Rural Liberal MPs and activists face a stark question in the aftermath of an historic May 2 defeat.
What is the future of the party’s rural policy development in the wake of yet another resounding rural rejection?
Liberals were shut out of most rural ridings outside of Atlantic Canada.
“Oddly enough, I think there is an opportunity here for us where we are, with four years to rebuild with a Conser vative majority,” said Prince Edward Island Liberal Wayne Easter, elected for his seventh term and agriculture critic in the past two Parliaments.
Read Also
Agriculture ministers commit to enhancing competitiveness
Canadian ag ministers said they want to ensure farmers, ranchers and processors are competitive through ongoing regulatory reform and business risk management programs that work.
“We’ve somehow lost our connection with rural Canada. We’re in a position now to put people on the road to see what we have to do to renew that connection.”
Heading intothe 2011 federal election, rural Liberals thought they had crafted the most rural-friendly policy in at least a generation with a leader who transcended his urban roots to understand the nuance and detail of rural and agricultural policy.
Toronto-based Michael Ignatieff was the first Liberal leader in modern times to make rural issues a core of his political pitch, arguing that the rural-urban divide is a national unity issue that must be breached by policies recognizing farmer and resource sector economic instability, the gaps in rural health care and the digital divide.
For his efforts, Ignatieff’s Liberals lost even more rural seats, became more than ever before an urban party and hit its lowest point in seats and popular vote.
Easter said it will be a challenge to convince the next Liberal leader to devote the time and energy needed to craft, understand and promote a rural policy.
“It will be a tough sell because Ignatieff worked hard on the file and we got very little return,” said Easter. “A new leader coming in will look at that and say, ‘why should I make the effort when there are other parts of the country more welcoming?’ ”
It is an old story for the increasingly urban-based party.
“I’ve heard that argument for a long time,” said Easter, a former National Farmers Union president first elected to the House of Commons in 1993.
“Why should we develop rural policy when they don’t support us? I’ve fought that for 12 of my 17 years here. Why should we support them when they’re not here to support us?”
Deputy party leader Ralph Goodale from Regina has what he considers a simple answer: because Ignatieff was correct when he argued that the Liberal party cannot confine itself to being the voice of urban Canada.
“It’s a long-term process and the party is going to have to stay committed to this work,” he said.
“We (Liberals with some rural constituents) will be insisting that the party in all its rebuilding work has to include rural Canada, agricultural and resource issues. I think there is a good deal of willingness in the party to accept that point.”
It is unclear what role Goodale will play in that rebuilding after the Liberals fell below 20 percent of popular support and 34 seats in the party’s worst election showing in history.
He was considered a strong candidate to be interim leader after Ignatieff lost his own Toronto seat and resigned as leader, but the party executive ruled that out last week by announcing the interim leader must be bilingual.
Party members vote online this week to decide if the party should set aside a requirement that it select a new permanent leader late this year to allow it to begin rebuilding without the divisiveness and cost of a leadership race.
