Ignatieff's Shadow Shuffle

Are Baird and McGuinty ready to rumble? Why is Dion warming the bench? What's with all the sports analogies? An analysis of the Liberals' fall line-up.

When Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff shuffled his critic line-up for the fall session of parliament recently, the media were quick to trot out the sports analogies. Sun Media’s David Akin even published a list of critics and their respective ministers – Scott Brison vs. Jim Flaherty in Finance, for example – that evoked a UFC line card more than the serious business of Her Majesty’s government and loyal opposition. But, then again, given the tenor of parliamentary discourse today, perhaps UFC isn’t really that far off the mark.

With the economy expected to be a key issue going into the fall and into an election that could be triggered by a budget next spring, the move that seemed to draw the most media attention was Scott Brison tapping-in for John McCallum in finance. As knowledgeable on the file as McCallum is as a former chief economist for the Royal Bank of Canada, the younger, more quotable and telegenic Brison should give the Liberals more profile on the file, and a better question period punch. Those who view McCallum’s move to infrastructure as a demotion however are mistaken. With the auditor general reporting on the Conservative stimulus program this fall, McCallum will be front-and-centre on what could well be the story of the fall. And he’ll be facing a minister new to the portfolio in Chuck Strahl, who will have to answer for potential mismanagement that occurred under his predecessor, John Baird.

Speaking of Baird, the Conservatives’ designated pit-bull is now the government house leader. And after the Liberal critic shuffle he’ll be facing a familiar foe in fellow Ottawa-area MP David McGuinty. The word on the street is these two don’t like each other at all. They’ve faced off before when Baird was environment minister and McGuinty was the Liberal environment critic, and their lack of love for each other was readily apparent in their feisty question period exchanges.

How will this dynamic translate into their new roles as house leaders? While many are predicting fireworks, I’m skeptical.

First of all, it’s not as if house leaders face off in the adversarial setting of question period. Theirs is more of a behind the scenes role, working together to manage the business of the house. With the cameras off the need for partisan theatrics fades, and while each side has goals and agendas, they do work together.

Secondly, the tenor of the house leader relationship isn’t going to be set by Baird and McGuinty. It will be set by Stephen Harper and, to a lesser extent, Ignatieff. The book on Baird is that his partisan fire is just for show; behind the scenes he gets along well with everyone (well, with the possible exception of McGuinty). But he’s a team player, and on Team Harper the coach calls all the plays. If Harper wants him to be collegial, he will be. And if he wants Baird to play hardball, that’s what we’ll get. Either way, I’m sure he’ll find a willing partner in McGuinty.

Among the other notable moves in the Liberal shuffle was the elevation of former house leader Ralph Goodale to deputy leader and Marcel Proulx to party whip. Proulx in particular will have his work cut out for him with the upcoming gun registry vote, ensuring with his decision to whip the vote and go hard on the NDP, Ignatieff doesn’t find himself walking off a ledge.

Gerard Kennedy has been too low-profile and underutilized by Ignatieff for my taste, and it will be interesting to see what he does as environment critic. And speaking of new talents, I hope Rob Oliphant’s appointment as multiculturalism critic will allow us to see more of this impressive and respected rookie MP. Meanwhile, Justin Trudeau’s new role as youth and immigration critic will be a test for him, with the Tamil refugee situation making this a high-profile posting.

I like Ujjal Dosanjh as the new health critic; he’s passionate about the file, and as a former health minister, knowledgeable about it too. And with the F-35 purchase expected by many to be a real sleeper issue, making Dominic Leblanc the new defence critic could allow the Liberals to elevate and advance this issue. This will also be an important file with our combat mission due to end in Afghanistan next year, and our future role still up for debate.

Also important is the return of Denis Coderre to the critic fold, in natural resources. I’m not a Coderre fan, and his bungling of the Outremont situation leading to his scorched-earth as Quebec lieutenant didn’t help. There’s an old saying about it being better to have someone urinating from inside the tent out rather than outside in. Either way though, they’re still urinating. We can only hope he won’t get into too much trouble.

Lastly, while there are a number of notable absences from the Liberal list, chief among them is Ken Dryden. Why he isn’t on there escapes me. Another is Ignatieff’s predecessor, Stéphane Dion, who has been missing from the critic line-up since his departure as leader. I’ve been told previously this was by Dion’s choice; he wanted to take a lower profile to let the new leader succeed. With Dion committed to running in the next election though, I hope he’ll reconsider. He will be an important part of any future Liberal government, and Ignatieff’s critic front-bench would be much stronger now with Dion in a high-profile role.

Whatever the reason, his absence is a mistake. To return to the sports analogies we started with, when the big game is approaching you don’t leave your star winger on the bench. And while he may not have been the right fit for team captain, history has shown Dion is a dangerous Liberal sniper.