Who should lead the federal NDP after Layton?

I think you should Erik.

You know, why are you posting this? We are in the middle of a possible election and personally I think it is demeaning. Right now, it is irrelevant.

'The Ontario...border" I meant.   Activists outside the party should be eligeable for consideration too.  

No interested in that kind of thing North Report, even if I had all the requisite resources, but thanks for asking. 

Not at all 'demeaning' Jan, just a free and fair question posted on an free and usually fair message board.  Not like it'll have any impact in any meaningful way but these kind of questions are always relevant IMO.  Any other potential candidates, after the next election defeat? 

One usually reserves that strong adjective for worse forms of personal attack than speculating on who should lead a party which democratically elects its leaders.

Thank you. If this is seen as inappropriate by most members right now, this thread can always be picked up again post-election.  I'm in no hurry. 

Ya! I'm still trying to figure out whether Count Iggy's received the nod from banksters for a stooge-off with Harper yet, or is it all just a bluff?

But personally, I think both old line parties will be shopping for new stooges if they can't shake the NDP and win a phony one soon. 

Peggy Nash is a good candidate as she is articulate and bilingual, but which seat would she run in?  I also wonder whether the NDP will have another woman leader for a while since it had 2 women leaders in a row and they both were treated pretty roughly by some voters.

Bill Siksay is a decent constituency MP and certainly did a good job jumping into the fray pretty quickly in order to keep Burnaby-Douglas for the NDP after Svend's sudden departure, but I don't think he is bilingual and I'm not sure if he the leadership type.  He would also probably be judged for being openly gay - even in a pro-gay jurisdiction like Quebec, a leader like Andre Boisclair faced discrimination.

I agree Jan!

Why does anyone think that the next election will be Jack's last?

He's only been the leader for 6 years.  Ed Broadbent had to wait 13 years before his fourth election, (1988) and that was the best result the NDP has ever had.

Given the steady growth in M.P.'s since he took over in 2003 (13-19-29-37), and with the quality of candidates running in winnable ridings, I can see the NDP potentially winning another 15+ seats, passing the Bloc for third place in the House of Commons.

Thinking about who should follow Layton as leader is like asking someone which team they'd want to win the Stanley Cup if their team doesn't make the playoffs....and the season hasn't even started yet!

The job is Layton's until he decides otherwise.

Gee, I wonder why the Liberals went with another man as leader after having had two men leaders in a row who were treated pretty roughly by some voters.??

I actually this a very sexist analysis. Its as if the performance of any woman in politics immediately reflects on ALL women, while if a male politician screws up its seen as just him screwing up and not as representing some sort of a weakness that applies to all men. It makes me think of something from the Diary of Anne Frank, where Anne writes about how any Christian can do all kinds of evil things and its always just seen as a personal failing that says nothing about Christians as a whole. But anytime anyone Jewish does something bad - suddenly it reflects on every single Jewish person in the world.

By that standard, any acknowledgment of sexist bias in society can be dismissed as sexist itself. Another Stockholmism...

WHAT!!?? You mean Jack isn't running to be PM?

So much for OMOV.

Good grief, you just can't help yourself. Even when I denounce sexism, you try to claim that attacking sexism is sexist. There's is no point having any dialogue with you. If I say black, you'll find a way to say white.

Looks like I'm on the same side Stockholm on this one, well, that's politics for you.  :)  

DY: "Why does anyone think that the next election will be Jack's last?"

Not his last, but if he keeps dogpaddling in the wrong direction other names will start receiving praise among latte tasters and champagne testers everywhere...at least outside of the GTA.   ;)

Most leaders are men and so they don't get judged by gender as harshly.  When women are leaders they stand out more and are more easily attacked.  Hillary Clinton and Sarah Palin were both given a rough time last year for different reasons.  There's actually an article written by a woman journalist about that called "The Bitch and the Ditz" you might be interested in reading.

I just think that women leaders, particularly in Canada, are given a rough time of it.  Chantal Hebert talked about this a few years ago in her book on politics.  I may even be able to find the interview clip of it if you are interested.

A few years ago Suhana Meharchand of CBC said she also finds it suspicious that women are usually elected leaders of parties that aren't expected to win and she mentioned Audrey MacLachlin, Alexa McDonough and Kim Campbell in her examples.

But it certainly would be impressive if the NDP elected another woman leader federally - they are already way ahead of the Liberals and Conservatives on that count.

Now now, lets not start getting races involved

On the thread though..I like the thought of Mulcair even if some veiw him as too old. He is very articulate in both languages and would certainly help out with the seat count in quebec having one of their own as leader.(i'm french BTW so don't get started.)

Mulcair has to win his seat first.

I wouldn't say that Mulcair is too old. He's 55 - that makes him about 6 years younger than Iggy right now.

He seems to have all the qualities I would be looking for in a leader. He is PERFECTLY bilingual, he has experience in government, he's very articulate and strategic - what more can we want in a leader? I can't think of anyone else in the NDP that offers those things - unless Gary Doer snapped his fingers and learned French overnight and decided that being leader of the NDP was a better job than being ambassador to Washington.

The only thing Mulcair would need to do would be to brush up on Canada outside Quebec. When you've spent your whole political career as a Quebec politician, there can be a big learning curve to get to know the rest of the country.

I agree that age is not much of an issue for Mulcair.  He's younger than most of the current and recent federal party leaders.

Well, I think Layton's been doing a terrific job the past couple of weeks, handling the strategic pivot and lead up to the beginning of the Parliamentary session.  The communications are excellent, and if the Conservatives have to leak something to Bob Fife on a Sunday night, you know that things are moving somewhere.  Plus, the Liberal bloggers are throwing hissy fits right now.  I love it.

As a result, the NDP is very well positioned, no matter what the outcome.  If there's an election, Iggy and the PM wear it.  And I think it's becoming evident that this could be one time the public does care about having one and who caused it.  Think David Peterson in 1990.

If there's not, it will have been because Layton was successful in extracting meaningful concessions from Harper that the Liberals, even after supporting him all those many times, just could not obtain.  Either that, or because the Bloc caved (although that's not my reading of where they're at these days).

So, with all due respect to Erik, I am not looking that far down the road yet.  I hope Layton stays a good long time, because I have a funny feeling that things have only just started to get interesting around here ...

Funny how the thread's gone this long without the requisite mention of Nathan Cullen, Charlie Angus, Paul Dewar, etc...

The thread is totally premature.

When Layton goes we could ahve a different crop-- who knows who will get elected in the next election-- I'd at least wait for that as Layton will lead the party into it-- then a look at who is elected might be helpful.

Oh it's very premature if we were actually thinking of a leadership challenge Sean, but no reason not to speculate about other potential leaders or talk up personal favourites.  Another of Layton's failings so far is not allowing other players a small share of the limelight. 

I'm not sure what you mean by that. Mulcair gets lots of limelight and I tend to see a lot of Paul Dewar as well. The thing is that when ou're the fourth largest party in parliiament there isn't all that much "limelight" to share.

Yes, I agree Stock, in the last few weeks, I have seen Dewar on the news, Libby was on last night, Mulcair, Comartin, and Peter Julian was on around the first of Sept talking about BC Fisheries.

The NDP has more fighting spirit then people here give it credit for.  Because of this, Jack Layton has at least 2 election cycles in the tank.  No doubt, with the strong caucus surronding him, compared to the dead wood in the other parties, Layton does need to show strength of caucus as much as strength of the leader.  The NDP needs a bigger caucus, and the leader shouldn't be appearing to do it on his own.  

Compare this to the Ignatieff party.  Considering the size and focus on Ignatieff, they do have a few pawns to push around, Like Rae, McCallum, etc.

Same goes for Harper and his party. While the Leader is always a point of focus, strength on the bench is needed.

I think alot of the leadership focus occurred last year, because the ballot question was one of leadership.  At the time, Layton showed the highest leadership ratings, above Harper, and Dion was in the cellar.

It won't be so easy this time around to convince the public that the NDP leader is head and shoulders above the others.

So... Who is going to replace Harper and Ignatieff and May? People on babble may as well go for the clean sweep. LOL 

Next leader should be Olivia Chow.

Oh ya, I have seen Olivia on the news recently too.

Layton sure is hogging the spotlight! :rolleyes:

Unfortunately not.  At no point did Layton ever top Harper on the leadership ratings.  Harper remained ahead on the leadership ratings throughout the campaign.  Dion did fare poorly though - Latyon did often place ahead of him on the rankings.

Actually, Layton was way ahead of Dion, and pretty well placed 2nd in leadership. I beleive near the very end of the last election campaign, he did top Harper once, and also noted that the after the election, MSM folks stated that the NDP ran a great campaign.

Of course, one didn't hear that till after the election. Gee, msm and their corporate backers don't really want the NDP to get ahead!

At no point did Layton place ahead of Harper on the Nanos leadership index - Harper maintained a clear lead on all the leaders throughout the campaign.  Layton did place ahead of Dion for most of the campaign though, apart from on a few occasions where Dion managed to finish 2nd such as after the time of the French debate.

Because he was able to beat the leader of the official opposition on the leadership index, it did make Layton come across as a stronger leader.  The challenge this time though will be to beat Ignatieff on that leadership index - that will be a harder task than it was beating Dion.

I think Mulcair would make a great leader.

I think that the NDP should make Libby their next leader.  As House Leader she has proven her self capable of leading the party in the House and she has the ability to speak about progressive policies and articulate them in a manner that garners both support and respect. I also believe that a Libby leadership bid would have Bill Siksay and his people jumping on board early and with enthusiasm.  They like many of the people who supported Jack's leadership bid thought they were getting more of a progressive than he has turned out to be.  

If the NDP does not make any major breakthroughs in this time of economic meltdown then it will be time to ditch Jack and get a true voice of the people speaking as the leader.

Libby for Leader Go Libby GO

She doesn't speak any French - instant disqualification - GONG!

Which NDP MPs can speak French?

Jack Layton is not Ed Broadbent.  He's not necessarily going to be leader for as long.

Jack will be around for one more election unless the NDP loses seats in the upcoming one.

As far as i know, the following NDP MPs can be described as being bilingual to a greater or lesser extent:

Yvan Godin

Thomas Mulcair

Paul Dewar

Jack Layton

Joe Comartin

Chris Charlton (I think)

Carol Hughes

Claude Gravelle

Charlie Angus

Nikki Ashton

Peter Julian

Denise Savoie

Alex Atamanenko (he actually speaks the best French of any of the non-francophones)

There may be more but those are the ones i know of.

"Jack Layton is not Ed Broadbent.  He's not necessarily going to be leader for as long."

That's true - first of all Broadbent was only 39 when he became NDP leader while Jack was already over 50.

I think its a bit simplistic to say that Jack continues as leader or not based on some arbitrary seat count. I tend to think that that after the next election, it will come down to the following factors:

1. Does he WANT to stay in the job?

2. How did the NDP do and what was the conventional wisdom on how good a campaign he ran under the circumstances and how the NDP did compared to expectations. (keep in mind that Broadbent's greatest campaign was in 1984 and yet in the 1984 election the NDP actually dropped from 33 seats in 1980 to 30 seats! - but he was seen as having saved the NDP from possible annhilation in the big Mulroney landslide.

3. What is the configuration of the next H of C? What if the NDP lost a bit of ground and had 30 seats instead of 37, but let's say the Liberals have 130 and the math is clearly there for a Liberal/NDP accord of some sort and the NDP becomes more influential than ever despite having somewhat fewer seats.

4. lastly, is there anyone waiting in the wings who wants the job and who people in the party genuinely think would do better than Jack?

I think that's a pretty good list, although I'm not sure if Paul Dewar and Chris Charlton are considered fluent to the same extent as the others.

I picture Jack Layton as leader for a long time.  I think he truly enjoys the job and he brings a parliamentary negotiation skill that was missing in previous leaders.  When he leaves the party will be taking a step backward.

Also keep in mind that, with the upcoming election, Layton will have fought as many electoral battles (4) as Broadbent did during his entire 13 year term as leader. Broadbent spent the first four years of his leadership waiting for the clock to run out on Trudeau's 1974-1979 majority gov't.

One wonders if the fatigue factor (4 elections in 6 years) could influence Layton's decision to stay on, but he strikes me as someone who's in it for the long haul.

Well Gilles Duceppe has certainly stayed leader for longer than people expected, so it's possible.

The thread question is plausible on a different count: who knows what kinds of Grant Notleyesque "acts of god" might strike Jack.  Think of it as emergency planning...

If any of the francophone MPs ran, they would have my knee-jerk support:

Denise Savoie

Yvon Godin

Claude Gravelle

Next, among the bilingual anglophones:

Tom Mulcair

Carole Hughes

Peter Julian

Peggy Nash

Alex Atamanenko

In my books, the leadership frontrunners should be Denise Savoie and Tom Mulcair. They are both from major media markets, fluently bilingual, from opposite ends of the country, possess strong environmental credentials, worked or collaborated with other parties, politically skilled, and demonstrate leadership abilities. Carole Hughes and Yvon Godin are possible dark horse candidates because of their charisma.

Denise Savoie is my MP and would be an incredible leader for the party, but I am quite certain she's not interested.  She is one of those rare politicians who is truly in the arena purely out of commitment to the issues and public service, not for personal advancement or ego.  She is very dedicated to environmental issues and commands respect across partisan lines both in Ottawa and in the riding.  Denise brings tremendous strengths to the caucus and we are very proud to have her as our MP from Victoria. 

I think Mulcair has many qualities - he is intelligent and a hard worker and he has helped build a solid team of candidates and organizers in Quebec.  Rocheleau's 20% in Hochelaga this week would not have been possible without Mulcair's Outremont breakthrough and sustained media profile in Quebec.  That said, in contrast to Savoie, Mulcair is extremely partisan and sometimes comes across as more about the style and messaging than substance - maybe an unfair perception but that is what I perceive in him at times.  I also don't know if he could keep a team together and bring in folks from various perspectives the way Jack has done so well over the last 6 years.  That said, he is a huge asset to the party and I am fine with him as Deputy Leader and prominent Finance Critic, just not sure if he is the right choice for leader.

Peggy Nash is (sadly) no longer an MP but I have thought of her as a strong candidate for leader for a long time.  She has the strong labour background that Savoie and Mulcair don't have but also very credible environmental credentials.  I think Peggy has the potential to bring together NGOs and social movements, labour and the NDP in a way that very few other candidates could do.  She is bilingual and I hope to see her back in the House after the next election.

The other MPs listed are all great but I don't see any of them as leadership material at this point.  In the caucus, Megan Leslie has enormous potential for growth and could be a future leader if she can develop her French skills over time.

Unite the Left, then find a new leader...or find a leader who can unite the Left?  Either way, she/he would need to be an outsider, I think.  Does that broaden or narrow the search?

Why are people even talking about throwing out a leader with a 10 year strategic plan who's made so much progress implementing it?  This is nuts.

While it does seem premature to openly discuss the next leader, the prospect of a Harper majority does concentrate the mind, presently.  Is that not so?

Or, it could be argued that the never ending possibility of a Harper majority, which has been there since 2006 and will never go away no matter how much its chances wax and wane, is a bogeyman that paralyzes thinking.

Our party is most successful when we stick with a particular leader for a long period.

One need only look as far as Nova Scotia and Manitoba to see that is the case.  Dexter and Doer languished in opposition for a decade each before emerging as the credible alternative.

All of the fawning and swooning over M. Mulcair or others named in this thread is backgorund noise that damages our party.

Let's stick with Jack until he decides to move on.  The NDP has had good fortunes under his leadership and will continue.

Agree with you OO and moriarty, the concern over leadership, is just deflectionary white noise.

The instant world has done such a disservice to society and humanity.

Besides which, I've seen no signals from Layton indicating he has any desire to step down anytime soon. Has anyone?

... he has a 10 year plan as OO pointed out above....

I am not talking about throwing Layton out at all - I'm totally loyal to him and he is on track with his 10-year plan as you state. The thread topic as I understood us was to reflect on WHEN Jack eventually leaves of his own volition, who the likely candidates would be.  Savoie, Mulcair and Nash and all the others are 100% focused on helping Layton make an NDP breakthrough in the next campaign.  A few posts on babble to speculate on future events is not an "insurrection" or any kind of challenge to Jack, who got 90% support at the Halifax Convention, IIRC. 

Strong organizations and strong leaders think of the long term, including succession, even while focusing our efforts on the immediate priorities.  The federal Liberals are a classic example of what happens when parties don't think ahead and tear themselves apart instead - let's not imitate them!

though I see what you are stating WCL, that is  4-5 years away who knows who will even be in the HoC by that time.

personally  think it distracts from messaging  where we need to be going,

there are several things on the horizon

I don't have a problem with doing some idle speculation about who the next generation of NDP leadership contenders might be. I don't see that as meaning that Layton is going anywhere.

I have a hunch that some day in the future, after Jack retires, people in the NDP are going to miss him a lot and will have a much greater appreciation of how good his political instincts and strategic sense have (for the most part) been. He has taken a lot of risks as leader and had to deal with a lot of nay-sayers - but in most cases he was vindicated:

In 2005, many people were aghast at Layton for making a deal with Martin over the budget that gave the Liberals a six month lease on life. I think that in retropect, its pretty clear that that was the a good move.

Later in 2005 people questioned withdrawing support from the Liberals after they refused to talk to the NDP anymore. I think that history will record that given that the government was doomed no matter what the NDP did at the time - it was a good strategic move for the NDP and it produced a further advance in votes and seats.

In 2007, a lot of people in the NDP thought it was a big mistake and a waste of resources to take a major stab at winning Outremont and a lot of people thought that the NDP should stick to the old tried and true strategy of ignoring Quebec. They were wrong and Layton is now the most popular federal leader in Quebec.

Later in 2008, Layton refused to have any part of cozy deals with the Green party that some people in the "gauche pluriel" were pushing. Contrary to expectations when the election was called, the NDP gained ground despite the Green party mirage and Dion making a blatant attempt to get NDP votes with this carbon tax etc...

Pushing for the coalition last year didn't work out as hoped, but the alternative was letting the Tories pass their elimination of party funding etc...and various other nefarious things. It was the closest the NDP has been been to have a real share of power.

More recently, the nay-sayers were so sure that it would be suicidal for the NDP to support the Tories so much as a single solitary time and that if they didn't vote with the Liberals and force and early election, all credibility would be lost. I think the events of the last month and recent polls and byelection results show pretty clearly that Layton's move succeeded and that it was Ignatieff who ended up looking like a fool.

Its interesting that Layton's worst miscue was saying in December 2008 that he would vote against the budget no matter what was in it...and Ignatieff's biggest mistake so far has been to say he would force and election and vote no to everything Harer proposed this fall. There must be a moral to that story.

So, in the end, while Layton is only human and is not infallible, its pretty clear to me that nine times out of ten, his political instincts are right and the party has benefitted. We cannot take for granted that the next NDP leader will have as good a record as that.

The Liberals couuldn't think ahead because it was inherently divisive.

For the NDP, talking about who might make good leadership prospects 3 or more years from now, is talking about a time when a lot will change, what people think is needed will change, and the population of who looks good changes too. So if taling about who next isn't nuts, it strikes me as being too speculative even for a bunch of junkies.

When there is at least a broad consensus that a Leader in question is or should be thinking of packing it in, thats good for crystalizing all sorts of thinks. What as well as who.

We aren't there now.

Not that there isn't plenty of reason to talk about the what anyway.

OK, all good points.  But I notice that as soon as one friend raises it in that context, all kinds of provocateurs emerge to egg on the discussion.  I just didn't want to encourage that train of conversation, mindful that these threads get read by others always looking for hints of such discord.

One thing I don't like about Peggy Nash is that she is now as insider as insiders get and her taking over from Layton would put the leadership yet again in Toronto, but the best gains once Layton has topped out would seem more likely with a different strategy and areas where Layton hasn't achieved a breakthrough like in francophone Québec and out West. Layton has been a great leader for the NDP in Ontario and built important beachheads in other provinces (Alberta, NFLD, Québec). Areas where the NDP is currently underperforming or, maybe viewed another way, could have potential (IMO), regardless of the cause, are Nova Scotia (generally), rural NFLD (with the Liberals treading water in the polls some of the 2008 support has to be seriously soft), rural francophone New Brunswick (Madawaska-Restigouche, Moncton-Riverview-Dieppe) & St John, francophone metro Québec, rural Manitoba, rural (but virtually all of) Saskatchewan, rural BC and maybe suburban Vancouver and Southwestern (post-industrial and largely rural) Ontario. A repeating theme here are the words rural (in its many, many incarnations) and francophone. Compared to the Liberals the NDP are also a rural powerhouse - the Liberals are very urban heavy in their support. Maybe the best way to counterbalance this effect is to organise the relevant NDP MPs into a rural caucus that could counsel the leader and also provide some insight on how to fight the Conservatives specifically, but also the Liberals in rural areas. It also wouldn't be the end of the world if the party had a broader francophone strategy to give profile and voice to those in the caucus who sphere of general francophone interest and influence extends beyond the geographic confines of La Belle Province. In other words, for any francophone work that doesn't absolutely have to be Québec-specific, the party should broaden its francophone accomodating strategy and bring people like Gravelle, Godin, Hughes, and maybe as an alternate Atamanenko on board.

Hear that Jack? Create some MPs committees to address and advise the leader's office on francophone and rural matters. These could serve both as a forum to bring issues to the leader's attention and also to counter the campaigning of the Conservatives and the Bloc.

ETA: This 10-year plan stuff sounds so...Soviet. Also, what's wrong with criticizing the Grand Leader when they deserve it?

Actually, if there is one place in Canada where the NDP desparately needs to make a breakthrough its in...TORONTO! Jack may be from Toronto, but right now its probably the place in Canada where we are the most below our potential. The fact of the matter is that under "Toronto Jack" (sic.) the NDP is doing better than ever in rural and remote ridings (ie: we virtually own northern Ontario and have been gaining ground in Atlantic Canada and the BC interior as well) and on top of that Layton is the most popular federal leader in Quebec - its hard to top that.

If I look across Canada and ask myself, where is the NDP really underperforming compared to its potential - two places stand out to me - Toronto and Montreal. Let's set MOntreal aside for now because the existence of the BQ and its stranglehold on a big chunk of the francophone vote - PLUS the way a lot of non-francophones have a tribal loyalty to the Liberals makes that a work in progress.

But look at Toronto, the GTA has a ton of seats - more than the whole province of BC - and right now the NDP has only two of them - all because of personal popularity and high profile of the leader and his wife and those ridings are getting to be so gentrified that we cannot count on them always being NDP. Beyond that, there are a whole slew of very low income GTA ridings in Scarborough, in places like Davenport, York-South Weston, York West, Etobicoke North, plus Oshawa, Brampton and parts of Mississauga - and the4 NDP is barely competitive in any of them. If those same seats were in Vancouver, they would be NDP strongholds similar to New Westminster-Coquitlam or parts of Surrey. THAT is where we need a breakthrough more than anything else. On paper these shoudl be fertile ground.

Ultimately, where a leader calls home seems to have little to do with his or her regional appeal. The Liberals have never done worse in Quebec than under the leadership of Montrealer Stephane Dion and while "Toronto Jack" has been a huge plus to the NDP in Qubec, Atlantic Canada, Vancouver and esp. northern Ontario - he never seems to have brought in many votes in Toronto as a "favourite son". Kim Campbell didn't exactly "win the west" for the Tories in 1993 despite being from Vancouver. Tommy Douglas got ZERO NDP seats in his own province in 1962, 1963 and 1965!

Let's worry less about what postal code the next leader comes from and more about how skilled they are as a leader. Sometimes people become "insiders" for the simple reason that they are very talented and I would put Peggy Nash in that category - and being talented is a good thing in a new leader!

I think Torontonians are focussed on unseating that socialist mayor, "his blondness", and purging city council. When that job is done, Ontario's economy will soar with the rest of the capitalist eagles, some of which have since been grounded for having flown too close to the sun. That and preventing free markets in hockey.

Layton is the most popular leader since Broadbent. In hindsight, Broadbent left too soon. Layton should stay for at least another decade. By that time the political landscape will be so different from today that it's pointless predicting who'll replace Jack.

Hate to put a small kink into an otherwise excellent insight, there, Stockholm, but Paul Martin in 2006 (20.8%, 13 seats + 14 2nds, with 59 rebates) actually did worse in Quebec than Dion in 2008 (23.8%, 14 seats + 30 2nds, with 74 rebates).  OK, both did horribly, but Dion actually did marginally better.

My point still stands since Martin represented a Montreal riding and tried to pass himself off as a Quebecer.

Certainly.  So, what's the best approach into those lower-income GTA seats, do you think?

stop listening to the ECE crowd?

I'm acronym-challenged ... please, what's ECE?

Educated cultural elite

Erectile challenged electoralists.

The big red machine found out they could flip-flop on only so many major election campaign promises before it hurt them at the polls. The phoniest majority for them was in 1997. And the brand new reform-aTories still haven't fully recovered from the Mulroney years.

The NDP's challenge is different than that of the two old line parties used to automatic rule. The NDP has to wade into things and reap what our two old line parties have sewn while in government. 80% of Canadians hold no political party membership. And we've never been more indebted than now. Sir Tony Benn said that indebted people eventually become hopeless people. And hopeless people don't vote.

The NDP's task is a straightforward one. And that's to be a beacon of hope for the many disenfranchised voters and those who've given up on hoping for change for the better.

Hee-hee-hee.  Best belly laugh of the night!  Good one, Unionist!  thanks.

Not to get too ageist but if we are looking for candidates for leader for five plus years from now both Peggy Nash and Thomas Mulcair would be over 60 by then.  We need to look at people currently in their forties and start getting a bunch of them the experience and exposure required.

So, who's on that list?  It might be a little thin because that is the generation the NDP lost over the Waffle.

I'm trying to understand your math on that one, jrootham, because I'm in my late late forties, and the Waffle predated my YND years by over a decade.  A whole bunch of us got very involved around the time of the 1984 election.  We romanticized the Waffle a bit, but also wanted to do well electorally.  I think folks got disillusioned after that because of the Ontario government's response to the recession and the federal party's preoccupation with constitutional politics.  The social movements were moving in a different direction and the party got isolated, and after 1993 and 1995 there wasn't much of an organization to get involved with.

But back to the question at hand, you're right that a bunch of younger folks need to be cultivated now and given a lot of opportunity for growth.  I must say I was thoroughly impressed with Ryan Meili's campaign, and I think there may be other very talented folks in his generation.  Someone mentioned Megan Leslie, and she is really a breath of fresh air, with a lot to say of substance.

Several of the usually-cited next-leader suspects--Angus, Cullen, Dewar--are under 50 (and Angus has added musical "hip cred")

And then there's closer-to-home cases like Hamilton, Windsor, London-Fanshawe in the "shoulda-coulda" role-model category.  It's almost like Layton's been willing to basically "throw" his own home turf on behalf of strengthening his party nationally (and overcoming whatever personal inner-city champagne-socialist stigma to boot)

Maybe in order to discern wha'appen, one can consider whatever dynamic led to *eight* GTA contenders for the federal Liberal leadership post-Martin (nine if you include John Godfrey)

My quick analysis, for what it's worth, is that the weakness of the provincial section is what's been hurting efforts there.  The solution is both to build federal capacity there, but likely also to encourage the rebuilding of the provincial section.

I do think the latest commentary on Ignatieff's weakness should have been enough to bomb the bridges on the Liberals' last remaining argument that "we're the only ones who can form an alternative government", so I guess the question becomes whether it continues to be worth it for those ridings to return MPs who consistently vote against their best interests, in return for the distant hope of defeating the Conservative government.

Tom...

... then (after Liberals reject him a second time) Gerard Kennedy!

... make that 'a third time' (forgot how Ontario Grits had to reach down to the bottom of the roster to prevent the leadership going to a lefty).

This makes absolutely no sense,

- those in their 40's nowadays were not part of the Waffle

- there was not a generation lost because of the Waffle, in fact  you are giving way too much importance to the Waffle..as really we all know that Toronto, is not the be all and end all of the NDP. Torontonians may think they are the centre of the universe, the rest of Canada knows they are not.

- who cares if they are "over 60"

I do. Its just not a great idea.

Leaders are for connecting with people. One, that takes time to establish- which over 60s have less of. Two, its all that anyone in politics needs.. more reason for younger people to say they don't see anyone up there remotely like them.

Yes, youth can and be, and is made a fetish of. But that doesn't mean you should ignore the effect that the age of a Leader has. Sure, a charismatic or obviously dynamic and infectuous 70 year old is going to do more to get younger people to take another look. But charasmatic figures are not generally part of the pool we are looking at- none of the good prospects we have now is.

How is it untrue? Willing to be persuaded that such is not the case....

As, I believe it is the case across all the political spectrums, as a matter of fact....

and it is not an attack, it is a statement of awareness of elite bias, just like when  someone states that Vancouver, Nanaimo and Victoria are the Golden Triangle, as they believe they are the centre of the BC universe, and is also expressed by  comments "there is no hope past Hope".

That line of reasoning has been used quite effectively to advantage others at the expense of Toronto - e.g. under-representation in provincial legislature, e.g. underfunding from the federal government.  I'm tired of hearing Toronto bashing and don't expect it on babble. 

Its actually quite the opposite. I find that the vast majority of Torontonians have a bit of an inferiority complex about their city and feel sheepish and insecure because they keep being told over and over again that everyone else hates them because they live in Toronto. I've actually never met anyone in my life who actually thinks Toronto and Torontonians are the "centre of the universe". I have met people who think Montreal is the centre of the universe and I've even met people who think Vancouver is the centre of the universe, but Toronto - never.

The only people who do think Toronto is the centre of the universe are people who live outside Toronto who have some weird chip on their shoulder - and by their constant need to denigrate and insult Toronto they only show that they are the ones with a Toronto obsession.

Then they cheer for the Maple Leafs

I have heard that Cullen might be up for it. I'd like to see Dewar. I wonder if Jim Stanford has the stomach for it. He would be awesome!

The way to prove any "stomach" for it would be to run for a seat in the next election and hopefully win. Being leader of a national party is not an entry level political job.

Yes, as Iggy's short time at the Liberal helm has shown.

Oh I guess we are choosing to forget then that Michelle had it as her tag lin for years,  indicating how prevalent it is/was.

Rewriting history peeps? Over sensitive? Guess one realizes how the west feels then when the eastern peeps here go on their little wild west dissertations, in particular against Albertans....

We need only understand the Cons believe it is so, because of Bay Street, and the TSE.

Liberals believed it so given Iggy slotted in all those TO boys to assist him.....and they have all those lovely secure seats there

And apparently some also do in the NDP......given the remark to which I responded.

But fair enough in the interest of solidarity, I will bow before the efforts to silence and refrain from referencing TO as the centre of the universe.

Though I will bookmark this thread for times when people disparage other places in Canada....

Remind, has the concept of "tongue in cheek" ever occured to you?

Oh my goodness, no it hadn't, ooopssssss

But it does make more sense read that way....

I'm not trying to silence you - just to point out that your caricature of Torontonians is a bit offensive and very stereotypical. Perhaps I'll have to start a new thread called "Torontonians as an identifiable group under attack". Regional biases work against people uniting for common cause because it puts where you're from above what you believe and what your material interests are. Do poor people working 2 or 3 part-time jobs think that they're the "be all and end all" just because they live in Toronto? I doubt it and I doubt that you would take your argument to its logical conclusion. 

By the by, you're right! I had no idea it was that limbo low? In 2006 The Institute for Policy Research said:

That's pathetic!

It is pathetic. One of the ironies of the failed MMP campaign in Ontario was the line that the "backroom" boys will choose the list candidates (instead of the 1% who belong to parties). It was a profound statement about the distrust and impotence of lib and con party members in democratizing their own parties. 

Tell me how stupid this sounds.

The Next leader of the Federal New Democrats will come from a Provincial Leader of another political party, either Liberal, Conservative or Sask Party.  

Does this sound absurd?

Now switch the names New Democrats and Liberal in the sentence above with the opposite and read it again.

The Next Leader of the Federal Liberals will come from a Provincial Leader of another political party, either New Democrat, Conservative or Sask Party.

Doesn't sound so absurd in this context.

I just figure the Liberals are the ones currently in search of a leader and the NDP appears to be back on solid footing.

I think Jack is doing a fantastic job and continues to be an important and inspiring asset to our party. But when the time presents itself, I would like to see Chris Charlton as the next leader of the NDP! Her seat is safe. She's a fantastic speaker. She can fire up a crowd and bring in new supporters. I think she would be a wonderful leader! 

Chris Charlton also speaks fluent German!

Which is, literally, an urban myth. Unless you begrudge the North the bonus of three extra MPPs which all three parties promised them in the last two elections, in recognition of their geographic challenges. If those three MPPs were spread with mathematical fairness across Ontario, Toronto would get 0.6 of a seat more -- which would be excellent to get rid of the monstrosity called Pickering - Scarborough East, but hardly a major disadvantage.

So what are you really trying to say? That we will now be able  to win Kitchener and environs as well as even possibly Steinbach, Manitoba?

What more can he say, but "Jawohl".

Indeed. But it's reversible. The CCF in Saskatchewan often had 10% of its voters signed up as party members. That same level has, on a few occasions, been reached by the NDP's strongest riding associations in Ontario -- Timmins comes to mind. Any decent riding association should start by signing up 3% of its voters, and then grow from there. That's the difference between a mass party and an elite party.

MPs I get the sense are interested: Cullen, Julian, Mulcair, Ashton (albeit not next time, but maybe down the road).

I also get the sense Nash is interested. I think she should set herself on the path to the leadership by re-offering in Parkdale-High Park. With the Liberals so low in the polls, the Conservatives picking up, and the Greens largely dead; some of the proper elements are in place for the necessary vote swings Nash would need to win. Biggest obstacles are obviously that this time Kennedy gets to play incumbent, and Kennedy is popular but perhaps played out and Nash has to win back High Park. One thing that Nash can probably count on though, is that the Liberal caucus won't lend much of a hand to defending Kennedy's seat. He's not well liked.

Not consciously. But everyday it's a problem.

Just today I was reading an excellent submission to the Attorney-General on revamping the family court system, with specific recommendations that could be carried out only if a local court served a number of people many times that served by a typical local court. It's tunnel vision. A related example is when organizations preparing such submissions appoint a committee consisting of six people from Toronto and a token "out of town" person, as I have seen many times. Finally, it's not just bigshots; at the working level this kind of mentality is also common among underpaid, overworked staff -- such as a bank clerk in Toronto asking that someone urgently pick up a document from the downtown head office, without thinking -- and then saying resentfully "oh, are you out-of-town?" That's what I call endemic.

Damn right! She could be the Angela Merkel of the NDP!

I don't know her personally, but she's been more than competent on the panels I've seen her on.  Apart from the right policy chops, I would look for a leader with a very strong strategic sense and a unique ability to connect with people.  Chris may have that, but I'm not close enough to know.  I do think Megan Leslie has the spark of something pretty remarkable, but it will need a much longer incubation ... although by giving her that co-chair with Tom Mulcair of the middle-class and the recessio task force, it seems they are trying to develop her potential.

What about Paul Dewar? Cuts a good figure, bilingual, good pedigree etc...

He's a strong possibility, too.  Growing into the job more and more, and really well-regarded here in Ottawa.

Something about Megan Leslie that may not be well known.

As an activist she was very tapped in- across a number of issues. And she was outside the NDP until she sought the nomination.

So she has a lot of different chops, and has equitted herself much better and more quickly within the NDP and electoral politics generally than I would have expected. Can't speak to her strategic sense- though that would seem to go along with what else she has shown she can do. Can say that knows organisational needs.

Megan was NOT an outsider to the NDP before winning the nomination.  While she was a law student at Dalhousie, she was a volunteer canvasser in Alexa's campaign.  She served on the riding executive in Halifax Chebucto, Howard Epstein's constituency, and was staff on Howard's 2006 campaign team.  Many New Democrats are more well known for their community work than their partisan work,

You're right, that would be more accurate.

I'd still say despite that participation, that she was not 'on the inside', and that she wasn't just better known for her community work, that her investment in the NDP was much smaller. The point being that shes clearly very fast and very good at finding her way.

I don't think Paul Dewar is bilingual, but someone can correct me on that if I am wrong.

I do think he has gradually become a stronger MP over the past couple years though.  Originally I thought he was kind of a lightweight successor to be inheriting Ed Broadbent's riding, but he has some potential.  He was on Power Play today speaking out against the Conservatives' attempt to repress the torture controversy.

Closing for length. Please open another if you like.