Showing posts with label Jack Layton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jack Layton. Show all posts

8/24/11

Why People Were Drawn to Jack?


Speaking of Jack...
I was interviewed by CTV at the ceremony on August 25th in front of Parliament Hill at the end of the Lying-in-State ceremony for the late Leader of the Opposition, Jack Layton. They wanted to talk about the content of the blog posting below, Why People Were Drawn to Jack?
CTV - commenting on Jack Layton
Welcome back.
Canadian politics lost  a phenomenal political leader, with the sad news that Jack Layton, the NDP Leader of the Opposition, passed away. As with millions of people across the country, I felt personally saddened by the loss of "the Happy Warrior". I had the privilege of knowing Jack on a personal and professional level, and although I won't get into the details, I knew him well enough to share some of my analysis of why Jack Layton was able to strike such a profound chord with so many people. Hopefully, there are lessons in there for all who contemplate or practice the art of politics.
 Why People Were Drawn to Jack?
1. Jack had a positive vision. He was able to foresee and articulate a future in clear and compelling terms that he felt deeply and authentically would be a better world than what we have today. He shared that vision in every way, every day.
2. Jack felt that politics could be a noble calling and he was never apologetic about being a politician. I had the privilege of knowing and working with his late father, Bob, early in my career and Bob's zest for life was so obviously passed on to his son - and I am sure - to his children. We would occasionally joke about the fact that he was a conservative while his son was a socialist, but that was never a barrier in the love that the two men shared for each other. At the same time, although he was a strong leader, he knew that he could only succeed through igniting a passion for citizen involvement among youth and others who had felt marginalized.
3. Some might say he was a 'dreamer', but he was very much a realist. An optimistic one, absolutely, but a realist nonetheless. He was strategic in his thinking, disciplined in his actions and determined in the face of sometimes frightening odds - both politically - and as we all witnessed on the campaign trail earlier this year - profoundly personal - yet determined to see it through. As Canadians saw him hobbling along on the campaign trail, he turned his cane into a metaphor for a gutsy fighter speaking out for ordinary Canadians against the odds.
4. Jack drew energy from people. Some might have cast him as a 'showboat' with his penchant for colorful outfits and stunts that got him coverage, but that was part of his zest for life and his love of people as much as it was for the political benefit those events may have garnered him and his party.
5. Jack was an extremely considerate and thoughtful man and people loved him for those qualities. Earlier this year I asked him if he would kindly write a letter of reference for me for a particular project, and his letter could not have been more gracious - if too kind. But I will treasure that always.
 Canada Says Goodbye
Jack Layton Lies in State on Parliament Hill
Prime Minister Harper, although a long-time political foe of Jack Layton's clearly had a special relationship with him, and his personal comments, topped off by his ordering of a state funeral for him was so obviously the right thing to do and fully in keeping with Canadians' fondness for Jack. The overall response to his passing has been marked with the special grace that Jack radiated since he was diagnosed last year with cancer, and his subsequent broken hip. The last time I spoke with him - after the election - we were doing TV interviews up on the Hill on different networks, but at the same time. After a laugh or two about that, I thanked him for his gracious letter on my behalf, and those blue eyes looked right into mine and he said, "I meant every word of it."
Trust me, there are very few people in politics who would ever bother to say such a thing, but that was what drew people to Jack.  He passed that grace on this week to all Canadians who have come together across the political divides in every part of Canada to bid bon voyage to a singular man who left us a great legacy. Although it's not the end of partisanship, it could be a big step towards civility in politics.

Let's leave it with this poster taken from Jack's last letter to Canadians written two days before his death. Until next time....




4/15/11

Post-debate prognosis

Welcome back to the post-debate, mid-campaign period of Canada's biennial election. With Stephen Harper's Conservatives still hovering just below the majority government threshold (usually estimated at around 42% of the vote) at around 39%, did the Leaders do enough in the English and French debates to 'move the dial'? That's what we will explore in this post.

The McLoughlin Media team has been very busy in recent days - with yours truly doing the pre-debate and post-debate analysis on CTV with Power Play host Don Martin, and my partner Laura Peck at the same time doing the pre-and post-analysis on CPAC (while also handling telephone calls from viewers with host Peter Van Dusen and the political panel).

So, who won the debates? By any reasonable measure, Stephen Harper won the English debate by staying calm, cool and collected and avoiding any gaffes. According to the Nanos Research post-debate analysis, the numbers for Mr. Harper rose noticeably. However, in terms of best performance - it was clearly Jack Layton who impressed the most - for his attacks on both Harper and Ignatieff and positioning himself as a credible alternative to the status quo. His body language, eye contact and tone of voice were excellent - which was remarkable considering that he was standing on his feet with a broken hip for two hours!

For Michael Ignatieff - even though he came across as too 'hot' for the cool environment - he scored some strong hits on Stephen Harper, although not many of them inflicted much damage. this was due to a tendency to ask three questions at a time, when he needed to focus on one at a time. However, he didn't do himself any damage, and in fact, more than likely gave some badly needed momentum to his campaign.

Gilles Duceppe clearly under-performed in the English debate, compared to previous debates. With the exception of a few good lines, he mostly repeated his attack points, but didn't really score well.

French Debate Analysis
Duceppe was back on solid ground in the French debate as he took on all comers. Jack Layton again performed the best, while Michael Ignatieff's performance improved significantly over the night before's English debate. He was calm, focused and used the camera well to address Quebecers with his vision. Both Ignatieff and Harper side-stepped skillfully the traps that Duceppe laid out - on imposing Bill 101's French-only laws on the currently exempted federally-regulated industries, as an example. Jack Layton was the clear beneficiary again of the debate as he showed he could hold his own against Duceppe's attacks.
Stephen Harper survived the debate without any self-inflicted damage by choosing to mostly ignore Duceppe's attacks. He must have had welts on his tongue as he listened to the former Communist (by his own admission) lecture Harper on Quebec's inability to score more hand-outs to match Ontario's bail-out of the auto industry etc. He refuted him on the issue of helping the forestry sector, but for the most part knew that it would be a mug's game to take Duceppe on directly. However, Harper didn't need to 'win', he just needed to 'not lose' and, even though he under-performed against his English debate, nevertheless that was to be expected.  He just needs to hold those 11 Quebec seats and he may well just do that.

For my debate analysis on the English debate which I did for Carol and Paul Mott on the Motts radio show, click here  and select 'April 13' podcast.

So What Will this Mean?
The real proving ground for Stephen Harper is Ontario, and he is neck-and-neck with the Liberals. If the Conservatives can grab more seats in the GTA (Greater Toronto Area) from the Liberals, that will be a key. [Hence all the focus on the so-called 'ethnic' vote, which is causing a firestorm of accusations about some of the candidates from the Tories and Liberals with questionable backgrounds.]

The second proving ground will be a possible pick- up of several seats for the Tories in Atlantic Canada - in particular from Newfoundland. The Prairie Provinces look solid for the Conservatives, with the NDP holding seats in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. British Columbia, however, appears to hold the key for the NDP and the Tories as they battle over seats. If the NDP get a bounce from Layton's two debate performances it should show up in British Columbia where they have organization, unpopularity of the HST and other issues giving them a potential edge.

Finally, if the Liberals bring back the nearly 1 million Liberals who stayed home last time out under Stephane Dion, they could make a solid gain in seats, thus holding the Conservatives to a minority. If there is some kind of 'scandal' to be unearthed, it could turn into a very close race.

The Helena Guergis Story
Speaking of 'scandal', the 'Helena Guergis Story' ["soon to be a major motion picture an episode of CBC's Insecurity"] has been resurrected thanks to a copy of the PMO letter to the RCMP falling into the hands of the CBC. It shows that there wasn't really anything to the allegations against her other than private investigator Derek Snowdy's hyper-ventilated rumours. At her live news conference on Friday morning, she was very effective in her heartfelt reaction to the attack on her character, and her emotional response to what has befallen her and her family was understandable.
She chose to avoid the trap of broadening her attack on her Party even though she is in a head-on battle with the highly qualified Dr. Kellie Leitch, the Conservative candidate. That will be an interesting riding to watch on election night. Will this story involve any more collateral damage to Stephen Harper? Probably not directly, but it certainly lost him another day of focus on his message. He made it clear he doesn't want her back, without mentioning her name.  The photo of Helena holding her baby Xavier at the news conference will be hard to top, of course. That young boy has a future in politics! His party? To Be Determined.

Heading towards the finish line
As the Speaker has now cleared the way for Auditor General Sheila Fraser to release her final draft of her audit of the G8/G20 spending, expect that to be the hyper-focus for next week. So the momentum could slide against the Tories in the final weeks of the campaign - thus endangering their vision of a majority victory. The Liberals have moved to a thematic of 'fear vs. hope' to get the Tory numbers down. In my view, that won't work, as they have tried the 'scary Harper' theme in previous elections. Remember 'Tanks. In our streets. In Canada.'? Right now the frame is 'fear of the unknown (coalition) vs. 'fear of the known' (Stephen Harper). Stephen Harper has had five years in which he has been defined and the scare tactics rarely work when the public feels they already know him. However, their internal polling probably tells them it's all they've got left in their need to move the dial.

Who will form the Government? 50% chance it could be Ignatieff
If that happens, and the Liberals boost their seats, I believe that there's a 50% chance that Michael Ignatieff would be Prime Minister by the end of June - all without technically violating his promise that he won't have a 'coalition'. He won't need one; he won't need to offer Mr. Layton or Mr. Duceppe a place in his Cabinet.

IF the Opposition brings down the Conservatives on their budget (which they've already said they will), and IF the Governor General were to refuse Mr. Harper's wish to dissolve Parliament and call an election (which is possible given the threat of ongoing elections), he MIGHT be given the chance to gain the confidence of the House. He could do so with a letter of agreement covering a two-year period, without technically being a 'coalition'. And if that were the case, it would be.....Prime Minister Ignatieff. Do you think this is in the back of his mind - and Mr. Harper's? How about the front of his mind? And Michael Ignatieff's for that matter. Why do you think there is such a focus by the PM on getting a majority? The real tip-off will be on May 3rd. If there is no call by Liberals for Mr. Ignatieff's early departure, it will be because the negotiations will already be underway.

So, it's still ridiculously early to predict, but stranger things have happened - such as right after the 2008 election, for that matter - because, hey, welcome to Canada!

See you soon.
Barry

4/7/11

Campaign Craziness

Welcome back!
All the focus in Canada is on the election campaign while in Washington, the focus is on trying to keep the government's doors open and the revenue flowing..... Are we having fun yet?


The Conservatives have weathered about three solid days of media coverage on the ousting of two young women who were given the heave-ho from a campaign event by the RCMP. This led all newscasts at least two nights running, which means it really was the most important newsworthy event in the world, or it's a perfect example of the loss of proportionality by the media. You decide.

Prime Minister Harper finally apologized to them today which puts an end to the "controversy". In the meantime the Liberals had their own controversy - a 'white supremacist' candidate was given the boot by Michael Ignatieff which only threw them off their message for one day. However, a second candidate - Liberal candidate John Reilly from Alberta after making 'unacceptable comments about a sexual abuse case' decided to keep him on - thus throwing him off message for a second day. In my weekly gig on CTV's Power Play as Don Martin and I discussed some of these matters and the ads posted on websites by the Tories and the Liberals: CTV Power Play April 6th .
Debate Preview
Not surprisingly the polls don't indicate much movement so far, but wait until the debates on April 12th (English) and April 14th (French) and then I think we will see some dislodging of the 'don't know' and 'undecided' swing voters. Having coached many leaders for debates, each leader has to define clearly their goals, core messages, key positioning, and be able to get their messages across under fire.

In a nutshell, Stephen Harper has to survive, while Ignatieff has to introduce himself to voters as he has been sharply defined by the Tories over the past year. Jack Layton has to present himself as a clear alternative to the status quo. Bloc Leader Gilles Duceppe has to merely show up in English (where he always exceeds expectations) but most strongly deliver in French on the second debate - positioning himself as the 'only alternative' to the federalist parties.

In today's Postmedia news I was interviewed about the strategies that the leaders will be employing in their preparation for the debates.

I was interviewed by Carol & Paul Mott on their radio program this a.m. on the debates & campaign controversies. [Click on April 7th podcasts and it's about 2 minutes in]  http://lnkd.in/AMJPEV


In Washington, today's the deadline for negotiating a compromise over the budget. Failure to come to an agreement will mean the shutdown of key government offices, which will, in turn, hurt ordinary folks who depend on the government for help on their mortgage problems to their social security checks. If the Republicans don't come to an agreement, it will be 1996 all over again as they will be blamed for bringing on the pain and the President will be positioned as the one trying to fight on behalf of the middle class and the vulnerable. The President went on television last night and while his declared message was the differences have narrowed he reached beyond that to the messages about the 800,000 families who won't have a paycheck, the Americans who won't have the services they're counting on - passports won't be delivered, etc. the economic damage etc. - which clearly positioned the issue  as going backwards because Washington doesn't have its act together".

Until next time....pay attention and stay very, very calm.

3/1/11

Commenting on Campaign Ads

Hi there! I thought you might be interested in my comments yesterday on CTV's Power Play on the latest TV commercials by the NDP and Conservatives in this pre-campaign period. As an aside, it's looking more and more like an election is in the offing in Canada.   Barry on CTV's Power Play .

10/7/10

When we make 'inartful' comments

'Welcome back!
Well it looks like we are finally getting some of that beautiful Fall weather we have been so missing in these parts. How about where you live? All I have seen in the media - besides political muggings - is floods, hurricanes and the occasional tornado!

I have been busy as always, but managed to squeeze in a round of golf last week, and am hoping to get another round in this weekend.

I also managed to do a few interviews during the past week - one was my comments on David Johnston, Canada's new Governor General and on Stephen Harper, Michael Ignatieff and Jack Layton: Barry on CTV's Power Play


'Inartful' Comments

Last week, CNN's Rick Sanchez, the (now former) host of Rick's List made a few CTCs [Career Terminating Comments] about Comedy Central's Jon Stewart which his bosses at CNN thought were so incendiary that they fired him in record time. [Even faster than their hiring of that other paragon of virtue Eliot Spitzer...but I digress.] His comments speak for themselves and you can judge for yourself if they were worthy of the firing offence: Rick Sanchez melts down

In my view his comments were stupid - and as he himself called them 'inartful' - they weren't quite up to the  standard that one would hear on Fox News or by talk radio hosts across the fruited plain. It might have been better to pair him up with Jon Stewart and watch him be annihilated live on national television. At least Rick faced the music and apologized to Stewart. Jon Stewart Takes Rick Apart

So here is a rule for making 'inartful comments:

1. Never attack a satirist especially if a) he is intelligent and witty and b) has his own show.

So until next time...be careful about who is the target of your 'inartful' comments!