Klander's Slander: The Real Issue
Having pondered the Mike Klander affair, and the consequences, both from a serious and a humorous point of view, I know what is really bothering me.
As you can tell from my posts, my concern is less about Klander's comments, but rather with the consequences for Klander (forced to resign), and how that compares to the lack of consequences for Scott Reid and John Duffy over the "beer and popcorn" gaffe.
As I considered in an earlier post, Klander's comments were worse than Reid's and Duffy's, but were voiced in a semi-private forum, while Reid and Duffy were speaking on national TV in their capacity as spokespersons for the Liberal Party, explaining official policy to all Canadians who will vote on January 23.
An argument can certainly be made than Reid and Duffy deserved no less punishment than Klander.
That lack of consistency is worrisome to me, moreso than the unguarded thoughts of one Liberal functionary (though an important one, and one whose opinions bear examining for what they say about the Liberal Party as a whole).
What does this lack of consistency say about Paul Martin's leadership, about his style of management? I'm not so much worried about government policy. Government decisions are subject to a form of political inertia, especially in bureaucratic democracies -- no matter how fickle the leader, government policy can hardly change on a dime.
But inside the Prime Minister's Office, the Liberal Party executive, even cabinet -- if Paul Martin is seen as unpredictable and the sort of leader who plays favourites, then the ability of those organizations to function is in jeopardy. Resentment builds against those who seem to avoid the consequences suffered by others. Fear dogs every decision -- fear of making a mistake, and not having the protection enjoyed by those favoured by the prime minister to survive a mistake.
Soon, only safe non-decisions are ever made. Risk-taking, a critical element to leadership, is never seen again. The Liberal Party in government will soon lose the ability to attract smart Canadians, since the smart ones will realize there are better places to make a living. The ranks of government will be filled with those whose only skill is being able to avoid trouble.
Should Klander have been fired? Yes, I think so. But my opinion doesn't matter. What matters is the opinion of the highest reaches of the federal Liberal Party, and especially the opinion of Paul Martin. Right now, based on the evidence, it's not clear that he holds an opinion. Unless he can coherently explain why Reid and Duffy have avoided any consequences for their poor choice of words in light of the Klander episode, I can only surmise that there is no way to predict ahead of time how Paul Martin is going to respond to the actions, and errors, of his people.
That's fine for me. I don't work for Paul Martin. But if I did, I'd certainly want to understand how "the system" works, and why I should continue to work under it.
Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary
Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords
Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!
Comments
Reid and Duffy are in the top echelon of the Liberal Party. Though I hate both of them they are USUALLY effective debaters. In other words their net worth is positive. Klander is a second rate hack. While he held a rather high position in the Liberal party you could clearly tell from his writing that he didn't EARN his rise through the ranks. He can EASILY be replaced.
In fairness to the Liberal Party I would expect all political parties and business organizations would make that same assessment. Besides, Klander's remarks were intolerable. Reid's remarks did more damage to the Liberal Party but they weren't racist comments - they simply exposed the "government knows best" mentality of the Liberal Party.
Posted by: ferrethouse at December 27, 2005 07:02 PM
It could also be explained by the "accumulative effect".
One gaffe from the realm of leadership is bothersome, the second is 'bad', the third in that short of time is clearly intolerable and the particular head held responsible must now "roll". VoilĂ ! Hees gone! Poof!
Posted by: 49erDweet at December 27, 2005 07:35 PM
Reid's comments (and Duffy's echo) were generalized responses to an single interview question. Tasteless and arrogant but non-personal. One could apologise for poor choice of words in the defense of a government policy. How voters with young families react remains to be seen.
Klander's multiple blog entries was offensive on a very personal level. No amount of explaination or rationization could cover the vulgarity and Martin and his people could not escape the political damage. Klander is gone and Martin has a week to let everyone forget the story.
If this story has involved a Conservative honcho, any guesses the Liberals would have waited until next Tuesday before leaking this to the CBC? (Oh right, they have and they will.)
Posted by: john hare at December 27, 2005 08:16 PM
Angry, this is very simple
Liberal Party is $34 million in debt.
Fundraising is not meeting expectations.
Party is deeply divided (ask Sheila or Warren)
Campaign strategy is not working.
Leadership team is now the election story.
The Star is jumping ship?
Martin does not have to go negative. Jean Chretien already has. Klander is just the first liberal suicide bummer. The next three weeks should be a hoot.
Posted by: john hare at December 27, 2005 08:34 PM
Paul, Jr.:My Daddy told me to beat youes real good.>>
"During his years in Finance, Martin's temper was legendary. His tirades were called "beatings" by members of his staff. On one occasion, an aide contradicted him by quoting the 1993 Liberal campaign platform, known as the Red Book. Martin responded by saying, "Screw the Red Book ... Don't tell me what's in the Red Book. I wrote the goddamned thing. And I know that it's a lot of crap."" >>>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Martin
Posted by: maz2 at December 27, 2005 08:36 PM
Just as an aside, I thought the Blog-O-matic was brilliant. Satire, but so disturbingly true.
Meanwhile, back to the subject at hand.
Mike Klander posted his disguting attitude on a blog that is PUBLIC!!!! (no matter what his protestations about them being intended for only his close friends). I would pose that he has now found many close friends that he doesn't want. Perhaps he should be investigated by the Attorney General's office for promoting hatred. OOHH, I forgot, the Attorney General is a Liberal so we can kiss that idea GOODBYE.
As for the other two jackasses (beer and popcorn - personally I prefer peanuts) they should be placed into a perpetual reality TV show called "RAISE YOUR CHILDREN WITH NOTHING" with no hope of returning to their privileged world for at least 20 years.
Cheers
Gerry
Posted by: gerryinmontreal at December 28, 2005 02:23 AM
 
|
|
