The Bigger Things

My wife caught me off-guard. We were driving to Ottawa with the kids at the end of August for what was to be my final caucus meeting for the federal Liberal party. As we neared what was my home away from home for almost five years, Jane said, “Doesn’t this make you feel odd?”Truthfully, it didn’t. Ottawa is a marvelous city, and serving in Parliament was a deep honour, but it was over for me and I was happily moving on. Later, as we talked over tea, Jane said it was sad that I wasn’t in Parliament, fighting for the “bigger things” and that she missed that for me. She always felt that I had a unique role to play in the federal political drama and she was sad that I was no longer to play it. Yet citizens voted otherwise, and that was good enough for me.Ruminating on it later, my mind kept drifting back to her phrase “the bigger things.” We’ve always lived this way, the two of us, and our most memorable conversations have been those that talked about the greater issues of national and international life. So, yes, the bigger things do matter and always should to citizens. But here’s an irony. I entered politics to fight for four key issues: the environment, women’s issues, anti-poverty efforts and Canada’s unique role in the world. Those are big issues all right, but during my time in federal politics each one of those issues fell into decline.Canada today is witnessing progress in many areas primarily at the provincial level. As three of those provinces move into election mode, the incumbent governments have shown clear progress in issues like environmental reform, full-time employment growth, declining health wait times, poverty reduction measures, and educational enhancements. Regardless of your political affiliation, these are welcome developments in a time of economic turbulence. The lack of imagination is largely occurring at the federal level. Then again, no one has really looked to Ottawa for anything creative for years now.The “bigger things” are challenging and overriding issues that need to be addressed, but it’s a lot harder in Ottawa than you think. The recent Samara report on exit interviews with MPs who are no longer in Parliament is especially helpful in this regard. One conclusion was that, “For many MPs, their most fulfilling times as Parliamentarians came when they worked outside the ‘the bubble’ and stayed true to what brought them to public life in the first place.” I believe that is correct, since the majority of politicians I knew in Ottawa remained frustrated with the system as it is – the “bigger things” were beyond their reach. Many desired closer relationships with their constituents, but political parties largely remained ambivalent to that wish.In a world in which political choices are supposed to be plenteous, average MPs have hardly any choice at all and they find it deeply frustrating. In the end only one choice overrides everything else – choose to side with your party or your constituents. If you choose the former, you’re likely to never rise in the party or acquire a position of influence. You might not even be permitted to stay in caucus. So many voters desire their representatives to make just such a choice, little realizing that an independent MP has no clout at all. Ottawa runs by parties and leadership machinery; you are largely nothing unless linked to both of these.I found the Samara report fascinating, largely because many of the 65 former MPs interviewed saw themselves as kind of rebels, chafing against the party system and the Ottawa workings in general. Perhaps, but as Samara concluded: “Few MPs accepted responsibility for this state of affairs … instead they blamed party politics.” All of us, including me, should wear that. So many clearly struggled mightily to stay within that system. Why? Because the bigger things are what mattered and they knew of no other way to stay in the arena than to toe the party line and live in a world of partisanship.When my wife asked if I felt odd in heading back into Ottawa for the meetings, she assumed I missed the opportunity to fight for those larger issues I believed in. I don’t. I miss some people, to be sure, but in my community I’m preparing our food bank for the lean years that are about to come, assisting emerging leaders to learn how to hold the political system accountable, and expanding Canada’s influence in Africa. Are those not “bigger things?”I’m fully happy at the level I’m at, but it’s sad that things in Ottawa remain that way and it forms a key reason more people are shunning political life – leaving the door open for the ambitious as opposed to servants of the public. More discouraging yet, those that derided numerous democratic accountability mechanisms now enjoy majority status. As long as Ottawa remains a sterile capital of ideology and hyper-partisanship, the “real” politics will occur at the provincial and local levels. That’s where the bigger things are at present. Lester Pearson’s belief that the role of government is “to excite the daring, test the strong, and give promise to the timid,” lives far out of Ottawa these days and within our own communities. Sad really. Read the Samara report and see what all of us - politicians and citizens - have allowed to come to pass.