Humpty-Dumpty time has arrived, and if not, then at the very least the terms of reference may have been defined.

Unless you were hot on the 2006 Federal election trail in Halton – specifically the all candidates debates –  the reference to Humpty-Dumpty won’t mean a thing to you. But in a moment of rare comprehensibility, then NDP candidate Anwar Naqvi got a chuckle when challenging voters to consider something other than what he termed as the Humpty-Dumpty pattern of Canadian politics.

Today, as in 2006, the reference to either the cartoon character or the potato chip requires explanation. According to Mr. Naqvi, Canadians don’t change government based on anything concrete such as a fundamental change in policy thinking. Instead, alternating between the two predominant parties is based on a strange and ill-defined sense of whose turn it is at the helm. Mr. Naqvi’s awkwardly pieced-together words of wisdom went something like this, ‘Canadians have a history of electing and working with Humpty, and when that doesn’t work out so well, they change for Dumpty … then they change for Humpty…etc.’ You had to be there.

Mr. Naqvi’s 2006 analogy isn’t too far from reality, even today. The question is whether or not public opinion is reaching its natural tipping-point, or has Mr. Ignatieff determined that now is the time to try and manufacture one?

With the exception the Dion green-shift the main difference between Conservatives and Liberals for the past 3-5 years, is how they presented different arguments while essentially vying for the same position on the political spectrum, center-right or center-left, depending on which way polling winds blew.

Since it became clear Canada is not immune to the economic malaise surrounding it, there is likely no politician like Michael Ignatieff cheering more loudly, albeit in private, that Canada would sink lower than low for no other reason than hoping Stephen Harper would wear-it, and so that he, Iggy, could then attempt to position himself as Canada’s only hope for resurrection.

It wouldn’t matter if you could deliver any better, or possibly worse than the incumbent. All you would need do is create the illusion of, different. To a constituency that might believe things can’t get worse, different, by definition, is necessarily better. Or so the theory goes.

By setting out the promise of a series of report cards – regardless of the fact good performance was never defined – Mr. Ignatieff extended himself a preset number opportunities to let the government live for another day or, if winning conditions appeared favourable, force an election.

Make no mistake, the fact Canadians may now head to the polls in 2009 as opposed to 2010 has little to do with Mr. Ignatieff’s disappointment in Mr. Harper’s performance. Rather Mr. Ignatieff is interpreting the recent glimmer of more buoyant financial markets as a sign of what may transpire in the real market.

Mr. Ignatieff has reached the conclusion Canada won’t go as low as the US, and that today is the low. Translation, time to appear Saviour-like.

How does one accomplish this? Enter the case for extending EI premiums.

There is little argument that by reputation Canada is, particularly in Quebec, more of a hand-out than a hand-up society. This is why Mr. Ignatieff’s recent words may resonate well with those who are fearful and uncertain about the future; “We’ve got to have a government that steps in and says ‘Let’s put some floor under this. Let’s give people an employment insurance system that allows them to get training for new jobs.’ “

Either deliberately or by accident Mr. Ignatieff is setting the stage for a good old – and on more familiar grounds – showdown between traditional Left and Right thinking. Perhaps Mr. Ignatieff has come to understand how difficult it is expecting Canadians to differentiate between two not so different approaches to similar solutions. After all, Conservative spending in recent years is hardly characteristic of conservatism.

Hoping to appear Saviour-like, and against his own instincts, Mr. Ignatieff may be preparing to move the Liberal party back to more familiar territory on the left at a time when Canadians may be more poised for the move. Recent polling numbers whereby the NDP vote may be showing sign of gravitating to the Liberals will also add a little punch in Mr. Ignatieff’s step.   

Mr. Ignatieff’s strategy, as much as its timing, is a gamble. It still isn’t clear that Dumpty has made the undeniable case that it’s time to unseat Humpty.

Tags: Dan Baril personal website and blog