Tory response in his blog post "Abomination". Of the Martha Hall Findlay proposal, he writes:

This, of course, solves nothing. In fact, it amounts to endorsing the Ignatieff position. Whether you commit to put it in the constitution "now" or "later," you have still endorsed this repugnant idea.

Clearly, no matter how this plays out, LPC credibility is going to take a hit, and instead of writing about the party's bright new day, media talk will concern the size and weight of the albatross that the Ignatieff team has hung around the neck of the new leader (assuming that Iggy is not the new leader, which seems a pretty safe bet right now).

Finally, the CTV story considers the difficulty of killing the resolution outright:

It might also prove impossible to derail the measure, since the workshops are to be held on Nov. 29, before most delegates have arrived in Montreal. Those in attendance will be primarily from Quebec, and thus most likely to support the resolution.

One thing that won't be an issue at the convention: media apathy.

2 comments:

Gavin Magrath said...

There is one man who should be blamed for this current problem, and while he is guaranteed to come first on the first ballot, we should send everyone in Canada a clear message by dumping him in the most unceremonious possible fashion on the second.

Actually, I call on every Iggy supporter to vote for Martha on the second ballot (if she makes it - and she will if Iggy's ex-officio supporters who arent' bound vote for her on the first ballot). That way, we kill two birds with one stone: we get rid of Iggy, and we show the party is ready to give its respect to a woman of good ideas, even if she doesn't have any machinery backing her (except that bus).

G

James Curran said...

Damned if we do. Damned if we don't. That's our campaign slogan for the next election.

The What Do I Know Grit.