Bitter Mulroney-era losers are still hanging around

When the Reform Party (which had morphed into the Canadian Alliance) and the Progressive Conservative Party finally merged in 2003, not all the Progressive Conservatives came along. There was a small rump of PC’s left over - still too seething with resentment over Preston Manning coming along and spoiling their party - to bury the hatchet. They formed the Progressive Canadian Party.

In the last federal election, the Progressive Canadian Party fielded eight candidates. The most successful of these won 2.3% of the vote. (Five of the candidates each received less than 1%.) Yup, a political powerhouse to be reckoned with. But if you are bitter enough, lack of success will not deter you. For instance, over the weekend I received the following e-mail from the leader of the PC Party:

“Open Letter to Canadian Conservatives

The election result on October 19, 2015 is reason for Canadian Conservatives to think deeply. 

What is clear is that the party formed by the "merger" of the Canadian Alliance and the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada was rejected by Canadians who recognized the result of the merger was not the renewed Progressive Conservative party Tory voters had   thought they were voting for in elections since 2003.

New Conservative Party policy, politics, outlook and direction and political culture was imported from the Canadian Alliance and its predecessor the Reform Party.  Progressive Conservative policy, politics, outlook and direction and political culture was pushed aside and ignored.

Some former Canadian Alliance members are publicly revisiting Preston Manning's infamous "The West wants in" diatribe by claiming "The West wants out."  They echo Stephen Harper's firewall federalism, showing their contempt for democracy and insulting all Canadians in all parts of Canada, North, South, East, and West.  The party Stephen Harper shaped is not about Tory and Canadian conservative principle.

Integrity, parliament, and Canada matter: that is the message of the 2015 election. The party led by Stephen Harper, and previously by Stockwell Day and Preston Manning under other names, fails on all three counts.  They framed the ballot question in the 2015 election and Canadians voted to replace the party, leader, and government in power since January 23, 2006.

Progressive Conservatives remaining in the new Conservative Party are justified in feeling betrayed by the policy and leadership of the merged party.  It is time to reshape the Conservative Party of Canada to create a renewed Progressive Conservative Party of Canada or bring the CPC to an end..

Those of us who share the "progressive Conservative" vision of the Tory party Sir John A. Macdonald first spoke of in 1854 have reason to take heart in the decision of Canadians on October 19, 2015.  

The national vision of the party of Confederation, of nation-building, and of Sir John A.'s National Dream of One Dominion from Sea to Sea is endorsed by Canadians who put the divisive politics of the last ten years to rest.

Canadians have moved on.  It is time for what was purposely called briefly the "Conservative Party" to do so as well.

It is time for progressive - conservatives to restore vision in a party based on the principles which first built a strong, united Canada.

The Progressive Canadian party exists to provide a principled Tory home for Progressive Conservatives who have decided enough is enough should the Manning Centre Conference leave the directions of the Conservative Party of Canada unchanged.

We invite you to join us and we offer you leadership by example of what Sir John A. Macdonald's  "progressive Conservative" party should look like to Canadians today.  The PC Party on the ballot is a way forward to a renewed Tory government in a strong united Canada as Progressive Canadians and Progressive Conservatives.

Respectfully,

The Hon. Sinclair Stevens, Leader,

The Progressive Canadian Party (PC Party)”

How fitting that this party is currently being led by a Brian Mulroney-era cabinet minister whose career in the Mulroney government ended because of conflict-of-interest allegations. I am old enough to remember that disgraceful scandal play out on television.

Stevens talks as if Stephen Harper is some kind of failed leader. And yet, Harper was in office almost a year longer than Brian Mulroney. In addition, when Harper lost, he left his party in much better shape than Mulroney left his. When Harper resigned, his Conservative Party still retained 99 seats and was the undisputed official opposition. When the Mulroney/Campbell PC’s were crushed in 1993, they had only 2 seats left, and wouldn’t have even qualified to remain an official party except that the ever-crafty Jean Chrétien realized that it was useful for him to keep this rump of a party on life support.

And let’s not forget all the many anti-conservative betrayals that Prime Minister’s Mulroney and Campbell perpetrated on this country. They enacted draconian gun control laws; instituted a widely despised a value added tax; ran up huge deficits year after year; and to top it all off, attempted twice to change Canada’s Constitution. With the latter attempt, the Charlottetown Accord, Mulroney tried buy off every special interest group in sight. As a result, this amendment would have constitutionally enshrined multiculturalism, left-wing labour laws, socialized medicine, and an apartheid regime for our natives.

It is a natural human tendency to feel sorry for the downtrodden and the dispossessed, and to try to help them on their feet. Normally, such impulses are entirely virtuous and benign. However, in this case, given their treacherous past, any mercy would be misapplied. I think it’s better to put the boots to these people while they are on the ground so they never rise up again. Good riddance you losers!

Comments

[Calgary Non-Con]

Not content with depriving you of the ability to think critically, nature, nevertheless, endowed you with the ability to type.

C'est domage.

[Bill Elder]

This PC cabal is what is left of the right wing faction of the Laurentian elite political oligarchy.

- essentially bi-partisan crony power brokers who could be comfortable in a Liberal Government - top down autocratic insider crony policy makers and influence peddlers to whom a change of government means nothing more than a management handover of the corporate patronage clientele which passes easily from blue to red party/governments as easily as a dirty quarter.

The reform merger represented injecting western populism and grass roots policy making into the party - for the old crony PCs that was like sunlight on Vampires.

Harper,/CPC lost because the media collective sold voters a message of change for change sake - not necessarily a wise or better change, but a heavily messaged media coerced change which placed corporate media back in a roll of co-policy makers - something denied them under a CPC regime.

[Gabby in QC]

I would agree with you about some PCs wanting to get back to the glory days without the Alliance/Reform contingent, deluding themselves into thinking that resurrecting the PCs may better their election prospects against Justin Trudeau's Liberals. But apparently there are only a few Reform MPs left in the CPC, so I fail to understand their argument.

But I also fail to understand yours. I don't see how maligning the Mulroney era is going to help the CPC. Yes, there were some Mulroney policies you may have disagreed with, maybe even all of them, but how does it benefit the current CPC to resurrect those objections? Are your objections not as unhelpful and unwarranted -- I'm even tempted to say "bitter" -- as those of Sinclair Stevens?

P.S.: To be fair, "Judge throws out 1987 Sinclair Stevens conflict decision
CBC News Posted: Dec 17, 2004 6:59 AM ET"

[Don Morris]

Well said, I couldn't agree more.

I too remember the liar Sinclair Stevens and his fantastic tales.
And don't even mention Brian(%^$$#@&!!) Mulroney to me, the SOB that gave his endorsement to Justin Trudeau the moment he became Leader of the LPC!

[Cincinnatus]

Dear Gabby:

Yes Mulroney did a few good things: he got rid of the National Energy Policy, privatized a few things, tamed the Post Office, and brought in the Canada-US Free Trade deal.

But I think all of this pales in comparison with the outrages that I catalogued. Particularly since most of the good stuff occurred in his first term while the bad stuff was mostly concentrated in his second term.

I am old enough to have been eligible to vote in every election where Mulroney was the party leader and I am proud to say that I never voted for him, and I don't feel sorry that I didn't. I saw Reagan in the US, Thatcher in the UK, and Mulroney in Canada, and thought: boy, Canada has been screwed.

The day the Kim Campbell PC's were massacred at the polls was my proudest day as a Canadian. And judging by how the general public feels about Mulroney, I don't think I am alone in this.

[Gabby in QC]

Cincinnatus, I view some of the policies or attempted changes you list as Mulroney’s “anti-conservative betrayals” differently.

The GST or value added tax: a tax consumers can see upfront and that they can avoid if they absolutely refuse to pay it. Conversely, would-be tax cheats have a tougher time in cheating the tax system. Better that kind of tax than one that cannot be avoided, like income, property, and school taxes.

“Huge deficits”: inherited from Pierre Trudeau.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/pierre-trudeaus-disastrous-record-is-finally-laid-out-for-all-to-see
“Under Trudeau the debt grew tenfold, while federal spending ballooned from $13 billion to $109 billion. His 1984 deficit, measured as a percentage of gross domestic product, would equal $133 billion in current terms.”
Also “… the overhaul [of the tax system] boldly implemented by Michael Wilson, the former Conservative finance minister, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, paid off in the revenue surge that followed a few years later (for those lucky Liberals) when the economy picked up steam.”
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/revisiting-canadas-fiscal-miracle-a-different-take-on-the-deficit-fighting-story/

Meech: if ratified when all provinces had initially agreed to do so, Canada might have been spared the Quebec/ROC tensions that ensued. Remember, Pierre Trudeau was a major influence in its defeat. Furthermore, the 5 main amendments to Trudeau’s constitution, not the 1967 one but the 1982 one, recognized provincial powers:
Quebec a distinct society, similar to PM Harper’s motion of the Quebecois constituting a nation within a united Canada.
Prospective constitutional amendments needed the approval of provinces, not imposition by the federal government.
Enhanced provincial jurisdiction over immigration.
Allowed provincial opting out of federal programs.
Appointment of senators & SC judges from a list provided by provinces rather than the PM’s prerogative.

An interesting take on Meech here: http://bit.ly/1nhAXrq
In any case, the past is past and revisiting it is useless if all that does is open up old wounds. Thanks for your reply.

[monkey]

The Progressive Canadian Party may be a rump party, but I do think if the Tories want to defeat Justin Trudeau in 2019 they will have to be a big tent and moderate. I am a former Progressive Conservative and probably more a supporter of Brian Mulroney than Stephen Harper, but I realize with any big tent party you need to accept some who you may not agree with. I think the populists element of the Reform Party is fine, its more some of the more right wing policies which have limited appeal. Unlike the Chretien/Martin government, Justin Trudeau is decidedly left wing and he must be defeated in 2019 so if that means supporting someone more centrists than our own views so be it. At least a Red Tory is far better than the tax and spend Trudeau Liberals. The number one goal in 2019 should be to defeat Justin Trudeau and if that means moving closer to the centre so be it.

[Autoguy]

...except it doesn't mean moving closer to the centre. It means showing the electorate that you have principles and are willing to stick to them in the face of a hostile media.
I loathed the CPC's. I just loathed the Libs more, and the Dippers more than that.