Democracy Gone Astray

Democracy, being a human construct, needs to be thought of as directionality rather than an object. As such, to understand it requires not so much a description of existing structures and/or other related phenomena but a declaration of intentionality.
This blog aims at creating labeled lists of published infringements of such intentionality, of points in time where democracy strays from its intended directionality. In addition to outright infringements, this blog also collects important contemporary information and/or discussions that impact our socio-political landscape.

All the posts here were published in the electronic media – main-stream as well as fringe, and maintain links to the original texts.

[NOTE: Due to changes I haven't caught on time in the blogging software, all of the 'Original Article' links were nullified between September 11, 2012 and December 11, 2012. My apologies.]

Friday, March 02, 2012

The robocalls scandal and party strategy

Much has already been written about the emerging Robocalls Scandal, in which there are allegations of fraudulent and harassing calls made to Liberal and NDP supporters during the last federal election. At the time of this writing, it has been alleged that at least fifty-seven ridings were targeted by such calls. If true, this would likely amount to the most comprehensive case of electoral fraud and voter suppression in Canadian history.

Many questions linger, such as those related to the scope and director(s) of the operation. However, there are a few questions relevant to how Canada’s political parties are reacting to this scandal that have yet to be addressed in depth by most political commentators.

First, it should be noted that the Conservatives have been adamant in Question Period over the past few days: (a) in stating that they had played no role whatsoever in the scandal, and that the whole thing is merely an opposition-fuelled smear campaign against the government; and (b) in challenging the opposition parties to produce evidence that the Tories are in fact guilty. Of course, it is the legal responsibility of Elections Canada, the RCMP and perhaps an independent and specially-appointed body — not of the opposition parties — to determine guilt. But there’s a more important question here.

If the Tories are so adamant and certain about the fact that no Conservative central party operative is behind the Robocalls Scandal, why haven’t they brought all relevant information out into the public eye? More information will continue to be leaked by the Elections Canada investigation as time goes on, keeping the issue alive and hurting the Tories as a consequence. The fact that the Canadian public hasn’t received full disclosure from its government in the early stages of the scandal is likely to create the impression that Harper’s Conservatives have something to hide.

It’s ironic that a party that has made succinct messaging its trademark has been unable to achieve message control in the early days of the scandal. For instance, Tory Senator Mike Duffy has suggested that the entire operation was the fault of a third party whereas Defense Minister Peter MacKay stated in an interview that former Conservative staffer Michael Sona was in fact responsible. If the Tories don’t bring everything they’ve got out into the open early on in the game, then they’ll have a difficult time controlling the message on this topic over the long term and may pay at the polls in 2015 as a result.

Another question relates to Michael Sona himself. Sona — a 23-year-old staffer who became a controversial figure during the 2011 campaign for allegedly grabbing a ballot box in Guelph — took the fall for the party once the story of the scandal broke last week. Of course, few believe that a single staffer in his early twenties could have orchestrated such comprehensive electoral fraud across the country. More importantly, however, if the Tories insist that they have done no wrong, then why did Sona have to leave the party ranks when news of the robocalls erupted?

Is this part of the usual Tory pattern of blaming an aide whenever something goes wrong to absolve themselves of any responsibility for wrongdoing? Or rather, does it show that the Conservatives have something bigger to hide and are trying to divert the attention of the media?

One final question pertains to opposition strategy in the face of these accusations. I have advocated in the past that any party looking to beat Harper’s Conservatives will have to do so not by engaging the Tories on the latter’s battlefield of choice, but rather by creating a new battlefield. Put another way, any opposition party that is serious about winning an election in the future needs to spend less time yelling and screaming about the Tories’ alleged abuses and spend more time coming up with a comprehensive vision for the future of the country.

When it comes to the Robocalls Scandal, opposition parties will need to start drafting up a long-term strategy relatively soon. At the heart of that strategy will be a cold, hard calculation as to whether this scandal represents the tipping point for the Tories or not. That is to say, is it with this scandal that the Canadian people finally wake up and announce that they’re fed up with the corruption of this government? Or, do Canadians simply avert their gaze and continue to trust the Tories with the reins of power based on their alleged competence on the one issue that matters the most to the people — the economy?

If it appears to be the tipping point, then opposition parties may well try to make this the issue of the next federal election. Such a decision would be risky, however, because a misperception of the Canadian public at the present time could contribute to ineffective messaging over the next few years and to a renewed Harper majority in 2015.

The Liberals and NDP should focus on the long game. If the 2011 election is any indication, an opposition party that makes significant gains is one that includes in its central message what it would do differently if elected, not one that merely talks about what’s wrong with the men and women sitting two sword-lengths away.

Original Article
Source: ipolitics
Author: Zack Paikin

No comments:

Post a Comment