The news item of the day for Canadian political junkies is that former Conservative, more recently Independent, MP Garth Turner has joined the Liberals. I’ve read only a little bit of the online commentary and it mostly seems to be what I would expect.
The current incarnation of Garth Turner, MP was a lightning rod for criticism and political chatter of all sorts from the beginning. (I wrote “current incarnation” because I know almost nothing of his previous turn in Parliament before the Liberal landslide of 1993.) Anyway, from my perspective this is often a good thing for the individual member (especially a backbencher with a wee bit of wit and some stage ability), but it rarely does much for the party. A party on the Opposition side may be the exception but that’s certainly not always the case.
However, Mr. Turner has also recently represented himself as politician with certain strong principles and his actions today muddy that water quite a bit. He presented fairly sensible arguments for why joining the Liberal caucus does not violate his stated principle against MPs joining other parties without going back to the electorate. And, given the opportunity this move provided to challenge the government over its own late arrivals, today’s announcement was an effective political tactic. But, Mr. Turner’s actions, no matter what he says, do not represent a triumph of principle (at least not the one about MPs and party membership).
It is my contention that in politics principles are guidelines at best, rhetorical frosting at worst, and usually something in between. I don’t have much interest in arguing whether this is bad or good, but rather to establish a base of reference. This is a reality that I find is often obscured by proselytizing for one partisan side or another, and indeed for our civic religion itself, i.e. the idea of democratic government as the saviour from all ills. With that said, before today I would have placed Mr. Turner well over on the guidelines side of the political principles continuum and nothing I’ve read today has changed that.
My interest here is not to besmirch Mr. Turner (even if it were my opinion of him is quite irrelevant) but to elevate the bar of principled action and to make a point about politics in general. Being truly principled is very nearly impossible (I personally fail to be so every day), but I would appreciate if more politicians acknowledged that directly. Often an unequivocal statement is made, possibly with good intentions or maybe just to make a point in a verbal joust, and then later some circumstance requires that this be mediated or abandoned. There are times when I would accept an argument that such turns of events are evidence of hypocrisy, but despite my cynicism about politics I’m unwilling to say that’s always the case.
I’m not sure how I would have approached this situation if I were to be in Mr. Turner’s place. It seems to me that he made his decision by giving more weight to other considerations, in particular his desire for more influence in Parliament, which is entirely valid. And, I can’t say with certainty that any of the alternatives would have improved my view of today’s events. (I’m most certain Mr. Turner will be criticized no matter what he chose to do or say; as I said earlier he is a political lightning rod.) Would it have been better if he had simply announced his intention to seek the Liberal nomination in Halton? How many people would appreciate the nuance of an Independent MP joining with a Parliamentary caucus without joining the party itself?
In the final analysis, I think Mr. Turner’s statement on this comes very close to acknowledging the distance between his earlier statements and today’s announcement. It may just be that in the dirty world of modern politics everything gets dragged down into the muck. And so, I remain a little bit disappointed and just as cynical and pessimistic about this whole politics thing.
Just for the record, I dislike most of the politicians I’ve actually met in person, I’m firmly in the non-partisan camp, and I generally don’t vote. However, following the sometimes amusing and occasionally horrify spectacle that is politics in Canada (and it’s fellow democracies) is a guilty pleasure. You should need no further evidence than that to convict me of hypocrisy.
This entry was written by the proprietor, posted on 6 February 2007 at 9:45 pm.
Garth Turner Joins the Liberals
The news item of the day for Canadian political junkies is that former Conservative, more recently Independent, MP Garth Turner has joined the Liberals. I’ve read only a little bit of the online commentary and it mostly seems to be what I would expect.
The current incarnation of Garth Turner, MP was a lightning rod for criticism and political chatter of all sorts from the beginning. (I wrote “current incarnation” because I know almost nothing of his previous turn in Parliament before the Liberal landslide of 1993.) Anyway, from my perspective this is often a good thing for the individual member (especially a backbencher with a wee bit of wit and some stage ability), but it rarely does much for the party. A party on the Opposition side may be the exception but that’s certainly not always the case.
However, Mr. Turner has also recently represented himself as politician with certain strong principles and his actions today muddy that water quite a bit. He presented fairly sensible arguments for why joining the Liberal caucus does not violate his stated principle against MPs joining other parties without going back to the electorate. And, given the opportunity this move provided to challenge the government over its own late arrivals, today’s announcement was an effective political tactic. But, Mr. Turner’s actions, no matter what he says, do not represent a triumph of principle (at least not the one about MPs and party membership).
It is my contention that in politics principles are guidelines at best, rhetorical frosting at worst, and usually something in between. I don’t have much interest in arguing whether this is bad or good, but rather to establish a base of reference. This is a reality that I find is often obscured by proselytizing for one partisan side or another, and indeed for our civic religion itself, i.e. the idea of democratic government as the saviour from all ills. With that said, before today I would have placed Mr. Turner well over on the guidelines side of the political principles continuum and nothing I’ve read today has changed that.
My interest here is not to besmirch Mr. Turner (even if it were my opinion of him is quite irrelevant) but to elevate the bar of principled action and to make a point about politics in general. Being truly principled is very nearly impossible (I personally fail to be so every day), but I would appreciate if more politicians acknowledged that directly. Often an unequivocal statement is made, possibly with good intentions or maybe just to make a point in a verbal joust, and then later some circumstance requires that this be mediated or abandoned. There are times when I would accept an argument that such turns of events are evidence of hypocrisy, but despite my cynicism about politics I’m unwilling to say that’s always the case.
I’m not sure how I would have approached this situation if I were to be in Mr. Turner’s place. It seems to me that he made his decision by giving more weight to other considerations, in particular his desire for more influence in Parliament, which is entirely valid. And, I can’t say with certainty that any of the alternatives would have improved my view of today’s events. (I’m most certain Mr. Turner will be criticized no matter what he chose to do or say; as I said earlier he is a political lightning rod.) Would it have been better if he had simply announced his intention to seek the Liberal nomination in Halton? How many people would appreciate the nuance of an Independent MP joining with a Parliamentary caucus without joining the party itself?
In the final analysis, I think Mr. Turner’s statement on this comes very close to acknowledging the distance between his earlier statements and today’s announcement. It may just be that in the dirty world of modern politics everything gets dragged down into the muck. And so, I remain a little bit disappointed and just as cynical and pessimistic about this whole politics thing.
Just for the record, I dislike most of the politicians I’ve actually met in person, I’m firmly in the non-partisan camp, and I generally don’t vote. However, following the sometimes amusing and occasionally horrify spectacle that is politics in Canada (and it’s fellow democracies) is a guilty pleasure. You should need no further evidence than that to convict me of hypocrisy.
This entry was written by the proprietor, posted on 6 February 2007 at 9:45 pm.
Filed under Commentary Unbound and tagged canada, politics.
Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.