Under mounting fire for defecting to the Conservatives, Trade Minister David Emerson is suggesting that Paul Martin forced him to run in the election and then left him in the lurch when the Liberals lost.Emerson's new excuse leads to a few questions.
"Paul Martin dragged me in to work for him on a series of economic issues. I was loyal to him to the very end. He left," Emerson said of the former Liberal prime minister, who has said he will not lead his party into the next election.
For example, is Emerson right to place the responsibility on Martin for stepping down when he did? Or was PMPM right to make his announcement immediately, leaving the blame for Emerson's party switch with the man who suddenly lost his enmity for Stephen Harper when the right job came along?
How many other current "Libs" (whether in Parliament or not) are really only PMPM loyalists who would gladly switch to the Cons if offered a suitable reward for doing so? Would they too be justified since their loyalty is purely to the power promised by PMPM, rather than to any principle?
Will the outflow of Martin loyalists match the inflow of Chretien loyalists who lent their support to the Cons this time out to seek retribution against Martin?
And most importantly...why would any voter who's actually concerned with progressive values want to support a party whose actions give rise to these kinds of questions?
No comments:
Post a Comment