On possible outcomes

Murray Mandryk sets out most of the possible outcomes to the Hale report in his latest column. But he does seem to miss one crucial distinction in assessing the road forward.

As Mandryk describes the options, the first three are effectively the ones which reflect the decisions which the NDP itself will have to make. And on that count, I agree entirely with his conclusion that there's effectively no way for the party to think that anything other than releasing the report will be an acceptable outcome.

But that leaves the question of how Dwain Lingenfelter's campaign will respond once the report is released. And while Mandryk discusses a couple of those options as his fourth and fifth possibilities, he seems to miss the two most obvious possible results.

After all, it's entirely possible for Lingenfelter to respond to any problems by tracing them back to their source and removing those involved from their positions with his campaign. Which would seem far more likely as a way for Lingenfelter to be seen acting on the report than to abandon the race entirely.

Likewise, Lingenfelter could declare that while he'll cooperate with any further investigations, his campaign won't be punishing anybody personally for their actions. I'd classify that as a negative outcome for both the party and for Link's leadership campaign (since it would leave the issue live for the rest of the leadership race and beyond) - but it would be a somewhat defiant response without going to the extremes of attacking the NDP as a whole as Mandryk suggests.

Now, it's possible that Lingenfelter could instead present the more extreme possible response in one direction or the other. But I have a hard time seeing what he'd stand to gain by lobbing grenades in the general direction of his party, which would both crystallize any concerns about him in advance of the leadership vote and make it more difficult for him to lead the party afterward if he did eke out a win. And barring some finding that Lingenfelter was personally involved in the controversy contrary to his later comments, I wouldn't see it as a desirable result for him to drop out either. Which means that while there's naturally not much positive to be taken from the controversy, the results don't need to be as damaging as Mandryk's column might suggest.