NDP at risk of drift

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 27/07/2011 (5224 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

OTTAWA — Jack Layton’s announcement that he is again stepping aside for another fight with cancer raises some delicate questions about the NDP without Layton’s leadership, even temporarily. Naturally one wishes Layton a full recovery, and he successfully returned from an earlier absence to lead the NDP to its greatest heights ever.

But Monday’s announcement reminds us that the NDP and Layton have become nearly inseparable. More than any leader since Ed Broadbent, Layton’s personality has been the party’s single greatest asset, and without his leadership, the party risks floating adrift or even falling apart.

The NDP has long wrestled between trying to be a party of clear ideological principles versus more of a brokerage, catch-all party like the Liberals and Conservatives. Under Layton’s leadership, it has leaned particularly to the latter. In addition to the usual NDP mix of “social democrats” who cannot agree what that term means, the party manages to simultaneously represent both the most urban and the most remote parts of Canada, with a mix of intellectuals, activists, progressive suburbanites and blue-collar workers.

The 2011 election added a new dimension with the influx of 59 Quebec MPs in a party that previously had one (and for a long time, none).

What brings these people all together? The answer is Jack Layton. While Layton may not have single-handedly brought the party back to life, he has led it on a steady upward march. Layton has won more seats in every election since 2004, culminating in the Orange Crush earlier this year.

Some of those gains are explained by the implosion of the Liberals. But polls consistently show Layton, with his deft political skills and earnest personality, is the NDP’s best asset.

But it’s harder and harder to nail down exactly what the NDP stands for, apart from Jack. Like other social-democrat leaders both provincially and internationally, Layton has moved the party away from proposals for nationalizing industries, high taxes on the rich or other historically socialist ideas. But Layton has been particularly light on clarifying what he does stand for and what an NDP government would do about fiscal deficits or maintaining a sustainable welfare state.

Rather, Layton has made himself the champion of ordinary people, preferring to focus on everyday consumer issues like credit-card interest rates and becoming a hearty supporter of the military, although somewhat unclear on what missions it should be used for. Again and again, Layton has made his leadership, rather than substantive positions, the real issue for the NDP.

This was also the case with Ed Broadbent, party leader from 1975-89. Broadbent also sought to champion “ordinary Canadians,” and his friendly personality made him the most trusted leader in polls and for a brief time the most likely next prime minister. Prior to 2011, Broadbent’s win of 43 seats in the 1988 election was the high-water mark of NDP federal success.

However, after Broadbent’s departure the party fell into a deep funk, falling to nine seats in the 1993 election and entering one of its periodic soul-searching moments as pragmatists and ideologues struggled to determine its future.

It may be difficult to remember now, but Jack Layton won the party leadership in 2003 as an outsider lacking any seat except on Toronto city council. He vaulted over parliamentary veterans like Bill Blaikie in part because he was a fresh face, more charismatic than anyone in the Ottawa caucus and not overly scarred by the 1990s struggles. His longtime municipal service had worn down much of his original ideological edge, making him more pragmatic and attuned to everyday concerns.

His smiling earnestness may remind some of a used-car salesman, but it clearly resonated with voters and has been the key to NDP success.

Even apart from Monday’s announcement, the future of the NDP has been unclear, with its sudden move to official Opposition prime time and such a lopsided caucus, heavy in Quebec.

But the key was clearly Layton and his ability to pull together the disparate ranks and ensure cohesion and discipline. If he is unable to return, the fissures may appear quickly, and it’s difficult to see who could repair them.

.

Jonathan Malloy is associate professor of political science at Carleton University in Ottawa.

— Postmedia News