That NDP-Liberal merger story: smoke from a smoke-making machine

Iggy and Jack: No merger, please, we’re Canadian!

All of a sudden there’s a lot of smoke billowing in the media about the possibility of a merger of the federal Liberals and New Democrats.

This raises the inevitable question: whatever can it mean?

One thing this story surely does not mean is that anyone in either party is seriously suggesting there should be a merger. Indeed, it’s possible that a clear majority of Canadian New Democrats would vote for any party other than the Liberals, especially the Liberals under an unreconstituted right-winger like Michael Ignatieff.

Surely similar numbers of Liberal party supporters would vote for the Conservatives before they’d support Jack Layton’s NDP, even if Jack’s daddy was a Liberal (not to mention a Tory) for a spell.

In fact, a telephone tracking poll in March by EKOS Research Associates showed only about a third of decided NDP and Liberal supporters nationwide who listed a second choice would vote for the other party if they couldn’t vote for their own. More than a quarter of the Liberal supporters polled listed Prime Minister Harper’s Conservatives as their second choice! Given time to think about it, those results might even get worse from the perspective of a merged party.

So, to mix metaphors, that dog don’t hunt.

However, as the late American president John F. Kennedy wisely observed, “where there’s smoke, you’ll usually find somebody running a smoke-making machine.” So who is pumping up the smoke machine this week?

Well, sometime Liberal strategist Warren Kinsella, obviously, seeing as he’s the media’s go-to guy on this story, swearing affidavits and giving interviews right and left to say, yes, they really mean it, there really are “high level” talks about a merger – notwithstanding the fact that the leaders of both parties are in full denial mode, racing screaming for the exits.

But why? And why does the story have legs?

All this is pure speculation, of course, but surely it is not impossible that the idea is being kept alive by people in the Liberal Party who have grown disenchanted with Michael Ignatieff’s flagging faux Tory leadership?

After all, the idea of a merger would only make sense if the imagined new party had a more appealing leader than the gruesome Mr. Ignatieff. Consider that Angus Reid poll last month that suggested a Lib-Dipper coalition could only win with Mr. Layton in the lead. This can’t have thrilled too many Liberals.

By keeping speculation about a merger alive, Mr. Ignatieff’s intramural foes draw everyone’s attention to the increasingly obvious fact that what the Liberals really need is a leader with more political sex appeal.

Meantime, of course, the mainstream media’s incessant chatter about this non-story diverts attention from the bizarre fake lake brouhaha that dominated the previous news cycle to the embarrassment of the government – much to the relief of the media’s owners and their man at 24 Sussex Drive, no doubt.

Somewhere down the line – after a federal election – a Liberal NDP coalition might fly. But a merger? Never!

This post also appears on

2 Comments on "That NDP-Liberal merger story: smoke from a smoke-making machine"

  1. Scott says:

    I think there may still be some truth to this merger talk.
    Anytime two leaders simultaneously and roundly dismiss a rumour as “ridiculous” and “fiction” history has left me inclined to assume that there is more going on.

  2. workeradvocate says:

    Chantal Hebert wrote a compelling piece of political insight on Friday in the Star. I am going to paraphrase her comments and characterize them from the Alberta provincial perspective.

    Progressive voters 'share a strong belief that a Stelmach/Morton majority victory in the next election would have profound and—from their perspective—tragic consequences for the province, progressive voters are convinced that little short of a pre-election recasting of the progressive side of the provincial landscape can ensure that Conservative/Alliance rule does not become the new normal in Alberta.'

    'The future success of the Liberal brand and the maintenance of the central place of its values in the province’s political life rest with a more co-operative relationship with the NDP.'

    Disgruntled Liberal organizers are fearful of the blanching of the brand and cooperating with a fraction of the progressive political spectrum. The election of candidates is the mandate of the party. However the mandate must be qualified that it must elect candidates not just field candidates.

    There is a huge difference between fielding and electing. Cooperation in targeted constituencies is the key to success and 'non-compete' will ensure the election of more progressive candidates including, democrats, greens, and the alberta party.

    What about the 'alberta liberal democratic' coalition in Alberta?


You must be logged in to post a comment.