Is Dion Responsible For His Image

Or is it being manipulated behind the scenes?

Is Iggy behind goofy Liberal strategy?
By ANGELO PERSICHILLI
February 18, 2007

"Cui prodest?" (Who gains?) was the question the ancient Latins were asking themselves when trying to figure out the explanation of certain actions.

I asked myself that question last Wednesday during the vote on the Liberal motion asking the government to implement the requirements of the Kyoto Protocol.

The obvious answer is "the environment," meaning all of us, as long as it is possible to implement Kyoto within the required time frame.

At this point the debate becomes foggy and, at the same time, the hypocrisy of the Liberals more evident. But, is it just hypocrisy or is there something more? Let's see.

The Liberals signed the Kyoto Protocol in 1998, committing themselves to reduce polluting emissions to the level of 1990 by 2012. Then they sat on the protocol for eight years, as now deputy leader Michael Ignatieff unequivocally stated during the leadership campaign. In fact, greenshouse gas emissions increased by 27% under their watch.

Now in February 2007, they are asking the Stephen Harper government to do in five years what they were not even able to start in eight.

If we take them seriously there is only one conclusion: They want to go to the polls.

At this point I go back to the first question: Cui prodest? Who will gain from it?

PM'S ALREADY CAMPAINING

A few weeks ago I wrote only Stephen Harper's Conservative Party wants an early election. He is the one already campaigning, he is the only one with the money, he has a better organization and the best chance to win. The Liberals are not ready.

So, why do the Liberals -- who have a leader that is not ready, have no organization, no money and are still working on internal unity problems -- seem so eager to go to the polls?

Why does Stephane Dion want to roll the dice, face an electoral disaster and jeopardize his leadership? If the Conservatives are going to win a majority, Dion will most likely be forced out and the Liberals will face another convention.

The question is: Who is going to gain from another early convention?

Well, Bob Rae will still be dealing with his future within the Liberal Party, Gerard Kennedy will be somewhere in the country preparing an organization that will not be ready for a spring election and Dion will be back to being an academic.

So, let me ask the question again: Who is going to gain from an early spring election?

Yes, Stephen Harper, but I have to add another name: Michael Ignatieff.

It is, obviously, a coincidence, but looking at the commercial prepared by the Conservatives to attack Dion in the English media, we see the attack against the Liberal leader coming from Ignatieff. Harper attacks Dion on the issue he thought would provide the slam dunk during the election, the environment. But, as Ignatieff admits: "We didn't do it, Stephane."

Now Pablo Rodriquez, another Ignatieff supporter, is leading the pack within the Liberal Party to force Harper to respect the vote in the House on Kyoto.

THE OLD GANG

Also this week, Ignatieff has lead the charge against the government with another embarrassing issue for the Liberals: Patronage appointments. But, again, the only one to be embarrassed will be the leader, Dion, who was part of the old gang, not Iggy.

There are many other issues the Liberals can use to attack the Conservative government. They should have a long list. So, why are they using issues to embarrass the Conservative government but also the former Liberal governments? Cui prodest?