Former deputy PM Manley: 'People had trouble understanding what the Liberal Party stood for'

"...
Meanwhile, Mr. Manley said the key to winning the next election is first to analyse why the Liberals lost the last one and then address those issues. He said that, in his view, the three key reasons that led to the Liberals' defeat were: failing to come up with competitive policy ideas, a lack of focus by the party leadership and internal party divisions.

"The party itself needs to examine the reasons why it lost and articulate a vision for the future that reflects the fact that it understands some of the things that went wrong," said Mr. Manley who did not run in the last federal election and so far has not declared his support for any Liberal leadership candidate.

"People had trouble understanding what the Liberal Party stood for. It seemed to be that the basic principles, the commitments were not clear. Everything was a priority, nothing was a focus and the divisions within the party gave people the impression that, perhaps, this was a group that needed some time in a penalty box," said Mr. Manley.

Mr. Manley said that if the Liberal Party wants to win the next election, it should prepare a platform that reflects the wishes of Canadians because unless an average Canadian is inspired by the party's platform, he or she would not vote for the Liberal Party. He pointed out the policy platform should be prepared by keeping in mind that a majority of Canadians are not socially conservative people but are progressive people.

"You have to speak to Canadian aspirations. You have to attract younger people into the party, restore the idealism," he said. ..."

Why I endorse Gerard Kennedy

Choosing a candidate to support in such a wide field is hard, as many can attest to. Choosing a candidate to support when one has been a diehard supporter of someone whom isn't running is even harder.

Over the past months, I have examined the candidates, and have concluded that Gerard Kennedy is the right person for the job. Having the right mix of abilities, and demonstrated commiment to liberal values is important for a leader.

One of the test I used in evaluating potential leaders, was whether I would feel comfortable defending them of the hustings. My own personal Oakes test as it were (for you constitutional lawyers out there). Could I defend the actions of this individual in the past, and there current positions? One difficulty I had with our past leadership was defending the assemetrical federalist direction.

Many people have ditfully explained their reasons, so I won't go into specifics here. I would just encourage everyone to evaluate all the candidates with an open mind, and ask: Do I feel comfortable in the liberal party with them as leader? Am I prepared to fight for two or more elections under this leader? Does the leader have the political skill set to rebuild the party, and win the next election?