Angry in the Great White North

For an entrepreneur, Daniel Veniez is a singularly gutless individual.  He has written an extensive piece on what is ailing the Liberal Party.  Now you'd expect this former CEO, this former policy advisor, this former Crown corporation chairman, to call it like it is.

What we get instead is the tentative whining of a gutless Liberal.

At first blush, Veniez seems to be hitting hard:

The party is an even looser confederation than Confederation itself. In fact, it is a dysfunctional mess. Reporting lines go to multiple places, management accountability is entirely absent, and funds are allocated inefficiently. Everyone wants to be a big fish in a shrinking pond. Provincial offices have their own staff that report to provincial executives, who in turn want to protect their own turf. In any rational management structure provincial offices should report directly to the executive director at national headquarters.

An inordinate number of "commissions" serve no useful purpose other than being permanent fiefdoms and a power base for a few skilled operators. These lead to exclusion and a clique mentality. There's a "commission" for everything. If you're young, you've got one. If you're old, you've got one. A woman? No problem, there's one for you. Of course, where would Liberals be without an "Aboriginal" commission? Not to worry, we've got one of those, too.

At the national level there are "vice presidents" that represent you if you are English, French, and virtually everything else. I'm beginning to feel excluded because there isn't a vice-president for white middle-aged men with black hair. You get the picture. There are provincial and territorial associations with their own presidents, executives, staffs, constitutions, and way too many sacred cows.

Pretty harsh stuff, right?

Wrong.

There is a glaring omission of the sort that reveals the fundamental cowardice that bedevils all Liberals.

Where are the names?

Daniel Veniez lists every Liberal Party commission, but not by name.  Here are the names: the National Women's Liberal Commission, the Young Liberals of Canada, the Aboriginal Peoples' Commission, and the Senior Liberals Commission.

Was that so hard?

Veniez writes:

And what would I do with all those commissions and fancy officer titles that mean nothing and do even less? They would be toast -- every last one of them.

Why can't he bring himself to write this instead?

The National Women's Liberal Commission would be toast.  The Young Liberals of Canada means nothing and does less.  The Aboriginal Peoples' Commission?  Gone.  The Senior Liberals Commission?  Gone.

Now that would take some guts.

Here's another example:

An inordinate number of "commissions" serve no useful purpose other than being permanent fiefdoms and a power base for a few skilled operators.But changing it will be hard, because what people ultimately care about is themselves and their own space, not the health and vitality of the party as a whole.

Few skilled operators?  That's a bit vague.  How about being specific?

How about saying that Tanya Kappo, the president of the Aboriginal Peoples' Commission, cares only about herself, as do the other nearly dozen Presidents and Vice-Presidents of that Commission? 

Why can't Veniez take the step of accusing Nicole Foster Woollatt, Sharon Davis, Alexandra Knight, and the rest of the Women's Commission cabal of being a drain on the vitality of the Liberal Party? 

Is Veniez worried that Samuel Lavioe, president of the Youth Liberals of Canada, will burst into tears if Veniez actually names Lavioe as being complicit in creating a "fat, lazy, complacent, and obsolete" Liberal Party? 

Why won't Veniez lay part of the blame for the current state of the Liberal Party at the feet of Senior Liberals Commission presidents Austin Bowman (English) and Marie Reine-Paradis (French)?  Logic dictates they've been around longer and therefore have earned a larger share of the blame.

But Veniez makes vague references to petty fiefdoms and egocentric party apparatchiks, but won't take the lead of pointing fingers and naming names, and demanding that these individuals defend themselves against his accusations.

As long as the Liberal Party is being diagnosed by the likes of Daniel Veniez, these party "big fish" won't have anything to worry about.