If the legislative precinct makes her sick, as she has said it does, why is Christy Clark so keen, apparently, to stay there as premier? Is there such a thing as political bulimia?
I say 鈥渁pparently,鈥� because it鈥檚 not certain as I write this that she鈥檒l stick around for the May 14 election. It would be nice if she did, though: It would give sa国际传媒 voters their first chance to say what they think of her since she was picked out of a Liberal hat to govern us on Feb. 26, 2011.
Bloggers have been nasty about her. Pundits have written her off: The University of Victoria鈥檚 Norman Ruff has said her election hopes have been dashed by successive scandals that have been rolling over her Fukushima-like.
He says that she has inherited the sa国际传媒 Liberal brand of 鈥渄istrust and politically unethical behaviour鈥� as if she鈥檚 been flaunting it.
How much more of this Ruff stuff can Clark take?
Quite a lot, it seems. And shouldn鈥檛 we admire her at least for this? For what has happened to our appointed premier 鈥� and probably that alliance of the supercilious centre-right that she鈥檚 trying to hold together 鈥� isn鈥檛 all her fault.
A lot of it has to do with her sex. Political leadership makes hard demands of women. Trying to be more like men throws away the only advantage they have. Floppy grey pant suits don鈥檛 suit.
Clark is unabashedly a lady. It鈥檚 not her fault that so many equate this with frivolity or shallowness, including those of her sisterhood.
She told Frances Bula of Vancouver Magazine last spring that she returned to politics determined to be her own person. But, as so many have pointed out, she became leader with hardly any caucus support.
It took time to gain that support. It鈥檚 taking even less time for her to lose it.
Posing as an 鈥渙utsider鈥� from the radio world, it was hard for her to rally the troops while disparaging the general who had led them for a decade.
鈥淚 want you to be my partners in change in Victoria,鈥� she told party members who had made her premier. 鈥淚 want you to be my partners in bringing open government.鈥�
Some change. Some openness.
She has done nothing to change the distrust of the government she inherited. She has refused to find the answers to the questions she once asked as a radio host about the sa国际传媒 Rail scandal.
She has done nothing to divert the suspicion that politically unethical behaviour is not only condoned, but encouraged by those who sit around the cabinet table.
Clark says she never saw the crass plan to exploit ethnic communities for 鈥渜uick鈥� political gain. She says she 鈥渘ever directed it.鈥�
Does anyone really believe that finding ways to capture ethnic votes in the coming election wasn鈥檛 discussed in cabinet? Does anyone believe that orders weren鈥檛 passed down the line to find a way?
And is anyone satisfied that the premier orders an investigation that can鈥檛 pass through the caucus door where leaked documents suggest staff were involved? Not Gordon Hogg, the caucus chairman, thankfully.
How much worse than back-dating a document is it to have government officials order the rewriting of a letter to remove any suggestion that ministers of the Crown leaned on a supposedly independent public money trust to make a loan to a Liberal party insider?
What do Clark鈥檚 鈥減artners in change鈥� think about being partners in all this skulduggery?
How open do they think a government is that boasts that 鈥渘o records exist鈥� and whose orders are communicated by devices with an automatic delete button?
This is what happens when premiers and prime ministers are chosen by political parties instead of the electorate. It鈥檚 what happened when delegates chose a leader, not for leadership abilities, but because they thought a woman had the best chance of keeping their party in power.
Fixed election dates were never meant to give unelected premiers free reign for two years.
