|
| 2003-12-13 What happened to partisan loyalty? | | | Ottawa Sun
Published: Saturday, December 13, 2003 Get together, then stick together Today’s column is a Paul Martin Cabinet-free zone since enough ink and solid analysis on this subject already flows in the previous pages of today’s paper. Your not-so-humble scribe will return to the early machinations of the Martin Cabinet – former backbench MPs and the Chretien cabinet B-team – in the coming weeks. Instead, let’s focus on the other side of the House of Commons and look at former Progressive Conservative MP and 2003 leadership contender, Scott Brison, his defection to the Liberal Party (what a nice payoff he received yesterday from Paul Martin) and the future of the new Conservative party. As an aside, two of Mr. Brison’s former colleagues who also defected to the Liberals a few years back, Andre Harvey and David Price, were also elevated to the status of parliamentary secretary yesterday. The only turncoat who hasn’t been rewarded (yet) for betrayal is Quebec MP Diane St-Jacques. Back to the new Conservative party, yesterday Mr. Brison argued in a column in the Globe and Mail that his defection to the Liberals was a question of values and about making a difference. If so, then why did Mr. Brison actively support the merger of the CA and the PCs? Why did he appear in the national media arguing in favour of the merger in the weeks and days leading up to the vote? I predict that Mr. Brison’s decision to join the Liberals will likely stifle his creativity and greatly diminish his profile and influence given Paul Martin’s preference for excessive government intervention – just look at the “special emphasis” titles handed out to his parliamentary secretaries yesterday – and an Ottawa knows best mentality. (My apologies to readers, I guess some anti-Martin commentary is sneaking in to this column. I promise, no more.) Scott Brison also noted that many PCs who have qualms about the merger – overwhelmingly endorsed by the members of both parties – must come to their own decision points in the coming weeks and months. As someone who is personally (not organizationally) supportive of this merger, if you are one of these queasy PCs or diehard Reformers who doesn’t like this merger, for everyone’s sake, please take your marbles and go home now. However, if this cowardly route is not for you, then by all means, muster up your courage and fight within the new Conservative party for that which you hold dear. Which brings us to the question of leadership, the topic that now preoccupies many members of the new Conservative party. Indeed, I’ve heard more than a few members of the new party say that their “fight or flight” response will ultimately come down to who is chosen to lead the party next March. Some old-time PCs have confided to this scribe that if Mr. Harper wins, they’re gone. Equally troubling is the news of Alliance partisans pledging to sit out the next election if Peter MacKay becomes leader. And then there are partisans on both sides expressing grave concern should Mr. Prentice – the only declared leadership candidate to date – take the top prize given his lack of elected experience. To “conservatives” harbouring any of these thoughts, please grow up. The next leader of the Conservative party will be chosen on the PC-style points system where all 308 ridings are considered equal. So whoever wins – Harper, MacKay, Prentice (in alphabetical order) or someone else – must do so by winning a majority of ridings across the country. You can’t just win the West and become leader or simply lockup Ontario and hope for the best, the new Conservative leader must earn his/her crown by winning nation-wide. And surely this would be proof that this leader can also perform well nationally in an electoral contest to with Jack Layton and Paul Martin. Conservatives must pledge now to support the eventual winner period … if the party is to have a chance at governing. The other focus for Conservatives should be the task of recruiting 308 local leaders across the country to run as candidates since the leader only counts for one seat, despite the national media lens which focuses mostly on the party leaders. Yes politics is a blood sport, but at the end of the day it is also a team sport, Conservative party members would do well to remember this point above all else.
| | |
|
|
| |