When Stephen Harper "United the Right", He Solidified the Centre. Just Not For Himself.

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

How Stephen Harper became a "Tory" is the stuff of legend. Or more accurately, the stuff of fairy tales. He did have a brief stint with the PCs in the early 80's, but left the Party because they weren't right-wing enough.

The fact is, that the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada was not really right-wing at all, at least not in heart and soul. They were just right of centre. And they were 100% Canadian. And in many ways, historically, they were not unlike the Liberal Party in terms of policy.*

That doesn't mean that there weren't fierce rivalries. They were like two football teams (I don't want to use hockey because Harper has done that to death) who battle each other for the prize, but at the end of the day, both teams are in the same league, and committed to the game.

And while they both went after the same prize, the team that won it, honoured it. Showed it off and protected it for the next winner, whether it be themselves or their opponents.

They didn't win it, then smash it, to make sure that no one else could have it. That's how I see the Reformers, whether calling themselves Social Credit, Reform, Alliance or Conservative. They are the party that wants to smash the trophy and terminate the league.

Uniting the Right Was Not About Vote-Splitting

The common belief was that the PCs and Reform-Alliance joined forces to avoid splitting the vote. Sounds good but completely false. That's the way it was sold when David Frum arranged a meeting between Jean Charest then head of the PCs, and Preston Manning, then head of Reform.

In terms of bridging the differences between the parties of Preston Manning and Jean Charest, the conference made little headway ... the chasm in terms of the egos and pride of the leaders; the different attitudes that the parties have towards populist initiatives; Reform's origins in western alienation, Social Credit, and religious fundamentalism; and the fact that Reform emerged in part as an angry protest against the policies of a Progressive Conservative government made a rapprochement unlikely. (1)

A later report by Laurence Putnam confirmed the divide.

The first misconception about the Reform movement is that it is a conservative party. The Reform party has all the characteristics of a Western populist party and very few marks of a conservative party. (2)

And as to the myth of avoiding vote-splitting. In the West, many of those who voted PC did not go to Reform. Most of Reform's gain was at the expense of the NDP, another party that started out as a Western protest movement. But many also went to the Liberals.

Since the 2000 election, unity activists in both the PC and Canadian Alliance parties have preached that the PC party lost a major part of its family when the Reform Party rose to prominence, however, this is not exactly true. The PC Party did not experience a mutiny, but rather with the decline of the PC Party in Western Canada, an opportunity was extended for a new crew, the Reform movement, to come to power. In fact, many members of the Reform Party elected in 1993 had never been Conservatives at all. Preston Manning had been a member of the federal Social Credit Party prior to incepting the Reform Party. MPs Diane blonczy, Deborah Grey and Val Meredith were never members of the PC Party ... As these members were not Tories throughout the 1980's and early 1990's when the Tories were at their most successful peak since Sir John A. Macdonald ... (2)

Promoters of unity between the PC and Canadian Alliance parties had argued that if there were either only a PC or CA candidate in your average Ontario riding, they would have beat the Liberals in 2000. But what about Etobicoke North? In 2000, no PC candidate ran in Etobicoke North, but a Canadian Alliance candidate did, and yet they gained only 3.9%, and the majority of the PC votes migrated to the Liberal candidate. This despite the fact that provincially, the identical riding was held by PC M.P.P. John Hastings.

This riding is one example that proves 1+1 doesn't necessarily equal 2 when it comes to defeating a Liberal incumbent in Ontario ridings. Another interesting Ontario result was found in the riding of Markham, where Jim Jones was elected as a Progressive Conservative in 1997. Mr. Jones crossed to the Alliance in the summer of 2000, but lost re-election just months later. Why was Mr. Jones electable to the people of Markham, Ontario, as a Tory, but unelectable as a Canadian Alliance M.P.? (2)

It's because the majority of the Canadian electorate are moderates. The same people who voted for Brian Mulroney later voted for Jean Chretien, illustrating that votes between the Liberals and the PC Party were always liquid, while votes cast for ideologically-driven parties, like Reform/Alliance and NDP**, came from a "base".

The Reform movement only became palpable to Canadians when they shed their wolf's clothing and started calling themselves "Conservative", or worse yet "Tories", cashing in on a century and a half tradition. And for awhile, they were able to fool some of the people some of the time. But unfortunately for them, as their policies became increasingly un-Canadian, their level of support has drifted back to their "base".

They have no hope of drawing votes from the NDP, except perhaps in the West, but they are also losing the votes of moderates ... aka: ordinary Canadians.

So now they have a problem. Instead of eliminating what they thought was their own competition, they have eliminated all competition for the centre, and all of the "liquid" votes are now flowing away from them.

They are a right-wing fringe party. Nothing more. They came, they saw, they scared the hell out of us, and now they must leave.

This brings us to Michael Ignatieff. I see him as the perfect leader to unite the centre. And if I wasn't convinced before, a column by the widow of the late PC president Dalton Camp, has me sold. Ignatieff is not "a bleeding heart Liberal" but will lead a party that will be fiscally responsible but socially aware.

His family has a long history in this country, and come from all political stripes. His G-Grandfather, George Munro Grant helped Sir John A. and Confederation, and later promoted his railway. His uncle George Parkin Grant was also a Conservative, and author of the popular Lament for a Nation, as reaction to the defeat of John Diefenbaker. His fear was that we would become too Americanized and too beholden to corporations, and while this book was reactionary, he would later suggest that he felt that Pierre Trudeau was on the right track. (3)

Michael's father George Ignatieff was a foreign secretary under Diefenbaker, Diplomat under Pearson, and even served as acting president of the United Nations General Assembly***. He was also a peace activist, who fought hard against nuclear weapons, earning him a reputation as a "Peacemonger." (4)

Another uncle was Vincent Massey.

And though Michael Ignatieff's political views are his own, they have been nurtured in the true Canadian tradition.

So while Johannes Wheeldon may ask "Can Iggy Find His Centre?" He didn't have to. He was already there. And as Wendy Camp says: "He has come home to us." And whispering in his ear, will be family voices from the past, making sure that he doesn't screw up what they helped to build.

Footnotes:

*Stephen Harper referred to the PCs or "Red Tories" as "Pink Liberals".

**The NDP has since become more moderate and appealing, though some of their early followers feel that they had to sell out to do so. I like them and remember the greats like Tommy Douglas and Ed Broadbent, and the leader Jack Layton used to be.

***Stephen Harper and the Reformers never trusted the United Nations.

Sources:

1. The Winds of Right-wing Change in Canadian Journalism, By David Taras (University of Calgary), Canadian Journal of Communication, Vol 21, No 4, 1996

2. An Analysis On The Differences Between the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada & The Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance, by Laurence Putnam As prepared for the Fraser Institute, December 2002

3. Lament For a Nation: The Defeat of Canadian Nationalism, By George P. Grant, McClelland & Stewart, 1970 edition with new introduction by author.

4. The Making of a Peacemonger: The Memoirs of George Ignatieff, By Sonja Sinclair, University of Toronto Press, ISBN: 0-8020-2556-0

Media Manipulation: Conrad Black and the POWER of the Press

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Lawrence Martin has written several articles about the Canadian media's rightward migration. In a January 2003 column headlined 'It's not Canadians who've gone to the right, just their media', he quoted an unnamed European diplomat saying "You have a bit of a problem here. Your media are not representative of your people, your values." Too many political commentators are right of centre while the public is in the middle", the diplomat continued. "There is a disconnect."

Martin believes the disconnect began when Conrad Black converted the Financial Post into the National Post, hired a stable of conservative commentators like Mark Steyn, David Frum and George Jonas, bought the centrist Southam chain and turned the entire package into a vehicle to unite Canada's right and retool the country's values to U.S.-style conservatism. (1)

Conrad Black was definitely a media mogul, but his real claim to fame was as a power broker. A political power broker, who was instrumental in the success of the American style neoconservative movement that brought Stephen Harper to power.

Black was more effective as a conservative political advocate than a businessman. "Yet Conrad Black's business ambitions probably always ran second to his urge to be an intellectual force of conservatism. He did not want to simply own newspapers. He wanted to use them to help to reshape the political culture of his native Canada, and to influence that of the United States, Britain and Israel ..." (2)

From Brian Mulroney and Preston Manning, to Stockwell Day and Stephen Harper. Conrad Black was there.

Connie and Brian

Conrad Black and Brian Mulroney had been friends for a number of years. Mulroney was president of the Canadian Iron and Ore Company, when the Black family were major shareholders, and he was the one who first introduced Black to Power Corporation's Paul Desmarais. (3) Black backed Mulroney during his failed 1976 leadership bid, and the Mulroneys remained members of Black's social circle. That circle also included Murray and Barbara Frum(4), parents of David Frum, and while Mulroney and Black had a parting of the ways, Frum remains a Black supporter.

Connie and Preston

"I don't know about Preston [Manning], Preston went to a Bilderberg [summit] meeting. Rides in a limo with Conrad Black. [He's] hobnobbing with the New World Order." James Keegstra (5)

Ernest Manning had enjoyed corporate support when premier of Alberta, and while the Reform Party was supposed to be grassroots, it was very much a party of the corporate sector. So when the Reform Party decided to expand into Ontario, Manning went on a road trip and was introduced to the the king of the power brokers, Conrad Black.

[He spoke during a reception] at Toronto's prestigious Toronto Club hosted by Conrad Black and Hal Jackman. Afterwards, Black not only gave a favourable review of Manning's economic policies, but also contributed $5000 through one of his companies, Sterling Newspapers .

[Cliff] Fryers announced in June 1991 that the party would soon be embarking on a major corporate drive for funding. 'Corporations are part of our constituency,' said Fryers, a remark echoed several months later by Gordon Wusyk, Reform's chief executive in Edmonton: 'What we have to offer corporate Canada is significant." Based in part on the anticipated success of the campaign, the party raised upwards of $20 million ... Manning kicked off the campaign for corporate funds the following month with another trip to Bay Street. While there, he gave a talk to 450 members of the Financial Services Institute, an organization described by journalist Norm Ovenden as 'an elite organization made up of bank, trust company and insurance executives, top corporate lawyers, accountants, stock brokers and pension-fund managers.' (6)

Connie and Stockwell

After the merger of the Reform and Alliance parties, the leadership was up for grabs. And while both Stephen Harper and Conrad Black originally supported Mike Harris operative Tom Long's bid, Black did use a lot of his money and influence to help Stockwell Day, in his run for prime minister, in 2000.

He traipsed him around to $1,000.00 a plate fundraisers and allowed Ezra Levant to host additional fundraising parties at his house.

But after losing the election, and control of his caucus, Black looked to another hopeful. The president of the National Citizens Coalition, an extension of the corporate world.

Connie and Stephen

The decidedly conservative Conrad Black had taken over the liberal Southam chain of newspapers in May of 1996, and soon replaced soft liberal editors with editors of a more conservative cast at several of his publications, such as the Gazette and the Ottawa Citizen. He now controlled 58 of Canada's 105 daily news papers, and he soon made good on his statement to the Globe and Mail "We're going to try and recruit the very best people we can and produce the best papers we can, and publish them to the highest standards we can. And that means separating news from comment, assuring a reasonable variety of comment, and not just the overwhelming avalanche soft, left, bland, envious pap, which has poured like sludge through centre pages of most of the Southam papers for some time." Black folllowed that up by founding the National Post in the fall of 1998, and the Post would provide [Stephen] Harper with an always available platform for airing his views. The Sun Media Newspapers were also receptive, especially Calgary Sun, founded in 1980. (7)

Conrad Black was also heavily invested in the Fraser Institute, a pseudo-think tank, that gave us Jason Kenney and Rob Anders, and has contributed to the neoconservative success story.

When Harper decided to run for the leadership of the merged Alliance-PC party, it is rumoured that it was Black who paid off Peter MacKay's half million dollars worth of loans, if he agreed not to challenge him. (Harper claims to know who put up the money and that it was all above board, and yet still refuses to name the source. (8))

And not long after winning the Alliance leadership in 2003, Black took Harper to Bildeberg, a treat he once bestowed on Manning.

It's a dangerous thing when a powerful media outlet influences elections, whether they be leadership bids or a run for office. It further threatens our democracy, because they represent only the elite of society, and their goal is to destroy our social safety net.

And Stephen Harper has rewarded Black's world in spades, while promising to destroy the rest of us in the name of austerity.

We need to start fighting back, and we can do that by promoting the few independent news sources still available. it will be a long hard climb, but if we don't take that important first step, we are going to be in serious trouble.

Black's empire may be crumbling, but Rupert Murdoch is waiting in the wings, threatening to put the final nail in our coffin.

Previous:

Media Manipulation: Setting Agendas and Shielding Your Bum

Media Manipulation: Journalists or Playwrights?

Sources:

1. Right-wing media covering up political scandal, By Frances Russell, Winnipeg Free Press December 12, 2007

2. "The Guardian profile: Barbara Amiel", The Guardian, September 3, 2004.

3. The Establishment Man: A Portrait of Power, By Peter C. Newman, McClelland and Stewart, 1982, ISBN: 0-7710-6786-0, Pg. 224

4. Newman, 1982, Pg. 267

5. Bentley, Alberta: Hellfire, Neo-Nazis and Stockwell Day: A two-part look inside the little town that nurtured a would-be prime minister - and some of the most notorious hate-mongers in Canada, By Gordon Laird, NOW Magazine, 2000

6. Of Passionate Intensity: Right-Wing Populism and the Reform Party of Canada, By Trevor Harrison, University of Toronto Press, 1995, ISBN: 0-8020-7204-6 3, Pg. 195

7. Stephen Harper and the Future of Canada, by William Johnson, McClelland & Stewart, 2005, ISBN 0-7710 4350-3, Pg. 262

8. MacKay's financial secret safe with Harper: No conflict, party leader says, by Stephen Maher, The Halifax Herald Limited , Thursday, May 13, 2004

Peter Mackay and the Death of the Tory Party in Canada

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"When good people in any country cease their vigilance and struggle, then evil men prevail." Pearl S. Buck (1892-1973)

In 2003 former Progressive Conservative Member of Parliament, Flora MacDonald, had been in Afghanistan, working with a group of war widows.

When she returned to Canada she was surprised to receive a call from a CBC reporter asking for her views on "the merger". Thinking she was inquiring about some amalgamation of business interests, she explained that since she had just returned to Ottawa, she wasn't up to date on the latest business ventures.

But imagine her shock to learn that the merger in question was that of her Progressive Conservatives with the ulta right-wing Alliance Party. After all, Peter MacKay had clearly indicated during his leadership campaign that this was not a process he would endorse.

MacKay was not my first choice at the June leadership convention - I supported Scott Brison on the first two ballots but after that I gave my vote to MacKay because I took him at his word. He said he would support the strongly endorsed decision of the party at its national convention in Edmonton in the summer of 2002 that there would be 301 Progressive Conservative candidates in the next federal election.

My reaction to the agreement in principle, signed secretly by MacKay and Stephen Harper in October, 2003, was first of all one of incredulity, then anger that the party decisions so strongly expressed in Edmonton and endorsed by MacKay during the leadership campaign could be so easily jettisoned. Further, the fact that he would willingly preside over the demolition of a historic 150-year-old institution that has done so much to build this country leaves me asking how he defines integrity and principle. (1)

How he defines integrity and principle?

The leadership convention that had taken place in May, saw David Orchard, a leadership candidate, throw his support to Peter MacKay with the promise that he would not unite the right. In fact, at the the convention, the members voted overwhelmingly, that no such merger should take place.

So a meeting was held with representatives of the Mackay and Orchard teams, resulting in a written contract, that read:

May 31, 2003 Agreement between Peter MacKay and David Orchard

1) No merger, joint candidates with Alliance. Maintain 301.

2) Review of FTA/NAFTA - blue ribbon commission with David Orchard with choice of chair with Peter MacKay's agreement. Rest of members to be jointly agreed upon.

3) Clean up of head office including change of national director in consultation timing within reasonable period in future, pre-election and some of DO's people working at head office.

4) Commitment to making environmental protection front and center including sustainable agriculture, forestry, reducing pollution through rail.

Signed by Peter MacKay and David Orchard (2)

It was a done deal, or so the party thought. What happened? How was Mackay able to renege on a written contract, to "willingly preside over the demolition of a historic 150-year-old institution that has done so much to build this country"?

Next: Ernest Manning and the National Citizens Coalition

Sources:

1. Flora MacDonald’s Comments, The Toronto Star, November 14, 2003

2. "Tory leadership deal, Peter MacKay won David Orchard's support at the Tory leadership convention based on a deal hastily scrawled on a piece of paper", Globe and Mail, June 5, 2003