The territory has no secrets. Being upfront before such a vacillation is the only thing to do.
Also, following the David Emerson fiasco, it is necessary if you want to be re-elected.
And McRobb clearly wants to keep his seat.
He’s no dummy.
McRobb is the NDP’s … whoops … McRobb was one of the NDP’s best constituency people.
He’s also a tough-minded politician who knows how to play the game.
Which is why New Democrat leader Hardy did the right thing in turfing McRobb on Tuesday.
As leader, you can’t tolerate dissent in the ranks.
You have to get rid of it. Quick.
In turfing McRobb, Hardy seized the initiative from his mutinous MLA.
When McRobb started talking to his constituents, he had already made up his mind — in politics, you don’t ask the question if you don’t already have the answer.
So, in pushing McRobb, Hardy controlled the situation and the message.
That said, he’s got bigger problems.
McRobb left because of Hardy’s leadership.
McRobb doesn’t think the NDP can win an election under Hardy.
This is a significant shift, because McRobb effectively put Hardy in charge of the party.
Hardy ran for the leadership against Mike Travill.
McRobb supported Travill for the leadership, until the vote, that is, when he shifted his considerable support to Hardy, making him leader.
A couple of weeks ago, Travill, a New Democrat, left his longtime party and announced he was running Liberal leader Arthur Mitchell’s election campaign.
Now McRobb has abandoned Hardy and has said that Mitchell is the only leader capable of running the territory.
All the signs suggest a considerable power shift happening in the territory.
But it gets worse for Hardy.
Former New Democrat environment minister Eric Fairclough is also consulting constituents.
And, like McRobb, he’s held talks with Mitchell.
Fairclough is no lightweight. He’s the party’s core.
He’s a former interim leader of the party. He’s got experience in government, he’s a political moderate and he’s well liked in his riding — it was once an NDP stronghold.
Not anymore.
It’s clear that Fairclough, like McRobb, has been laying the groundwork to depart.
Hardy ejected McRobb. But with Fairclough, Hardy balked.
Why?
He can’t afford to lose him.
Hardy said Fairclough is firmly in his camp, but that’s clearly not true.
Fairclough is already gone.
Wednesday, Fairclough told The News he’s not happy with Hardy’s leadership.
He also admitted he’s had talks with Mitchell.
So, like McRobb, Fairclough has his answer and he’s now trying to firm up support.
He’s gone.
Hardy just hasn’t accepted it yet. (RM)