Saturday
May142016

To Staff Or Not To Staff

There has been much fuss about nothing recently over Sophie Grégoire Trudeau’s remarks that she needs more staff.

If we look at her situation it probably is true and she may very well need extra staff to deal with the volume of requests and correspondence she receives.

What the Trudeau’s need to do is put in place a game plan around what type of events will be supported and then decide who is going to pay for the staff to make it work.

Anyone who has been in government or even opposition knows the number of requests for you to support a cause or appear at events is mind-boggling. No matter how much you want to help, time constraints make it impossible. Every MP, every minister, every Prime Minister and yes their spouse has to face this head on.

First prioritize your events- political and other. Outside of politics focus on a few key areas that mean a lot to you.

Accept that by declining a request you will disappoint some of the requesters and look at other ways to offer support. If you can’t do an event in person, offer a letter of support that can be read out or use the power of technology and offer to do a short video that can be played at the event.

Who pays for the staff is always the issue. There could be issues with MPs using their House of Commons budget, but nothing wrong with PMO paying for extra staff or the Liberal Party paying for the extra staff that Sophie Trudeau needs. The Trudeau’s will have to keep in mind that if staff costs come out of the PMO budget it is still taxpayer’s dollars and those costs are still open to political attack. However, if the Liberal Party pays for the extra staff it dilutes the attacks on the wife of the Prime Minister and allows her to meet her obligations. It is a simple solution.

The PMO correspondence unit can make sure every letter addressed to Sophie Trudeau gets an acknowledgement. Staff for Mrs. Trudeau can comb few the requests and prioritize them based on the above game plan. Those that make that first cut are then presented once a week to Mrs. Trudeau and the correspondence unit sends out the appropriate note.

As I said, it is a lot of fuss about nothing.

 

 

Tuesday
Apr262016

My Latest Column from Power and Influence Magazine

We have all had a lot of fun watching the Donald Trump show in the United States and of course people up here in “politically correct” Canada have done their fair share of fingering pointing at him. There has been much said by political pundits, the media and even politicians about how awful American politics has become, but is this a sign of what is to come in Canada?

Over the years we have seen much of what is practiced in the United States slowly blend into the Canadian political landscape. Many of us can remember the introduction of some of the very first negative attack ads in the USA. The “Daisy Girl” ad used in the 1964 Presidential campaign by Lyndon B Johnson against Barry Goldwater is one of the most famous ones. The George H.W. Bush campaign successfully used attack ads against Michael Dukakis in 1988. In the Canadian election of that year the Liberals ran one of my all-time favourite ads on the free trade issue showing an eraser wiping out the Canadian border if the Mulroney Conservatives won. When attack ads were first introduced in the USA, we gloated that Canadians were different, but today such ads are a regular occurrence here. While Canadians still like to say they don’t work here, we know they do-just ask Stephane Dion or Michael “Just visiting” Ignatieff.

Some readers may remember the Presidential debates between Kennedy and Nixon. Today in Canada, we can’t have an election without some type of leader’s debate. As boring as they often are, they involve weeks of negotiations between the various political camps and the media spend hours trying to rev up the public’s interest in them.

After the federal election in 2000 (in which the Progressive Conservatives didn’t fair to well) the House of Commons research budget was so small we had to cut costs and that meant cutting staff. The net result was a very small staff that wasn’t able to find the time to do the type of opposition policy research needed. That was the reason we switched tactics and using the example of Bill Clinton’s advisor, James Carville, I set up a permanent war room under the guise of “Issues Management”. In those days we were an attack team that created the issues for the Chretien Liberals to handle. Issues management eventually moved to PMO in 2006, but it switched its focus to a defensive role. Incidentally, Carville was also hired by the Liberals on occasion to help train staff.

The Harper PMO often looked to Australia for examples that could work here. Internally there was a lot of discussion that focused on what and how the Australian parties did things. In addition, we had members of one of the Scottish political parties visit our war room in 2006 to see how we ran a campaign including our rapid reaction team. The Liberals in 2012 held a convention in Ottawa and among the presenters were some of President Obama’s campaign’s digital experts to explain how to use modern technology to build voter data bases and use it to win elections. On the Conservative side, The Manning Conference in Ottawa which is often viewed as a training ground for Conservatives also invites political experts and trainers to give lectures.

So while Canadian pundits and media types like to think that we are different, I would be wary of being too smug. For those who think that it couldn’t happen here, we only have to look at the media frenzy generated by one man, who like Trump is not a politician and who aimed a few words at the Premier of Alberta. In this case it was Kevin O’Leary who got the media all worked up, especially when he speculated he might run for the Conservative leadership.

Politics is often described as a blood sport with a winner takes all attitude. The strategies and political tactics used south of the border should matter to us as they do have a tendency to cross that invisible barrier.

One last point that might help to illustrate this can be found in the 2008 Presidential campaign. John McCain’s Republican Party ran an attack ad aimed at Barack Obama that included the tag line “But, is he ready to lead?” That does remind you of the Conservative attack ads aimed at Justin Trudeau which claimed he is “Just Not Ready”. As Canadians, we should be paying very close attention to what works and what doesn’t work in this latest Presidential campaign- it does matter to us.

Tuesday
Apr052016

Our Latest True North Politics Panel

Our panel from Monday 4 April:

 

http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?clipId=842329

Monday
Apr042016

Membership has no privledges

I don’t often agree with Liberal leader Justin Trudeau, but I do think he is going in the right direction with his open membership proposal. In this country our politicians often lament that the population is largely disengaged from our political process and we try to find all sorts of ways to attract young voters- Trudeau just did that.

Membership will no longer have its privileges. Anyone who signs up with the Liberals (with no membership fee involved) will have the right to take part in policy development, nomination meetings, conventions and future elections of the leader.

Unlike the Conservatives who after their last election loss circled the wagons and fired inward, the Liberals have taken a bold new step. The Conservatives have gone in the opposite direction to the Liberals with their new $25 membership fee that has to be paid by cheque or credit card. In effect the Conservatives have managed to make themselves more exclusive rather than inclusive. The Liberals have broadened their tent while the Conservatives shrank theirs. Time will tell who made the right move.

The Liberals will find there are lots of hiccups along the way, especially at the constituency level. In weaker regions, membership fees helped to keep struggling associations going. There will always be the fear of single issue groups hijacking nomination meetings (as there is now) and we will have to see how they manage fundraising and what amount does the national office share with ridings or keep of monies raised by riding associations.

Speaking of fundraising, the Liberal fundraising machine must be rubbing its hands in glee waiting for all these new Liberals to give them their name, address, telephone number and email address.

It will also be fun to watch what happens when the central party wants to get things done a certain way and folks at the grass roots level refuse as they don’t think they owe party headquarters any loyalty or any deference for that matter.

But compare that to a large influx of new members, who are excited to be part of the political process, who bring fresh new ideas to the table and who can serve as a broad based group for policy development rather than it being initiated by party insiders.

I expect the NDP will have to move in the same direction as the Liberals or risk losing large numbers of their members to the Liberals, many of whom voted Liberal in the last election. With Liberal policies already moving into traditional NDP territory this new membership proposal does pose a threat to the NDP. What about the Green Party? Could this move of Trudeau’s actually unite the left? That is an interesting question and puts even more pressure on Mulcair and the NDP bosses this coming weekend?

Friday
Apr012016

All Oil Workers Are Not Equal

Guess who said while rejecting offering the same EI changes to oil industry workers in one part of a province, the same help that other workers in the same industry in the same province needed:

"I think that both people in Edmonton and Saskatchewan should be pleased that they are not hit as hard as other parts of the country and indeed the province have been.''

Answer: It wasn’t Stephen Harper, a Conservative Prime Minister, although you can bet if it was that quote would have received at least a week’s intense news coverage; instead of appearing in the early news and for the most part only being referenced later.

No, it was our new Liberal Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau. It really is a pretty callous comment. For Trudeau one oil industry worker does not equal another if you live a few miles apart. When you translate the political speak, what he said was that workers in Edmonton and parts of Saskatchewan who are out of work, scrambling to pay bills and scrambling to find ways to pay their mortgage and put food on the table are supposed to be thankful that he didn’t include them with workers in the same industry, who are out of work, scrambling to pay bills and scrambling to find ways to pay their mortgage and put food on the table, just like they are. And Trudeau thinks that they should be thankful for this!

Perhaps our “silver spoon” Prime Minister when he is on his next $2500 a night vacation should show a bit more empathy for families who aren’t even thinking about a vacation, but trying to figure out how to save their home.

Does this Prime Minister have any clue as to what it is really like to know that your EI payment is all that stands between you and possibly bankruptcy? From his comment he obviously doesn’t- so much for sunny ways.