Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Did Ignatieff have to be convinced to return to Canada?

The view I had of Michael Ignatieff’s path to the leader of the Liberal party was that, after more than three decades in the United Kingdom and the United States, Ignatieff decided to return to live in Canada before he decided to run as a Liberal candidate and contest the leadership of the party.

But, apparently, if a report in the Globe and Mail can be believed, he was recruited to run as a Liberal candidate before his return to Canada, and to do so he obviously had to live here. That is to say, his return to Canada was even more opportunistic than I had thought.

According to the newspaper:

“Mr. [Ian] Davey and Mr. [deputy chief of staff Dan] Brock were instrumental in bringing Mr. Ignatieff back from his Harvard career as an academic and pundit to run for Parliament, and then the leadership.

“Mr. Brock, working in the early 1990s as a producer for CBC radio host Peter Gzowski, met Mr. Ignatieff when he was an on-air guest and was impressed. He and Mr. Davey, son of legendary Liberal strategist Keith Davey, had worked briefly on the short-lived 2003 leadership campaign of former deputy prime minister John Manley, and joined forces to persuade him to return to Canada.”

How do these people look themselves in the mirror every morning?

With a population of about 33 million people, wouldn’t you think the Grits could have found (would have wanted to find) a committed Canadian to lead their party. Instead, two of their operatives fly off to a foreign land to convince a man who had been living broad for virtually all his adult life to return to Canada so he could join their elected caucus and run for leader of the party.

Well, the Grits got what they wished for: an out of touch academic who is unable to connect with the Canadian public, people with whom he barely can identify other than through his birth certificate.

Ignatieff wrote a book talking up his Canadian roots, but few Canadians have been fooled. For years he saw himself British then American and only became Canadian once again when the lure of becoming prime minister was dangled before him.

Return to Main page »
© 2009 Russell G. Campbell
All rights reserved.


  1. By moving back to Canada, he knew he would be forced to watch Canadian News as well.

  2. Ignatieff is taming the Colonies.

  3. Before the 2006 election, where he ran in Etoicoke after incumbent Liberal Jean Augustine conveniently 'retired', Ignatieff was quoted in the November 30, 2005 edition of the Harvard Crimson as saying:

    “If I am not elected, I imagine that I will ask Harvard to let me back”

    “I love teaching here, and I hope I’ll be back in some shape or form.”

    Well, at least he was clear on his goals back then.

  4. out of touch academic who is unable to connect with the Canadian public ... sounds like the perfect Liberal leader to me ... just goes to show you what they think of their own party members if they have to fly to England to find someone to challenge the Conservatives.


  5. he was recruited to run as a Liberal candidate before his return to Canada

    Uh huh. They talked him into returning to Canada by dangling the big carrot in front of him.

  6. Perhaps Iggy was the only liberal they could find not linked to all the liberal scandals.

  7. Seems to confirm the contention that the LPC is run by a small group of operatives and that they don't think the membership is capable of voting "the right way".
    The segue to that is this group of operatives feels its entitled to power and the rest should do as they are told.
    Sounds like that Family Compact that "decided" to run Upper Canada after they got kicked out of the US after the war of Independance.

  8. You actually don't know how he "saw" himself, but as a person who has lived outside the country, and who has parents who lived outside the country - I know very well that ex-Pats identify themselves more as Canadians than domestic Canadians do.

    This article is pure speculation. You don't really know anything at all.

  9. Susan are all ex-pats drinking from the same kool-aid?

    I think Ross makes a sound case and hits the nail on the head. I suspect they needed a person who they could push forward quickly without any connection to Adscam.

    Adscam and corruption trials are making the news again in QC.

    Why is MI refusing to push the Sponsorship (Adscam) narrative comparing it to 2 logos, novelty cheques, partisan advertising by some within the LPC?

    I don't think it is honest to assume or treat all ex-pats the same.

    Some may feel more patriotic and others may have the same level as Canadians, and some even less.

    The Red Liberal Paintroller and blanket statements need not apply.