The rebuild ahead of the NDP

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 21/04/2016 (3486 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

It’s not in the falling, it’s in the getting up. The only shame in defeat is in giving up. It’s not a loss, it’s a lesson.

New Democrats today can be forgiven for rolling their eyes, for pulling the blankets over their heads to spend just another minute in forgetting and indulging in a bit of escapism, given the hits they took at the polls Tuesday. But axioms — true though they may be — can’t make the bruises disappear. And there’s a whole lot of hurting going on in the NDP today.

Manitobans are a charitable bunch and will likely give them a little room to reconcile to their new lives. But at some point, it will be time to get up, brush off the “woulda, coulda, shouldas” and move on.

The caucus, though greatly reduced in size, is not eviscerated, and in fact, it is in much better position today than it was in 1988, when the NDP was cut down from a majority government to 12 MLAs and consigned to third-party status in opposition. Along with nine returning MLAs, there are some new faces, people with credibility and valuable experience from their pre-political lives. As the official Opposition, the NDP brings the experience of 16 years in government to its new job on the other side of the house.

That’s crucial to the democratic process now as the Pallister Conservatives take government with a majority not seen in this province for 100 years. The Tories’ 40 seats give them a convincing mandate to govern, but a government’s legitimacy is reinforced by the scrutiny of an effective, vigorous opposition. That falls to the NDP, with the help of the Liberals, who saw their seat count rise to three.

Both the NDP and the Liberals have their leadership issues. Greg Selinger stepped down as leader on election night, and Rana Bokhari chose not to discuss her future at that hour. But leadership concerns should not interfere with holding the government to account and pressing issues the Tories have not highlighted in their platform.

There’s a big rebuild facing the NDP, most immediately. That should start at the ground up. The caucus needs to solidify as a team, backed by a party that coalesces around similar purpose. The risk in rushing to elect Mr. Selinger’s successor is that, in absence of real cohesion, it can lead the party to fracture as its executive, fundraisers and caucus split into camps. If that happens, it will distract from the job at hand and further weaken a shaky foundation.

There are some good illustrations of this in Canada’s political narrative. One of the best is that of the federal Liberals in the mid-2000s. Long referred to as Canada’s natural governing party, the Liberal party self-destructed in a misplaced enthusiasm to elevate Paul Martin to power, even as Jean Chrétien sat as prime minister. Mr. Martin proved ineffectual in government, and his leadership was fatal to the party, which then spent a decade reconstructing itself while the NDP, under Jack Layton, rose to official Opposition.

Provincially, the NDP is not in ruin, at least not yet, and there’s reason for optimism despite the gloomy outlook. Unlike their federal cousins under Tom Mulcair, the party holds centre-left of the political spectrum, with a weak third party — the Liberals. As a result, it can offer a contrast in its priorities, perspective and in policy, to the Tories. This alternative agenda could be a useful foil to the Pallister government.

Manitobans will be hearing a number of names tossed about as potential successors to Mr. Selinger. The trick for the party is in keeping them all part of one strong bench and preventing the aspirations of individuals from undercutting a reconstruction that needs to start sooner than later. It should choose its interim leader carefully. For the sake of Manitobans, he or she should focus the caucus on the job of keeping the Pallister government on its toes.