On targeting

Following up on yesterday's post, let's turn to the possible downside to the NDP's moves on financial policy - which is that while an effort to reach out to the financial sector might be a plus on its face, it may also raise questions about what priorities the NDP is pursuing:

Party strategists say they can sometimes face a credibility gap when they engage with Conservatives, Liberals, and business groups over policies affecting the financial sector. They argue it is a difficult handicap to overcome as they have no record of serving in a federal Cabinet to point to, meaning they have to do far more homework to have the same impact as their counterparts.

This political deficit came to the fore in early December when the Conservative government teetered on the brink of collapse and the NDP appeared to be hours from entering government in Ottawa for the first time.

Party strategists say that amid historic turbulence in financial markets, they made an effort to avoid fuelling uncertainty, making it clear the party was not seeking the finance portfolio and assuring the banking sector there would be a period of continuity in implementation of already-promised emergency measures to stabilize the financial system.

But during the interlude that has followed the suspension of parliament, the NDP caucus has been calling on external advisors and allocating more resources to strengthening its research on financial policy.

"There as been an effort to expand the capacity of the caucus," says an aide, who points to meetings with outside economists such as Glen Hodgson, chief economist for the Conference Board of Canada.

The aide says the push reflects both a sense of "responsibility" that comes with the prospect of decision-making power and the wider need for policymakers to become more familiar with "microscopic" aspects of the banking system as they seek a way out of the financial crisis.

A party strategist said while efforts to sharpen the party's financial policy-making had gained pace, it was best viewed as part of a longer-range goal of "changing perceptions of the party over a protracted period of time."

Let's start with the apparent concern about a "credibility gap". Whatever one's criteria for credibility, there's every reason to think that any gap is more a matter of perception (fueled by the other parties who have a vested interest in misrepresenting the NDP's level of knowledge) rather than any justification for treating the NDP with additional skepticism.

By way of comparison, remember that the Cons' near-complete lack of federal cabinet experience doesn't seem to have particularly affected them on taking office in 2006. And to the extent one takes into account governing experience at other levels, the NDP's crop of candidates - featuring former cabinet ministers from multiple provinces as well as a leader with experience on the council of Canada's largest city - similarly stacks up extremely well against the Cons' on taking office.

Once the "no experience" canard is dismissed, the more plausible conclusion is that the issue is one of political positioning: simply put, business will tend to be more receptive to a message which is perceived to maximize its potential profit without any associated social responsibilities. But that feeds into the bigger question, which is whether the NDP is best off committing its spare resources into impressing sectors which are likely to generally put their weight behind other parties regardless of what the NDP does, or into reaching out to Canadians who are more likely to become NDP members or supporters.

In that respect, I'd hope the NDP would have learned a lesson from the 2008 campaign. To my recollection, virtually every media commentary as to which party ran the best campaign pointed in the NDP's direction - suggesting that the corporate press which normally looks for reason to question the NDP was overcome by the party's effort just as some bank representatives seem to be now.

But that positive press didn't seem to do much to influence voters, even when the number of people theoretically open to voting NDP was similar to that for the other major parties. And the end result was a wave of pundits questioning whether the NDP can reach any more voters when it failed to do so while having earned the respect of the media.

Now, the above isn't to say that the NDP shouldn't be looking to improve its perceived and actual knowledge base on the economy (or any other issue), nor that it should want anything other than to be perceived as the best-managed party in Canadian politics. And it may be that the NDP has enough additional resources to pair some deeper internal financial research with a broader appeal to voters at large which has thus far flown under the radar - which wouldn't be a bad combination in making use of the product of an increased seat count.

But in the final analysis, any amount of demonstrated knowledge will be of limited use if it isn't accompanied by further increases in the party's vote and seat count. And I'd think the NDP would be best served countering any perceived gaps by proving its ability to bring in more first-choice voter support to increase the likelihood of its ideas being put into practice, rather than using too many of its resources to try to appeal to the last groups which are likely to ultimately support the party.