OTTAWA—The federal NDP have been notable historically for their loyalty to leaders in defeat, and unlike the norm for the other two main parties the Conservatives and the Liberals, the NDP has not expected or demanded that their leaders fall on their swords following defeat—but not so this time.
Whether it was the dramatic plummet from the heady expectation of taking over the reins of government formed early in the last electoral contest, or even returning to the lessor status of Official Opposition that was gained under the hand of the late Jack Layton, to be relegated once again to the role of third party, delegates to the NDP convention in Winnipeg this past weekend voted 52 percent in favour of a leadership contest.
Although pundits had suggested that federal NDP Leader Tom Mulcair’s self imposed line in the sand of 70 percent support might fall short, the dramatic refutation of the NDP leader was almost universally unanticipated.
Perhaps it was the recognition of Mr. Muclair, by friend and foe alike, as one of the most effective opposition leaders in Canadian history even more than the NDP’s historical loyalty to its leaders in defeat that obscured the surface of the pundits’ crystal balls.
Algoma-Manitoulin-Kapuskasing MP Carol Hughes expressed her own shock at the result of the leadership review vote. “I don’t think anyone saw it coming,” she admitted on Monday just before heading into Monday’s Question Period. “If I had a crystal ball life would be a lot easier.”
She noted that Mr. Mulcair was both well respected and had a great sense of humour, but that the electorate had chosen to take another route. “You can’t predict the electorate,” she said. “There was a strong desire for change, and when a wave comes along it can sweep a lot of good people with it.”
Ms. Hughes agreed that a lot of people had been disappointed with the results of the last election, but she noted that Mr. Mulcair as leader “took full responsibility onto himself.”
“In the end, the delegates made their decision,” she said.
“Tom is a great debater, knows his issues,” she said. “I don’t think Tom’s ability to do the job was the deciding factor.”
“I think the party dealt with what it had to deal with,” said local NDP stalwart Ken MacKenzie of Gore Bay, who admitted that although he works diligently for the party during elections he had not really been following the convention as such. “I think the turnaround in the last couple of months of the election was so dramatic (the NDP support plummeted from a commanding lead as the Liberals rose), especially in September. It would be hard for the people who worked so hard at the polls to get behind him again.
NDP supporter Craig Maxwell of Spring Bay also noted that he had not been following the convention that closely, but that the call for a leadership convention “was a bit of a surprise.” Mr. Maxwell noted that most of what he knew from the convention came from the media. “The CBC was really dwelling on the oil and Leap Manifesto thing,” he said. Mr. Maxwell added that the tendency of the media to focus on the negative and conflict tends to disfavour an NDP leader. In any event, he questioned the decision to wait two years to hold the leadership contest calling it “a bit of a long time.”
“That Leap business is going to stir the pot up,” agreed Mr. MacKenzie. “Whichever way they go in regards to the environment, it will have a big impact.”
The NDP federal council has already met to start the process of choosing a new leader in motion, reported Ms. Hughes. “So we are going to move forward as a strong and united party.”
“We still have millions of Canadians who are counting on us to even the odds for them.”
As to her own leadership aspirations, Ms. Hughes laughed, “no, I am not interested,” although she admitted that a number of people have spoken to her about running.
“With a riding the size of mine, it would not be fair to the people I represent to be away from them for the length of time that would be involved,” she said. “I am looking forward in the leadership to introduce the leadership and help them to run that process.”
Among the issues that were debated at the convention was the controversial “Leap Manifesto,” which envisions moving the nation completely away from dependence on fossil fuels for energy. The Leap Manifesto highlighted a significant cleavage between the Alberta, other western and rural delegates on the convention floor and some of the urban and eastern representatives.
Ms. Hughes did not shy away from the question. “The bottom line is that it is really about having that discussion,” she said. “Not that we were going to support it, but whether or not people were in support of it; it was an important discussion to have.”
The NDP has not shied away from difficult debates, she pointed out. “Whether it was abortion, climate change or any other issue, we do the study and follow up.”
In the end the delegates at the NDP convention did not endorse the Leap Manifesto.
Ms. Hughes described the general atmosphere at the NDP convention as being full of energy, with delegates who were “strongly invested in providing better equity and opportunities for all Canadians.”
