A Party Built To Survive
The Liberals have finally released their Red Ribbon Report on party renewal (available in PDF format), and at 30 pages it certainly reads a lot less volatilely than Buzz Hargrove’s screed.
Naturally they’re a little optimistic about using “A Party Built to Win” as part of their title, but let’s have a scroll through and see how serious they are about really renewing the party.
The report does begin with an honest assessment of the other major political parties:
We are facing, for the first time since 1984, a united right-of-center foe. The Conservatives used the opportunity of their merger to significantly streamline their organization and reduce the onerous structures that had built up over the years (Importantly, they were also able to adopt a new Constitution at the exact time of – and therefore consistent with - Bill C-24.) On our left, the New Democrats … have made great strides in becoming a modern political fighting force. The Bloc Québécois has been sustained by the onset of public funding and the unfortunate effects of the sponsorship issue. The Green Party has increased its vote in each of the last three elections. (page 9)
This is important because an honest evaluation of your opponent’s strengths is far more beneficial in the long run than a harangue of insults and fear-mongering. It’s interesting to note the inclusion of the Greens as serious opponents, a tacit acknowledgement that the Left can indeed be a more fragmented vote than in previous elections.
The Harper Government’s Bill C-2, which proposes to ban outright all corporate, union and organization donations, and will impose a new annual contribution limit of $1,000 for individuals (to each of national parties, Electoral District Associations (EDAs), and leadership candidates), means we must adapt ever more quickly.
The Conservatives claim that this is being done for reasons of “accountability”. However, Liberals should be under no illusion that this Bill C-2 is anything but a blatant attack aimed squarely at our Party’s political jugular. We can, and must, respond. (page 10)
It is perhaps to the report’s credit that it doesn’t talk about mounting opposition to Bill C-2. The writers obviously recognize a vote-losing strategy when they see one.
There’s also a passage that suggests that the Liberals might not be all that interested in making friends with their obvious American counterpart:
Through the eighties and nineties, the Democrats went from a Party that dominated both houses of Congress and competed to win in every local, state and national election to one that lost the vast majority of State Houses, Governorships, the Senate, the House of Representatives and (with the exception of the remarkable Bill Clinton) every single Presidential election. Obvious to even casual observers of American politics was the Democrats’ loss of unity of purpose.
Liberals must avoid the wrong turns made by the Democratic Party. We cannot become hostages to an unwieldy structure, buried in rules and procedures. We must preserve our own unity of purpose. We must always seek to look forward, and challenge the status quo. (page 12)
I wonder if the U.S. Democrats will be paying attention?
The actual recommendations begin on page 15, and can be summed up as follows:
Streamline the rules for membership, and make membership a national process. The report does concede that local membership rules have been designed in the past to block certain “cliques” and factions from taking over a local association. So, instead of keeping party membership local, make it national with a common set of rules and qualifications, and keep things simple.
Mind you, the local associations may not like the idea of their power of membership screening being taken away from them, but keeping things simple is always a good idea.
Change the definition of Provincial-Territorial Associations (PTAs). The Report wants to keep local associations around, but change the rules of what they can and cannot do.
This type of thing is going to involve some serious negotiations, assuming that PTAs are all going to be subject to the same rules. It’s one of those things that probably will take more than a year to work out.
Clear the bureaucracy at the national level. Too many committees, says the Report. Chop ‘em down to three: Policy, Financing and Election Readiness.
Anyone familiar with the study of bureaucracy will be sorely tempted to cynically giggle at this one, particularly when this caveat is attached:
Of course, the principles of equality of men and women, and of the English and French languages, must be maintained. Moreover, increased efforts must be made to ensure representation of youth and visible minorities in Party deliberative bodies.
In other words, expect these new super-committees to be super-big. Which doesn’t exactly solve the unwieldiness problem, especially when you add the complication of:
Establish a Council of Presidents. This body would consist of the presidents of the EDAs and National Executive members. I’m not entirely certain that a body of 300-plus members would make governance all that much easier, because each of those 300-plus people is going to need some support staff for their annual get-togethers. Then again, I’m not that big a student of bureaucracy.
Establish a Permanent Standing Committee on Policy Development. Here I’ll congratulate the report authors for addressing a definite deficiency of the Liberals. As we’ve just seen with the Middle East situation, lack of a definitive policy can lead to some serious miscues and scrambles.
While it’s tempting to just stick with the executive summary, I suggest that each Blogging Tory download this report and read it in full, then keep an eye on the leadership candidates and see what they say about this report. The ones who try to dismiss or otherwise belittle it are the ones Stephen Harper can beat.
