It is interesting to listen to the punditry’s theory about “leadership” in Canadian federal politics. It would seem to the casual observer that if your goal is to build a winning political party you need only to find the “right” leader and the puzzle will be solved. Of course, it is possible to stumble upon the “wrong” leader and that will inevitably send you and your party back to the drawing board in search, once again, for a new leader.
I guess – in theory – this hit or miss process could continue indefinitely. If this was my political party I would be pretty concerned because – in theory – this could mean that my party would perpetually lose, assuming that the right leader could not be found. In such a complex world, there is something so intuitively simple about this assumption. The most refined, race-engineered Formula One automobile could never compete unless paired with a driver deserving of such engineering. Alternatively, that driver would never taste even the bitterness of defeat if they were not surrounded by the technical mastery necessary for competition. Like the motor sport analogue, driving or leading a modern political party to victory takes more than individual leadership. It requires a race-ready political machinery to harness the leadership opportunity that is available. In politics, this machinery is built first at the local level.
There are basic principles to waging successful political campaigns that have been proven both anecdotally and empirically and that are generally accepted among campaign professionals and volunteers, at the electoral district (ED) level. Experience has shown that victories are earned one voter at a time. Intensive canvassing, voter identification and get-out-the-vote efforts is the trinity that wins close races. However, the integration of public opinion and opposition research with fact-based, competitive communications and socio-geographic selection when building a strategic foundation and tactical focus is also an integral feature of winning campaigns. A research-based and competitive communications emphasis is especially important when running against incumbent politicians and veteran campaigners or within strategically identified EDs. It is only through this type of fine grained, riding-by-riding perspective that a national party can position itself for victory in today’s perpetually hypercompetitive political battle.
I would not suggest for a minute that within the landscape of Canadian politics that strong national leadership isn’t a large piece on the puzzle; however, the puzzle itself is quite sizable and the pieces that need to come into place must revolve around a much bigger team than can be expressed through or by any single individual. The primary, mission critical factor in pre- and post political campaign success, regardless of the right or wrong national leader, relates to the magic of decentralized leadership, and the relative ability of 308 ED candidates and campaign teams to communicate and realize a winning electoral strategy. Once a national party ensures the local machinery is race-ready then everything else will fall into place.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Thursday, February 25, 2010
prime minister interviews hockey greats
Amazing interview. Well done Prime Minister, well done. And thanks to Stephen Taylor for the original post (well, and the PMO).
Monday, January 18, 2010
an argument for vision
With the recent announcements by mayoral candidates, Ottawa has shifted into election mode. Many are suggesting that a federal election may also be looming this spring, and the province goes to the polls in October 2011. With a hyper-political landscape emerging, it is worthwhile to ask ourselves What should citizens consider before choosing their next municipal leaders?
One defining feature of politics is the necessity of relationships, and in Ottawa political relationships are deeply intertwined. The defining feature of good politics is the ability to use these relationships to develop, communicate and realize a shared vision that benefits society as a whole. Unfortunately, vision does not always match the time and place that we are in, and it can materialize in many forms. Political leaders, however, are increasingly using a combination of the economy and sustainable development to help express their ideas about the future and the appropriate role for government.
It has almost become cliché to hear that we are entering a new era as global citizens. Yet global economic competition is real. Market dynamics are always changing and businesses must remain competitive. Of course, this is also true for cities. Cities are a key economic unit. The choices that our municipal leaders make, or influence at other levels of government, heavily affect whether or not a city becomes a commercial leader or laggard, which in turn affects the quality of life we experience.
Today’s economies require governments to participate and even lead the global transition that is taking place. Within this context, sustainable development is not a cliché but rather a key strategic and operational principle. It relates intimately to Canada’s competitive edge. Political leaders that appreciate this principle will help position their cities for success within a tremendously competitive future. Ottawa is moving in this direction, but the question becomes one of comparison and scope. Among Vancouver, Toronto, Seattle, Berlin and other great cities worldwide there is a race developing to be the greenest city on earth. And this is not empty rhetoric. Canadian municipal leaders are communicating a vision of the future that fully realizes the significance of integrated sustainable urban development. Vancouver and Toronto do not want to be the greenest cities in the country, but rather in the world. Now that’s vision. It is time for citizens in Ottawa to reflect on this emerging political trend and the reasons for it. We should be asking about Ottawa’s vision, or if we even have one.
Relationships and vision are what politics are all about. Through relationships we build teams that are capable of monumental achievements. Politicians, societies and cities with vision bring a standard of community success that benefits the world. Municipal politicians that cannot build or leverage their relationships with other levels of government and private and not-for-profit sectors will find it challenging to contribute to the new urban agenda in Canada—or anywhere in the world for that matter. The highest standards of sustainable development must be the guiding principle of that vision. It is through this lens that Ottawans should consider their leadership options while municipal politicians are working hard to earn their support in October 2010. If the option is between leader or laggard, I choose leader, and I’m sure you would too.
Here are a couple of recent articles that relate to the municipal landscape that may also be of interest:
One defining feature of politics is the necessity of relationships, and in Ottawa political relationships are deeply intertwined. The defining feature of good politics is the ability to use these relationships to develop, communicate and realize a shared vision that benefits society as a whole. Unfortunately, vision does not always match the time and place that we are in, and it can materialize in many forms. Political leaders, however, are increasingly using a combination of the economy and sustainable development to help express their ideas about the future and the appropriate role for government.
It has almost become cliché to hear that we are entering a new era as global citizens. Yet global economic competition is real. Market dynamics are always changing and businesses must remain competitive. Of course, this is also true for cities. Cities are a key economic unit. The choices that our municipal leaders make, or influence at other levels of government, heavily affect whether or not a city becomes a commercial leader or laggard, which in turn affects the quality of life we experience.
Today’s economies require governments to participate and even lead the global transition that is taking place. Within this context, sustainable development is not a cliché but rather a key strategic and operational principle. It relates intimately to Canada’s competitive edge. Political leaders that appreciate this principle will help position their cities for success within a tremendously competitive future. Ottawa is moving in this direction, but the question becomes one of comparison and scope. Among Vancouver, Toronto, Seattle, Berlin and other great cities worldwide there is a race developing to be the greenest city on earth. And this is not empty rhetoric. Canadian municipal leaders are communicating a vision of the future that fully realizes the significance of integrated sustainable urban development. Vancouver and Toronto do not want to be the greenest cities in the country, but rather in the world. Now that’s vision. It is time for citizens in Ottawa to reflect on this emerging political trend and the reasons for it. We should be asking about Ottawa’s vision, or if we even have one.
Relationships and vision are what politics are all about. Through relationships we build teams that are capable of monumental achievements. Politicians, societies and cities with vision bring a standard of community success that benefits the world. Municipal politicians that cannot build or leverage their relationships with other levels of government and private and not-for-profit sectors will find it challenging to contribute to the new urban agenda in Canada—or anywhere in the world for that matter. The highest standards of sustainable development must be the guiding principle of that vision. It is through this lens that Ottawans should consider their leadership options while municipal politicians are working hard to earn their support in October 2010. If the option is between leader or laggard, I choose leader, and I’m sure you would too.
Here are a couple of recent articles that relate to the municipal landscape that may also be of interest:
Friday, December 04, 2009
women needed
Societies and governments around the world increasingly appreciate the critical importance of balanced, gender representation in the elite levels of their official politics. The United Nations and the Inter-Parliamentary Union use 30 percent as a minimum benchmark to ensure a critical mass of women parliamentarians. In Canada, certain provincial legislatures have been more successful than our federal in overcoming the barriers of institutionalized male dominance. Both Quebec and Manitoba have passed the 30 percent threshold. The high water mark in the House of Commons is tied between the 2008 and 2004 general elections at 21.1 percent. Those who value liberal democratic reform believe that this gender bias is a perennial issue that must be addressed.
General elections are often discussed as the cornerstone of Canadian democracy. There are, however, alternative forums for citizens to participate. One forum that is rarely mentioned, but is the actual foundation of electoral politics in Canada, is the nomination process, administered by political parties. Before a political candidate is permitted to enter an election as a party representative they must first navigate their way through the hyper-political process of a nomination. Often, this represents the first round of competition for potential electoral candidates. With the exception of appointees or candidates that run independent of party affiliation, only a few avoid this grueling political rite of passage. It is at a grassroots level that women need to be fully engaged: at the party level, during nominations, in every electoral district across our country.
Nominations are about networks, membership sales (usually of some sort) and organization. The nominee that can organize their network, sell memberships and get out the vote, while simultaneously balancing the competing relationships that influence the nomination process (ex. membership cut-off dates, selection of a nomination dates and venues, etc.), will win. This entire enterprise is conducted in partial secrecy from the public in 308 electoral districts; is overseen and managed by volunteer party loyalists; and is ostensibly guided by the prerogative of the respective party’s constitution. Unfortunately, nomination overseers and managers often have direct conflicts of interests due to personal relationships and overlapping networks. Nomination rules are either incomplete or lack the monitoring and enforcement mechanisms necessary for compliance. Moreover, nominations cost money and run officially or unofficially for significant periods of time. This necessary process presents both structural and situational barriers that are often more difficult for woman to overcome than men.
To affect a greater gender balance within legislatures, Canadian political parties need to reform their respective constitutions to enshrine the greatest fairness in their nomination practices, which would include candidate search committees that are required to recruit women. The introduction of a multiparty, constitutional review and amendment process to institute a common standard among parties should be jointly championed by our political leaders. And lastly, the Government of Canada, through the appropriate body, should establish a fund and grant criteria to support female candidates during nominations. This combined, party-government approach would provide greater opportunity for women to compete during nominations and therefore future general elections. As for the results of future competition, women will easily take care of that part on their own.
General elections are often discussed as the cornerstone of Canadian democracy. There are, however, alternative forums for citizens to participate. One forum that is rarely mentioned, but is the actual foundation of electoral politics in Canada, is the nomination process, administered by political parties. Before a political candidate is permitted to enter an election as a party representative they must first navigate their way through the hyper-political process of a nomination. Often, this represents the first round of competition for potential electoral candidates. With the exception of appointees or candidates that run independent of party affiliation, only a few avoid this grueling political rite of passage. It is at a grassroots level that women need to be fully engaged: at the party level, during nominations, in every electoral district across our country.
Nominations are about networks, membership sales (usually of some sort) and organization. The nominee that can organize their network, sell memberships and get out the vote, while simultaneously balancing the competing relationships that influence the nomination process (ex. membership cut-off dates, selection of a nomination dates and venues, etc.), will win. This entire enterprise is conducted in partial secrecy from the public in 308 electoral districts; is overseen and managed by volunteer party loyalists; and is ostensibly guided by the prerogative of the respective party’s constitution. Unfortunately, nomination overseers and managers often have direct conflicts of interests due to personal relationships and overlapping networks. Nomination rules are either incomplete or lack the monitoring and enforcement mechanisms necessary for compliance. Moreover, nominations cost money and run officially or unofficially for significant periods of time. This necessary process presents both structural and situational barriers that are often more difficult for woman to overcome than men.
To affect a greater gender balance within legislatures, Canadian political parties need to reform their respective constitutions to enshrine the greatest fairness in their nomination practices, which would include candidate search committees that are required to recruit women. The introduction of a multiparty, constitutional review and amendment process to institute a common standard among parties should be jointly championed by our political leaders. And lastly, the Government of Canada, through the appropriate body, should establish a fund and grant criteria to support female candidates during nominations. This combined, party-government approach would provide greater opportunity for women to compete during nominations and therefore future general elections. As for the results of future competition, women will easily take care of that part on their own.
Tuesday, December 01, 2009
the dirty old man of the climate world
This, my friends, is how the world thinks about Canada. From today's Guardian:
In stark contrast to its cuddly international image, Canada is the dirty old man of the climate world – missing its Kyoto emissions reduction target by a country mile (by 2007, it was 34% above its target) and showing no signs of reigning in its profligacy.
Friends and foes Roundly criticised by developing countries for being way off the pace, now there are calls to suspend it from the Commonwealth.
What they're offering A pathetic 3% cut on their 1990 emissions levels by 2020 – an offer mired in thick black tar.
What they most want No curbs on its ability to mine those lucrative tar sands in Alberta for oil (a far more carbon-intensive process than regular extraction).
Least likely to say "Look, when you set a target, you've got to stick to it, OK?"
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Ottawa’s megaproject and the sad reality of urban development
After months of city-wide opposition to the Lansdowne Partnership Plan (a.k.a. Lansdowne Live), Council has voted to accept the proposal submitted by the Ottawa Sports and Entertainment Group (OSEG), with certain revisions.
Polling data and other research has shown that citizens across Ottawa do not agree with the plan’s heavy commercial bent. When polled on their level of support, more Ottawans rejected Landsdowne Live than accepted it. MPs and MPPs spoke out in opposition. The Federation of Citizens' Associations opposed the plan.* A majority of urban councillors voted against Lansdowne Live and, equally significant, the lack of process that allowed its submission. Community Health Centres diplomatically warned Council of their core principals, highlighting the significance of, among other points, affordable housing (coincidentally absent from the current plan). A judicial review application regarding the City’s authority to override its procurement policies has been submitted and accepted by the Superior Court of Ontario. The Ottawa Regional Society of Architects and the Ontario Association of Architects formally presented their opposition to council. And distinguished academics, professionals, and politicos (incl. Ed Broadbent, Penny Collenette, Elizabeth May, and Flora MacDonald) have spoken out to express the many financial and governance shortcomings of the Lansdowne Live proposal.
The campaign that was organized against Lansdowne Live was a great experience in grassroots campaigning. The fragmented coalition that emerged waged a strong fight. In the end, however, the communications team and high-level organization that took place in support of the megaproject won the battle. With the help of Hill and Knowlton and the Mayor, OSEG representatives and Lansdowne Live earned positive media coverage day after day. Of course, in their typical, status-quo fashion, Ottawa’s two major dailies lapped the OSEG press releases and conferences up with a spoon. Alternatively, CBC and Metro News should be applauded for offering a balanced and critical picture of the controversial plan and its implications. In addition, Councillor Clive Doucet demonstrated an iron-clad will and dedication to protect the public interest and to lead the opposition against this poorly structured deal. With almost a complete absence of initial support, Coucillor Doucet (and his dedicated staff) faced constant, unfair, untruthful, and arrogant criticism from all sides. He did not flinch nor did he back down. His choice of language and his tactical and strategic actions displayed a man who, by any measure, is a true community champion.
Ottawa is on the cusp of either turning an historic, national, admittedly somewhat decrepit, urban park into a massive shopping complex; or, depending on council’s “revisions,” possibly realizing a portion of the extreme potential that this site holds. Hopefully councillors will have the foresight and courage to do what is best for Ottawa. It can’t be easy to constantly deflect the pressures of the Mayor and OSEG but the political fallout will run deep if the current look and feel of the Lansdowne plan is not changed to respect the wishes and interests of the public.
Here are a few posts and links summarizing the opposition to Lansdowne Live:
Polling data and other research has shown that citizens across Ottawa do not agree with the plan’s heavy commercial bent. When polled on their level of support, more Ottawans rejected Landsdowne Live than accepted it. MPs and MPPs spoke out in opposition. The Federation of Citizens' Associations opposed the plan.* A majority of urban councillors voted against Lansdowne Live and, equally significant, the lack of process that allowed its submission. Community Health Centres diplomatically warned Council of their core principals, highlighting the significance of, among other points, affordable housing (coincidentally absent from the current plan). A judicial review application regarding the City’s authority to override its procurement policies has been submitted and accepted by the Superior Court of Ontario. The Ottawa Regional Society of Architects and the Ontario Association of Architects formally presented their opposition to council. And distinguished academics, professionals, and politicos (incl. Ed Broadbent, Penny Collenette, Elizabeth May, and Flora MacDonald) have spoken out to express the many financial and governance shortcomings of the Lansdowne Live proposal.
The campaign that was organized against Lansdowne Live was a great experience in grassroots campaigning. The fragmented coalition that emerged waged a strong fight. In the end, however, the communications team and high-level organization that took place in support of the megaproject won the battle. With the help of Hill and Knowlton and the Mayor, OSEG representatives and Lansdowne Live earned positive media coverage day after day. Of course, in their typical, status-quo fashion, Ottawa’s two major dailies lapped the OSEG press releases and conferences up with a spoon. Alternatively, CBC and Metro News should be applauded for offering a balanced and critical picture of the controversial plan and its implications. In addition, Councillor Clive Doucet demonstrated an iron-clad will and dedication to protect the public interest and to lead the opposition against this poorly structured deal. With almost a complete absence of initial support, Coucillor Doucet (and his dedicated staff) faced constant, unfair, untruthful, and arrogant criticism from all sides. He did not flinch nor did he back down. His choice of language and his tactical and strategic actions displayed a man who, by any measure, is a true community champion.
Ottawa is on the cusp of either turning an historic, national, admittedly somewhat decrepit, urban park into a massive shopping complex; or, depending on council’s “revisions,” possibly realizing a portion of the extreme potential that this site holds. Hopefully councillors will have the foresight and courage to do what is best for Ottawa. It can’t be easy to constantly deflect the pressures of the Mayor and OSEG but the political fallout will run deep if the current look and feel of the Lansdowne plan is not changed to respect the wishes and interests of the public.
Here are a few posts and links summarizing the opposition to Lansdowne Live:
- Friends of Lansdowne Park
- Stop Lansdowne Mall
- Councillor Clive Doucet
- Lansdowne Report
- Nanos Research
- COMPAS Research
- Citizen Op Ed (Dr. Ian Lee, et al.)
- Op Ed (Martin Canning)
Thursday, October 29, 2009
repower
Repower America is a climate change campaign that was launched by Al Gore. It's social media heavy and refined in it's application. Check out "the wall." Too cool. An amazing campaign with amazing communications.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
