Maurizio Bevilacqua Visits Vancouver
Yesterday, I got to meet the first of the 11 Liberal leadership contenders. On short notice, Maurizio Bevilacqua came out to Vancouver to meet with the Liberal faithful. He was introduced by former MLA Karn Manhas, who despite only hearing about him a few weeks ago, was so impressed with his vision he signed up as one of his BC co-chairs.
He gave a speech and then took questions from the audience. Although I still haven't decided who to endorse, I was very impressed with what I saw from him. I think he would make a very good PM even if he ever becomes one and considering he is only 45 he may get a chance even if he doesn't win this leadership race. Like myself he argued against uniting the left, but rather uniting the centre. He talked about focusing on the long-term challenges rather than short-term policies to win votes. Specifically our aging society, emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil, as well as environmental sustainability were issues he talked about. The thing I liked the most is he said he would be realistic in his goals. For example politicians in the past have advocated raising foreign aid to 0.7%, while he argued it would be better to promise to raise it to 4.25% and keep the promise rather than promise to raise it to 0.7% and not even come close. He even with Kyoto Protocol argued the government had failed to curb pollution and didn't have the right to criticize other nations until it cleaned up its actions. Instead of arguing for the unrealistic idea of meeting the Kyoto targets or the lazy idea of doing nothing, he argued in favour of reducing our emissions, but setting a target that was do able. As a Blue Liberal/Business Liberal he certainly comes from the same side of the party as I do. Finally I was impressed about the fact he seemed to be willing to look at why the party lost and move forward rather than pretend nothing happened. We cannot win if we don't know why we lost and learn from our mistakes. Also his final message was whoever you support, it is party to remain involved since the party will lose when it is divided.
This weekend Michael Ignatieff will becoming to some undisclosed location (I know where it is, but you have to join the Liberal Party before you can attend). Hopefully over the next little while I can get a chance to meet each of the individual candidates and learn more about them. I certainly haven't ruled out endorsing Maurizio Bevilacqua, but I want to wait and see what the others have to say.
He gave a speech and then took questions from the audience. Although I still haven't decided who to endorse, I was very impressed with what I saw from him. I think he would make a very good PM even if he ever becomes one and considering he is only 45 he may get a chance even if he doesn't win this leadership race. Like myself he argued against uniting the left, but rather uniting the centre. He talked about focusing on the long-term challenges rather than short-term policies to win votes. Specifically our aging society, emerging economies such as China, India, and Brazil, as well as environmental sustainability were issues he talked about. The thing I liked the most is he said he would be realistic in his goals. For example politicians in the past have advocated raising foreign aid to 0.7%, while he argued it would be better to promise to raise it to 4.25% and keep the promise rather than promise to raise it to 0.7% and not even come close. He even with Kyoto Protocol argued the government had failed to curb pollution and didn't have the right to criticize other nations until it cleaned up its actions. Instead of arguing for the unrealistic idea of meeting the Kyoto targets or the lazy idea of doing nothing, he argued in favour of reducing our emissions, but setting a target that was do able. As a Blue Liberal/Business Liberal he certainly comes from the same side of the party as I do. Finally I was impressed about the fact he seemed to be willing to look at why the party lost and move forward rather than pretend nothing happened. We cannot win if we don't know why we lost and learn from our mistakes. Also his final message was whoever you support, it is party to remain involved since the party will lose when it is divided.
This weekend Michael Ignatieff will becoming to some undisclosed location (I know where it is, but you have to join the Liberal Party before you can attend). Hopefully over the next little while I can get a chance to meet each of the individual candidates and learn more about them. I certainly haven't ruled out endorsing Maurizio Bevilacqua, but I want to wait and see what the others have to say.
posted by Monkey Loves to Fight at 7:08 PM
11 Comments:
Miles,
You've posted the same story twice.
Leadership of a national party should come from someone who has been a leader at the National level. I don't think being a back bencher, or an intellectual, or a Provincial politician from Ontario counts.
I'm going to hold off supporting anyone until the last minute. I'm hoping someone else might join the race, who does have a National profile. Hopefully someone who held a senior Cabinet position for several years.
Walter, I removed the first one, anyways, the blog sometimes doesn't post things initially so I double click it.
Certainly someone with a high position is probably a better choice. I suspect Bevilacqua is running this time around, so next time around he will be a serious contender. By running this time he is almost guaranteed a cabinet post and will likely have more exposure by next time.
Walter - there is one candidate who fits your bill: Stephane Dion. I doubt anyone else will be entering the race with his kind of experience. In fact, I doubt there will be any new candidates at all.
Joe Volpe, Carolyn Bennett, Ken Dryden, and Scott Brison would also fit the bill, although I agree if you require them to have been a senior cabinet minister Stephane Dion is probably the best chance in terms of winning the election, although I think both Joe Volpe and Scott Brison would make a good PM if they could win.
Brison was really impressive at the LPCO AGM last weekend. His grasp of the issues and AS IMPORTANTLY, his ability to communicate them were second to none.
I was undecided but absolutely with Brison now.
I supported Scott Brison for the PC leadership race and certainly look forward to hearing his ideas. I definitely wouldn't rule out of the possibility of supporting him, but I am going to wait until I hear from all candidates.
Hedy Fry for Liberal Leader... as we speak!
She won't be my first choice and I would have trouble voting for her, but since I am committed to the Liberal Party now, I plan to actively help whoever wins. Canada needs a strong Liberal Party whether in government or opposition to remain a vibrant democracy. I am concerned that the Conservatives are trying to do everything to put the party out of business so I am not going to sit by and allow it to happen. I made a mistake of allowing the former Progressive Conservatives to be destroyed, I will not repeat that mistake by allowing the other founding party of Canada to be destroyed.
I saw Maurizio too this week and was impressed with his honest demeanor. Certainly his experience, including some important work on committees, does give him a good standpoint from which to launch his campaign. That he is still just in his mid-40s is both positive and negative -- a career politician with minimal real-world experience? He wouldn't be the first to take the leap.
As you mentioned, his platform embraces our recent fiscal prudence (well, adscam and gun control excluded...). And its good to hear someone espouse the need to remain in the centre, although I am more inclined to lean left these days -- and after Chretien and Martin, isn't time for a more progressive platform? My question for him, if I had the chance, would be: If you win, or if someone who leans left-centre wins, how will you ensure that the party remains intact and flowing in a manner that is progressive? Would you work under a Bob Rae/Gerard Kennedy-led party, and how would you make people like BR/GK feel comfortable and included in a party under your leadership?
I'm already leaning towards someone, but I too want to see as many candidates before I publicly state it.
I agree that Chretien moved the party to the right in the 90s, but if anything Martin despite being right leaning as finance minister swung to the left. Now much of that had to do with the fact he had a minority government.
From listening to him, he strikes me as a pretty loyal Liberal. He did after all run as a Liberal in 1988 when the then Progressive Conservatives were closer to the centre than the Reform-Conservatives. I suspect he would work well if they choose a left leaning one too. One of the advantages of not going to the left is to try and capture the 12% who voted for the Progressive Conservatives in 2000. Those people are without a political home and could really go either way. Unfortunately it appears the majority have gone for the Conservatives at least for now.
He also talked about widening the centre that would take in moderate NDP supporters and Red Tories since those groups Chretien successfully was able to win, while Martin in 2006 couldn't.
www.onlineuniversalwork.com
Post a Comment
<< Home