My weekend with Liberals and Thinkers

I don't have much in the way of a comprehensive narrative for how the Canada 150 conference went, or what its implications are. My live blogging post is here, and my general impressions are below the fold.

1) Aside from the panelists, there really weren't that many Thinkers there; the hall was dominated by Liberals and media. That couldn't have been a surprise to the organisers: I certainly wouldn't have paid $700 just to listen. This may explain why so many people spent so much time on long, rambling, tangential preambles to their questions - they had paid for a chance to make a speech in front of the assembled national media.

2) From the chatter that I overheard in the hall and in the elevators, the presentations made by the various economists - Pierre Fortin, Rick Miner and David Dodge - generated a buzz of alarm and surprise. But these economists did not do much more than present what I thought to be well-known data. I would have thought that prominent members of a party that considers itself to be a government-in-waiting would be more familiar with these basic facts.

3) I was happy to see unanimous support from the environmental panel for the carbon tax. I was unhappy to see how this support was spun. The worst were the idiots that dismissed it as an 'old idea'.

4) There were far too many business types on the panels, and far too few academics. For example, Dominic Barton's talk sounded like a pitch for investment opportunities in Asia; there was nothing there that could be used as a springboard for a discussion about policy.

5) I don't understand why so much time was spent on foreign policy issues, and none was spent on issues such as poverty and inequality.

6) The corporate tax announcement was a non sequitur to the conference. It's not as though there had been a session on public finance discussing the best ways to generate government revenues. On the other hand, if there had been such a session, the experts would have told us that the plan to reduce corporate tax rates should be left alone, and that if Liberals wanted to increase revenues, they should increase the GST. So maybe that's why there was no session on tax policy.

7) I thought the internet stuff - skyped questions from sites across the country and such - was somewhat hokey at first, but it started to grow on me. The questions weren't all that great, but the technology certainly worked. And the implications for future party conferences may be considerable. Why oblige people to fork out huge sums to travel to a national conference when they can participate without leaving their home ridings?

Comments

[CAD]

A good wrap-up, thanks. I hope the Liberal leadership is listening.

[Just visiting from macleans]

I watched a good portion of this online after the fact. So, it's not clear to me what the increased benefit of attending might have been, apart from the socializing.

To look at these things from a distance, and measure their success, you first have to ask: "What was the conference attempting to do?" If it was to get some publicity, demonstrate that the Liberal party is in the process of renewal, probably a qualified success. In terms of coming up with a new party platform - not so much.

And even if you have a good idea or the right policy - you still need to implement it. Managing Change - gosh there's even a whole bunch of biz type theory and courses about this.

Having Michael Phelps run on unscripted about a carbon tax appeared to have surprised the party brass - and perhaps lead to the distancing of the concept by the leadership, and subsequent negative spinning. This was not the right person, place, or process in order to float that pinata at this time.

That's probably what prompted the Corporate Income tax announcement. The timing did seem odd.

[Andrew F]

And here I was hoping that all the talk about carbon taxes was just posturing, and that they were just going to spring a carbon tax on us when elected (easier to ask for forgiveness than permission). Now it sounds like the leadership has embraced dumb policy. Too bad, I was hoping Iggy was smarter than that.

[Just visiting from macleans]

I noticed in your twitter feed, you made a comment that I agree with: "We need Brian Mulroney's political courage. Introduced the GST, campaigned on free trade. Our leaders are deer caught in headlights."

So, it was with some interest that I read a piece by L. Ian MacDonald, a former Mulroney speechwriter (and still connected) on the Montreal Conference. His take on the mix of panelists was different.

Liberals pull off great conference

...As for content, the major surprise of the conference wasn't the policy wonks, it was the business leaders, who were the stars. Dominic Barton, a Canadian who is managing director of McKinsey's global consulting business, gave a stunning presentation on the exponential growth and prospects of the Asian economy, which he styled "the re-rise of Asia." CEOs Tom Jenkins of Open Text, Elyse Allan of GE Canada, and former West Coast Energy president Mike Phelps made compelling presentations on innovation and clean energy. Phelps noted that energy consumption will increase by 50 per cent to 2050, and the global auto fleet will double to 1 billion. How are mitigation targets of at least 50 per cent for greenhouse-gas emissions to be met? Only with a lot of innovation and new technologies.

http://www.montrealgazette.com/technology/Liberals+pull+great+conference/2745905/story.html

[Pascal Zamprelli]

On Point 7, I wrote an op-ed for the Hill Times on this idea, called The Dawn of Politics 2.0
http://www.hilltimes.com/page/view/zamprelli-04-05-2010
subscription needed, unfortunately, or you can see it on FB (http://www.facebook.com/pascal.zamprelli?v=app_2347471856)