Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 16803
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 10:21 am
 


Filibuster Cartoons
Title: The weird rise of Robert Rae (click to view)
Date: May 26, 2011


The Liberal Party of Canada unanimously elected Robert Rae to be their new leader yesterday, formally concluding the sad and failed reign of Michael Ignatieff.

As was the case with Iggy's uncontested coronation in December of 2008, Rae's automatic ascension was the decision of the party's parliamentary caucus, who, in conclave-like fashion, have come to believe that all Liberal leaders must be installed with as much quiet unanimity as possible, rather than a lot of messy debate. Rae finished third place in the party's 2006 leadership election — their last genuinely competitive one — and was thus understood to deserve the top job by virtue of royal succession, considering that candidates number one (Stephane Dion) and two (Ignatieff) had already fallen.

Again like Ignatieff, for now Rae only holds the leadership role with an "acting" suffix, but has nevertheless stated a preference to remain in office for at lest a couple of years — though his precise future intentions remain fairly ambiguous. A formal convention of the Liberal Party is scheduled to take place next month, at which point the party constitution is expected to be changed in all sorts of ways that could potentially keep Rae in power for quite a while, and overturn any stipulations that the acting leader can't ever become "full" leader, and so on. But for the time being, at least, Rae's the man.

The entirely uncontroversial rise of Bob Rae to the leadership of Canada's once most powerful political party has been a rather bizarre phenomenon, considering that the man is, by all measurable standards, one of Canada's least accomplished and, indeed, most disgraced political figures of recent decades. His story has been one political pundits recite while shaking their heads.

Rae came from an old-time establishment Ottawa family, with his father serving as Pierre Trudeau's UN ambassador and his brother an executive in the aptly-named Power Corporation, Canada's equivalent of the Bilderberg Group. Expected to go on to similarly great things, in 1978 30-year-old Robert was elected to the House of Commons, representing the NDP. In many ways, this brief stint as a third-party backbencher would represent the most distinguished phase of his political career.

Four short years later, Rae resigned from parliament to seek the leadership of the Ontario NDP, a party that, at the time, seemed no more bound for the winner's circle than its federal counterpart. Yet after leading his party to two back-to-back electoral defeats, an odd thing happened. In the 1990 provincial election, he actually won. The victory was one of the most unanticipated flukes in Canadian political history, and exposed the weird outcomes that can occur in a strong three-party system with a plurality-based electoral regime. Despite only winning 37% of the popular vote, the vote splitting between the Tories and Liberals was severe enough to give Rae's party a healthy majority of seats in the Ontario legislature, a victory that even shocked him.

Abruptly handed power they didn't seriously anticipate gaining, Rae's single-term NDP administration did nothing to disprove the idea that they weren't ready for prime time. In a province crippled by a worsening recession, a sizable deficit, growing debt, some of the highest tax rates in Canada, and a faltering, uncompetitive industrial sector, Rae's government adhered dogmatically to a hardline socialist agenda that paid little heed to the realities of the time. Spending on social programs was cranked up, welfare was made more generous and easy (over 10% of the Ontario population had joined by the end of Rae's term), public sector salaries were hiked, and all sorts of government-run make-work initiatives were introduced. The province could afford precisely none of this, and Ontario's debt and deficit predictably ballooned. In just five years, Rae had racked up twice as much public debt as all previous Ontario premiers combined. Belatedly, his government would try to balance things out by forcing the province's overpaid public employees to take mandatory  (and made-up) unpaid holidays, though these "Rae Days," as they were soon known, quickly became a despised symbol of the grasping incompetence of his leadership.

Rae has since attempted to defend his record by claiming he was fairly "distracted" as premier, though the object of his wandering attention was hardly more worthwhile. Always more obsessed with federal politics than provincial, Rae was one of the leading architects of Brian Mulroney's Charlottetown Accord, an overly-ambitious effort to rewrite key portions of the Canadian constitution that ended up spawning one of the most aggressive populist backlashes Canadian politics had ever seen. The package of Quebec-friendly amendments and half-assed parliamentary reforms were rejected by strong majorities in almost every province they were put to referendum, and helped unleash a tumultuous new era of regional polarization across the country.

Rae himself was predictably defeated in Ontario's 1995 provincial election, and his NDP fell from first to third place, never regaining power since. Whatever "legacy" he was said to have left behind was quickly undone by the new premier, Michael Harris, who came from the hard-right of the Ontario Conservatives, yet seemed downright moderate in the context of Rae's dramatic push to the left.

Following his loss and resignation, Rae vanished from the political scene for a decade, only to declare in 2006 that he had finally seen the light, and was now ready to become a member of the Liberals. It was a fairly rich line coming from a man who had always been one of the NDP's more doctrinaire members, openly and aggressively socialist in his rhetoric and ideas (as you can see from the quote above), even at a time when socialism was rapidly falling out of fashion. Yet, for whatever reason, this background was cheerfully forgotten by a Liberal Party that was even then, trying desperately to find new sources of energy and enthusiasm, and Rae finished a respectable third in the ensuing leadership race to succeed the recently-defeated Paul Martin.

Rae's emergence as one of the most prided goslings of the Liberal establishment, despite his obviously unimpressive and ideologically incorrect political background, has never been sufficiently justified, other than through a sort of anti-NDP, neener-neener schadenfreude. He remains a widely-despised figure in Ontario — the Liberals' traditional base — to this day, and his loyalty to his new party continues to be suspect. In a recent Macleans' interview, Rae seemed to imply that he still envisions the Liberals being a social democratic party — just a more competent one than the NDP. It's for this reason that some more conservative members of the party fear Mr. Rae harbors a hidden merger agenda with the New Democrats, and why the Liberal executive committee, in turn, took the rather heavy-handed approach of explicitly banning their new leader from entering into such negotiations during his term.

There are, in short, just so, so many things bafflingly wrong with Rae's appointment, optically, logically, strategically, and philosophically,  it's almost impossible to fathom why the decision was made, especially in the context of a badly wounded party desperate to rebuild its failing brand. It seems to me a classic "groupthink" case study; a terrible decision approved unanimously simply because everyone involved in the process had grown desensitized to the outcome through over-exposure.

I'm not sure how much more groupthink this party can survive.



Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 11:33 am
 


:lol: It's BOB Rae, not Robert Rae. When you say "Rob Ray" to a Canadian, this is who they'll think you're talking about:

Image


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2962
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 1:17 pm
 


A closely written post but not compelling. This idea that Bob Rae gave pay raises to civil servants and that mandated "Rae Days" some how seems wrong. Lots of people, conservatives, hate him but many people acknowledge his 30 of public service. I think in the first conservative budget they raised taxes on the bottom. I sharper pencil in Ottawa is still a winning proposition.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 435
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 3:05 pm
 


How does it seem wrong? He overpaid civil servants then tried to compensate by making them work less.
30 years of public service is meaningless if all 30 years were riddled with terrible decisions.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 14762
PostPosted: Thu May 26, 2011 3:18 pm
 


I agree JJ. Too many people laud wankers and idiots just because they managed to outlast the good guys.

Rae, well, 'nuff said.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3351
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 3:28 am
 


Sounds like a fun character.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 122
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 6:38 am
 


Pretty jaundiced view of Mr. Rae I must say. He became Premier in Ontario during a recessionary period (2nd qtr 90 to arguably late 91 early 92). During that time a standard Keynesian philosphy of buying your way out of a recession was imposed. Problem was on one hand financial gurus complained the stimulus was too much and on the other Keynesians complained it was too little. Rae tried a middle ground which was less than sucessful. Part of his stimulus was public employee contracts with increases of 5% in hopes of increased consumer spending. Again this was viewed as pandering to his base. 1993 to 1995 was an all out effort to control spending & reduce the deficit hence the "Social Contract" & " Rae Days". The Conservatives in 1995 took over government & a province in a lot better condition than Rae did in 1990 from the Peterson Liberals.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 6:47 am
 


Uhh, provincial governments aren't in the business of performing fiscal policy. Non of what Rae did was ever considered, nor intended to be, economic stimulus.


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 122
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 9:51 am
 


Lemmy wrote:
Uhh, provincial governments aren't in the business of performing fiscal policy. Non of what Rae did was ever considered, nor intended to be, economic stimulus.

Not sure where you are coming from with that comment, however as far as stimulus goes all you have to do is look as far as the 407, started & built during the Rae administration. Yes some of the borrowing went cover the previous government's mistakes eg the SkyDome. Previously mentioned some went onerous union contracts & expanded social services in the hope of spurring consumer demand. The borrowing siutation execerbated by very high BoC rates and stimulus as such could not be sustained.
That necessitated a shift to Labour friendly legislation which was all but negated by the "Social Contract".

Tell me, just who does control a province's fiscal policy if the province does not.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 9:57 am
 


Fiscal policy is a federal matter. It's ultra vires provincial authority.


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 4634
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 10:10 am
 


Check out what Rex Murphy has to say about Rae! I tend to agree with him. I can't get the video to unload so you just have to look for it.
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/


Offline
Active Member
Active Member
Profile
Posts: 122
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 10:15 am
 


OK, just what would be correct teminology in your view of the scenario as described above?
If a provincal budget is not fiscal policy what is it?
Just trying to get on the same page here. Thanks


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2962
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 10:20 am
 


fifeboy wrote:
Check out what Rex Murphy has to say about Rae! I tend to agree with him. I can't get the video to unload so you just have to look for it.
http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/


Can you post another link? A search CBC for Rex Murphy and Bob Rae but get too many vague references. I would like to hear what Rex Murphy has to say.


Offline
CKA Super Elite
CKA Super Elite
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 6972
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 10:25 am
 


The course of economic policy in Canada is drafted by the Federal government in concert with the Bank of Canada. The Bank of Canada carries out monetary policy while the Federal government carries out fiscal policy. These two parties must work together or the actions of one will off-set the actions of the other. The same is true when it comes to Provincial economic policy. It must done in concert with the feds or else could potentially counteract economic initiatives at the Federal level.

In 1990, Bank of Canada governor John Crow proposed a national economic experiment: zero inflation. Long standing economic theory suggested that inflation and unemployment were opposite problems. Fighting one created the other. This relationship was hypothesized by American monetarist Alban Phillips. His Phillips Curve attempted to show the “best case scenarios” for inflation and unemployment. Crow believed that, by focusing on inflation, we could remove the element of uncertainty from the markets. He hypothesized that an economy would experience inflation-free, supply-driven economic growth if it could demonstrate an on-going commitment to price stability. He believed it was possible to do better than Phillips’ best-case scenario.

In 1991, this experiment was put into action. The Bank of Canada raised interest rates and PURPOSELY created a recession to test the theory. Businesses and consumers eventually sucked it up, paid the higher interest rates and went on with their lives. Lo and behold, the economy began to recover and by 1994, Canada had beaten the Phillips Curve. We had lower unemployment AND low inflation than Phillips believed was possible.

Now, what do you suppose would have happened if Rae’s provincial government were allowed to carry out expansionary fiscal policy when the Federal government was carrying out the Zero Inflation experiment?


Offline
Forum Super Elite
Forum Super Elite
Profile
Posts: 2962
PostPosted: Fri May 27, 2011 10:26 am
 


Just while we are denegrating Bob Rae I'ld like to remind readers that Chretien, Martin, Dion than Ignatieff pretty much stunk the place out. Pew, we deserve better.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  1  2  3  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.