Emerson's Political Future Ending?
2006–10-24 (Gary Mason, The Globe and Mail)
Odds are Emerson won’t seek re-election
Mr. Emerson has to be thinking about his future. Given the precarious nature of minority governments, if he’s not running, he has an obligation to inform the Tories soon so they can find someone else to lead to the slaughter in Vancouver Kingsway.
Because that’s what it will be for whomever the party runs there—an utter annihilation.
So that’s the first reason why Mr. Emerson is unlikely to run again: He’d get absolutely hammered by voters still angry over his defection from the Liberals to the Tories mere weeks after the last election. The seat had belonged to the Liberals since 1993 and before that, the NDP. It is not a Tory riding, period.
What about running somewhere else you say? He could, but he’s on the record as saying if he does run again it would be in Vancouver Kingsway.
I suppose in the name of political expediency he could change his mind and run in a safer riding. But he’d look like an even worse opportunist than he already does. Besides, there’s no such thing as a safe Tory seat in the Vancouver area.
Mr. Emerson attempted to justify his defection by saying it would allow him to get more for his province. Well, that hasn’t exactly happened.
The softwood lumber deal he helped negotiate has been widely panned and described as a sellout for B.C. The $321-million the Tories recently announced for Asia-Pacific Gateway projects was just a reheated commitment made by the previous Liberal government.
Hardly the stuff of campaign brochures.
As Harper gets out his broom to clean house in case he feels the need to call a surprise election (Turner’s ouster, a Green Plan that isn’t, kowtowing to certain highly visible social conservatives to reinforce that part of the new Conservative base), I’ve been fully expecting this sort of an article, or an actual announcement directly from Emerson’s office.
Mason’s article left out another reason why Emerson won’t run in the next election. Faced with falling support in the polls, and perhaps a more robust Liberal Party than expected, Harper is going to shed as many liabilities as he can. Garth Turner was one. For completely different reasons, David Emerson is another albatross flapping in the wind.
Emerson will not run in Vancouver—Kingsway, despite his promise to do so. There remains some possibility that Emerson might try to run in a ‘safer’ riding—perhaps West Vancouver, helped by the former Conservative MP for the riding, arch-Conservative and B.C. power broker John Reynolds—but in order to do so, he would need the full support of the provincial and national campaign strategy teams, and Harper himself.
If Emerson, and more importantly, Harper’s campaign strategists, are smart, they won’t try. Emerson simply doesn’t bring anything of value that can’t be obtained in some other way.
| Pro | Con |
|---|---|
| Emerson is arguably the most experienced policy maker from B.C. | Emerson is critical of some of Harper's policies |
| Emerson has extensive ties to B.C. political and business elites | Harper doesn't need Emerson to attract that camp, cash will do |
| Keeping Emerson demonstrates political courage | Why keep a flapping albatross? |
Here’s another reason: the various groups and individuals which fought so vigorously to ensure Emerson and Harper paid a heavy price for giving voters the finger—are ready do to it again. We’ll dog Emerson’s every move in any future election, no matter where he runs.
Wander the streets of Vancouver—Kingsway even today and you’ll find the anger within the general public still bubbling. The same is true, to a lesser extent, right across the lower mainland. In the context of an election it won’t take much action on our part to bring the Emerson affair back to front of mind for B.C. voters.
There are no safe seats for Emerson in B.C., period, and Emerson – a seasoned politician involved in power politics in this province since the days of Bill Bennett – must know that.
Why continue to fight Emerson?
Most involved in carrying on the fight for Emerson to resign did so with the big picture in mind. We saw what Harper and Emerson did as yet another attack on democracy that could not be allowed to stand unchallenged.
Crossing the floor without seeking a mandate leaves the constituency with a representative supporting a party, ideology and policies for which they did not extend their approval. That clearly is not democracy in action.
We fought this battle to ensure that Emerson and Harper paid a price. We fought this battle to ensure that no parliamentarian would ever again callously pull an Emerson. We fought this battle to prove that citizens have power even after the polls close.
Emerson is a walking symbol of the cancer growing within our democracy. This is why so many rose up to fight this fight with determination and incredible tenacity.
And we are ready to do it again.
And the targets won’t only be Emerson.
The objective? An improved democracy.