Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper, Progressive Conservative leader Joe Clark
What Stephen Harper Isn’t Telling You About Merger Talks
London, Ontario - Wednesday, May 8, 2002 - by: Chris Blackman (the Red Tory)
Clark stumbling block	Well if you have heard the latest news out of Calgary (I don’t think he has found Ottawa yet), Stephen Harper wants to be friends with the Progressive Conservatives after all. He even took the time to send an open letter to rank and file Tories explaining that Joe Clark is the only stumbling block to this marriage of small ‘c’ conservatives in Canada. Mr. Harper also pointed out in his letter that any such offer to merge would only be valid until this summer (when the Tories conveniently happen to have a national convention), and after this summer all such overtures would have to be taken off the table.
Brooklyn Bridge	If you believe he is sincere, then send the paper a note because I’ve got a lead on some shares that are available real cheap on the Brooklyn Bridge.
protest party	This is the same Stephen Harper that just won the leadership for a far right Western based protest party that only saw 7% of ballots combined cast in favor of the two unity candidates with their hats in the ring.
0% chance	This is the same Stephen Harper who met with the Rt. Hon. Joe Clark a few weeks back and came prepared only to play X’s and O’s for two hours. While Mr. Clark came with a plan that had an excellent chance of working, and a history of leading a coalition of Tories and DRC members in the House of Commons - Stephen Harper came to waste everyone's time. How would you describe such a junior player on the federal political scene asking a former Prime Minister, and leader of the party of Confederation to take on a junior role in a regional protest party from the West - that has a 0% chance of electing members in numbers east of Manitoba?
wrong	Stephen Harper is just flat our wrong when he blames 'professional politicians' from keeping the Tories and Reformers from working together.
"Right"	Right off the bat we need to ask if there actually is any ‘Right’ to unite in Canada? Is the Reform-Alliance really representative of ‘conservatives’ at all?
loath for change	Conservatives, and ‘conservatives’ in general share the loath for change just for the sake of change. I think myself to be a Conservative, and a 'conservative' in that any time I consider policy directions I only do so after carefully taking into consideration how any such changes will reflect on the efforts of generations of past Canadians, out of a desire to bring about the best conditions for today's Canadians, and with great concern for how today's actions may impact on the Canadians of tomorrow.
preserve	I particularly like Edmund Burke's wise words,
	"The conservatives have a disposition to preserve and the readiness to improve."
reform	All one has to do is take note of the Reform-Alliance name to understand they do not share this view. Reform was created with just that goal in mind — to reform Canada, and its government. Reform exists with the goal of change itself. They don’t think Canada works, and by golly they are not going to take it anymore. Reform-Alliance wish to drastically cut government spending, put an end to the welfare state, sell off the CBC, end what they would deem to be wasteful spending on transfer payments to the provinces, bilingualism, and of course multiculturalism. They wish to destroy influential focus, and interest groups who lobby and work on behalf of traditionally disadvantaged groups in Canadian society, and to replace them with their own such groups like the National Citizens Coalition, and Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
details	The two parties may agree on 80% of their policy initiatives — but it’s that 20% area of disagreement that is the problem. And at this stage the disagreements seem insurmountable. The devil, after all is usually in the details.
common	Do the federal Progressive Conservatives, and Reform-Alliance crew have much at all in common?
fiscal responsibility	The Tories and Reform-Alliance agree that fiscal responsibility is important. Both parties espouse the importance of fiscal conservatism. Both parties prefer to see as little government involvement in the economy and the day-to-day lives of the nations citizens as is possible.
social programs	Where the difference comes into play is in the degrees to which spending on social programs should be sacrificed in order to meet a positive bottom line.
social safety net	Reformers want to place the onus on social programs squarely on the shoulders of the weak and most needy in society, and would leave social spending to the discretion of non-governmental organizations. Whereas the Tories (federally at least) feel responsibility for a social safety net in Canada is the prerogative of government.
freedom	Freedom, after all is not about choosing which bridge to sleep under.
Canadians are compassionate	The truth is most Canadians are compassionate small ‘c’ conservatives. The problem becomes, and this is key - Canadians are not willing to achieve fiscal responsibility at the expense of other Canadians. Canadians don't want governments to bring about this type of political climate on the backs of a group of underprivileged Canadians who for whatever reason simply aren't able/willing to measure up.
just society	In other words, Canadians are not willing to leave other Canadians behind as we strive towards our 'just society'. And in the end, when you are counting all the chips - there are worse things that could be said for a people than they simply don't want to benefit by leaving others behind. You don't leave your wingman.
social matters	A careful examination of this key concept is paramount in any future talk of cooperation between Tories and Alliance. Both camps are in agreement regarding fiscal matters, where the problem arises is with respect to social matters, and where our priorities should be.
American style	An appreciation of the history of the two parties is important (though because it does not paint a very complimentary picture of the Reform movement, the Reformers are quick to discount this), because the Canadian people have on many occasions granted their approval of the 'conservative' politics of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada in the best fashion possible - by giving the Tories the mandate to govern. The same can’t be said for the American style ‘conservative’ politics of the Reform, Reform-Alliance, or Social Credit.
concern for poor	The overriding theme here must be this - Conservatives are not willing to improve at the expense of the least fortunate in Canada. There in lies the conundrum in merging the two parties together. It’s just not fair to paint Joe Clark as the bad guy in holding up any future cooperation between the Tories and the Reform-Alliance crew.
shady characters	Seems that Mr. Harper in trying to win the battle of public perception wants to appear in the eyes of the public as the ‘White Knight’ of unity on the Right. However, with the Reform-Alliance historical connections to some shady characters, and racist organizations in particular — It’s frankly surprising any of them would be comfortable being labeled as the 'White Knight' of anything.
challenge to leadership	By hinting the most recent offer to merge will only be on the table until the end of this summer — or roughly the time of the Tories national convention this August in Edmonton, Stephen Harper is in effect encouraging a challenge to Joe Clark’s leadership. Bet the farm on it — some fruitcake from the right will magically appear to challenge Mr. Clark’s style of tolerant Toryism.
mutiny	Title of knight suggests at least some amount of chivalry — mutiny of course does not. But that’s exactly what this latest offer amounts to — it’s about trying to encourage a mutiny on the good ship Tory.
part time job	Joe Clark and the Tories would be well advised to stay the course. Joe Clark kept his word to send Stock Day back to the Alberta sandlot leagues, and that’s just what happened. Best guess gives Mr. Harper about eight months in the Big Leagues of Canadian federal politics before he is a victim of the same fate as his predecessor. Really, in recent years the Leader of the Reform-Alliance has been little more than a part time summer position.
PC party an alternative	It is to be hoped that the Tories will to flock to Edmonton the summer and completely reject the overtures of Stephen Harper and his Reformers. Tories need to speak out loudly and with unity is support of Rt. Hon. Joe Clark, the '301' resolution, and with a sincere commitment to work within the framework of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada to build a strong and viable national alternative to the Liberals.
won't sell out	For some reason people seem eager to criticize Joe Clark — but he deserves credit for refusing to sell out the principles of the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada. That courage should be rewarded — not censured.
$10 membership	When five-am comes and the cows have to be milked we all need to get out there and work no matter how we feel. Anyone wishing to help should certainly welcome. But, Dr. Elsie Wayne has the right idea when it comes to Reform-Alliance types - Tory memberships are $10 - just sign here, and the help is very much appreciated.
Brutus	Let's remember - Brutus never ascended to the Throne, and in the long run, Rome did not benefit from the murder of Julius Caesar.
careful	Tories would be well advised to tread carefully in what can be very dangerous waters.
Chris Blackman
	(Chris Blackman is a regular editorial writer for the St. Mary's Independent, this editorial appears in today's edition)