As a Globe columnist (first appointed as such last week by the "World Socialist Web Site" - and as we all know, what they write is nothing but the truth, hence others have taken to calling me same), I am really angry this morning.
You see, if I am going to take on the title of columnist (rather than hack political blogger), surely I should also be entitled to all of the benefits that come along with such a prestigious position.
Yet for some reason when the memo went around to the Ottawa political media posse on Friday that they all had to write negative stories about Michael Ignatieff's office in the next 48 hours, I was totally shut out.
It started with the Globe on Saturday when this paper got the jump start on our competition with the story " Ignatieff's Bay St. brain trust." It was a hard-hitting piece that followed up nicely on the previous week's story that Ignatieff's OLO have the audacity to wear " blue jeans, pointy shoes and tight button-up shirts with loud colours" in the middle of the summer (unlike us reporters who wear nothing but three-piece suits, rounded shoes and muted shirts through the entire summer. Without exception).
So what did this week's story say? That Michael Ignatieff has surrounded himself with - get this - people from Toronto. It gets worse - they're lawyers (other than the ones who aren't lawyers). Some under the age of 40 (other than roughly half the people listed who are over the age of 40).
Now put aside the fact that Leslie Church and Mark Sakamoto are both from Western Canada (something that they don't exactly keep as a secret). Also ignore the fact - that is mentioned in the story - that "24 per cent of the people who work in the office are from Quebec and only 19 per cent are from Toronto" which kind of negates the entire premise of the story.
Put those inconvenient little facts aside since they get in the way of this week's story of the week. Ignatieff's office are all a bunch of Toronto born and bred Bay Street lawyers and this means Ignatieff is doomed to certain political failure.
The Star, having been fully scooped by the Globe for the exclusive story (suckers!), ups the ante today with a story saying that Ignatieff has surrounded himself with people who have been - get this - loyal to him since 2006. Obviously the paper was put to bed early yesterday or this would have been front page stuff.
Any objective observer would concede that the Star story is devastating. Surrounding yourself with people who have been loyal to you is a cardinal political sin. All great political leaders only surround themselves with people who are out to screw them. Obviously Ignatieff hasn't been in politics long enough to know this yet but hopefully with the help of the very well intentioned media, he will learn and bring in some savvy, senior, unnamed Liberals to take over (though I'm not sure how someone without a name can sign an employment contract - if only Ignatieff had some smart lawyers to help him through those issues).
And last but certainly not least, the Hill Times tells us today that Ignatieff actually doesn't make decisions on who his chief of staff is. Nope, it's the jean-wearing, 24-year-old Bay Street lawyering OLO that decided on Ian Davey as opposed to Alex Himelfarb. Lots of senior, with unnamed Liberals to back it all up too.
Pretty heavy stuff.
So let me give you my take:
1. If I were Michael Ignatieff, I would have the exact same team around me that he currently has. Why? First off they are all really smart. Second, they are all really loyal to both him and the Liberal Party. No games, no palace intrigue. That is exactly as it should be. Third, they have been working together as a team for a long time now. Again, that's a positive. They have been to war together. They have stuck together in good times and bad. There will be more of both in the weeks to come and they know how to deal with it. Fourth, the "old political staffers who have been around the block and have years and years of experience" are, with some notable exceptions, vastly overrated. I know that's not a popular thing for me to say but it is sadly true (again, there are some notable exceptions but most of those people aren't looking to get back into the political staffer business). In short, if I was Ignatieff I would have the same team in place because they are both talented and dedicated to making me the next prime minister. I'm pretty sure that's what an opposition leader is looking for in an office.
2. There used to be some of us who talked about Liberal Party renewal (oh those heady days). Well guess what, party renewal means bringing in new people to do jobs that old people used to do. Those old people may be threatened. They may get angry. Some of them know reporters and will say nasty things (on background, obviously - only, only, only on background) about the new people. This is how it is and how it has always been. So ya, as someone who believes the Liberal Party needs to renew itself, I would rather have the people who are currently in the OLO but may lack a bit of experience than the alternative. And not only because they are "new" but because they also happen to believe in the same changes for the Liberal Party that I believe in (and we have started to see some of these positive changes over the last eight months).
3. Despite my point above, I don't want to fall into a false dichotomy that the entire team right now are a bunch of inexperienced newbies. Look at the campaign team; Smith, Guy, Ashworth, Kinsella, Zed, etc, etc. These aren't exactly green horns. The narrow lens of these stories is claustrophobic.
4. I think it is fair to say that in the history of politics, not just in Canada but in the entire world since the Athenians first gave this whole democracy thing a try, opposition staffers and political offices are always - without fail - a bunch of idiots who are screwing everything up, will never win and need to be replaced by people who have "won before." This is always the case until the day the opposition office (or stated properly, the leader they are working for) wins an election. This time is no different. The OLO and the staffers there within will ultimately be judged on whether they win, not on how they dress or who they are dating. Until then, they will be criticized by those on the outside. It's not fair but it is how it is.
5. Let me repeat something I have written about before; politicians put their faces on posters, staffers don't. This makes me old school. I don't think staffers should be subject to glowing profiles of how brilliant they are, their bosses should be. I also don't think political staffers should be subject to attack - again, their bosses are the target. This isn't a partisan comment - there are lots of cases of Liberals and Conservatives alike breaking this rule. I just wish we could call a truce and lay off attacking staffers of all stripes - they should be off limits for attack with very few exceptions. I know that it won't happen but it should.
UPDATE From the Macleans comments section, a frequent Macleans contributor named "OntarioTown" cites my revelation that a memo went around to all Ottawa media on Friday to coordinate an attack on Ignatieff and his office as proof that the Canadian media just can't be trusted and lets the world know, in the most serious terms possible, that the memo makes him sick to his stomach.
I can now reveal that the memo likely emanated from the Stonecutters - it only takes so much time to make Steve Guttenberg a star and they needed to move to bigger fish. And no, the media can't be trusted - especially serious columnists like me.
But to OntarioTown and anyone else who read my post and believed that such a memo existed and that I wasn't clearly making a joke about Ottawa media group-think, let me revert to my ethnic heritage and quote Congressman Barney Frank by asking "on what planet do you spend most of your time"?