Finally Someone's Talking Sense!

[Neal.F.]

PC Sen Tkachuk has submitted a proposal for parliamentary coalition, thence full merger. The deal would save 65 ridings for CA nominations, 40 for PC nominations, with the rest doing joint nominations. Both parties will sit together in the fall session, and if all works out, full merger in the new year under the name "Conservative Party of Canada". Harper has praised the idea. MacKay has yet to respond. The leadership issue would have to be resolved shortly after the merger.

About time too. Whether or not diehard Tories and Alliance members like it or not, it is time they kissed and made up. There may not BE another chance. First off, Canada cannot afford and its status as a democracy may not survive another Liberal mandate... I guarantee you that the Lieberals will use all the means at their disposal to further consolidate their hold on power, making the task of dislodging them even more difficult than it already is. Serious players will come to the conclusion that public policy is being formulated exclusively in the Lieberal party, and will only consider running for them.

On the other hand, if we have a credible NATIONAL opposition with the potential of becoming the government, the whole picture changes. The ONLY way this can be achieved is by a full merger of both parties. Sen. Tkachuk has made a very reasonable proposal to that end, I believe.

the really fuzzy matter is the question of leadership... I think that after a successful joint caucus operation, followed by a formal merger in the early new year, an accellerated leadership contest must be held. Both Mssrs. Harper and MacKAy should be allowed to run, but if they decided to fall on their swords for the greater good of the country, they would be be well regarded. This would permit someone such as Mike Harris, who like him or not, is known for one thing- doing exactly what he says he is going to do-could ostensibly lead the party, if not to victory, at least a minority govt, or a VERY strong opposition poised to win the next time. The Lieberals on the other hand waffle on every issue. you never know what they'll do. they don't do what they promise, and they bring other things through the back door, and ram them down our throats.

If we want what is possibly our last chance to restore a parliamentary democracy in this country where two parties can successfully vie for power, then full merger of the PC and CA parties, and NOW, is an absolute requirement.

There are people from both parties working diligently behind the scenes to achieve this, fully aware of the consequences of failure. I hope blowhards in both parties can restrain themselves from torpedoeing the process. If the two parties don't work together, they'll hang together...and bring the rest of us to the gallows with them

[KrustyKidd]

That's too good to be true. It will fail as it has before. Simple logic, polititions are in it for themselves. If they don't get in power then they won't go for it. If I can't be leader then nobody is. I hope they prove me wrong in a big way.

[Neal.F.]

What good does it do do know your whol;e carreer in politiocs will peak at being leader of the opposition (or shadow cabinet) with no hope of EVER being government?

Just a big fish in a small pond.. and a small fish in relative size to the average backbencher on the government side?

If these guys are incapable of reeling in the egos, the one thing we can count on is Prime Minister Paul MArtin....then Tobin....then Justin Trudeau....ad infinitum.

I'm inclined to think the behind the scenes executives of both parties might have a say and be able to twist the arms of the egotists.

[dnsfurlan]

I read a bit about this in the G&M. Frankly, I don't see it happening.

There is virtually no chance of a merger before the next election. You just can't put together a new party with a newly minted leader in such a short period of time. Co-operation on candidates is possible, but even that would take a considerable amount of time and negotiation.

Furthermore, this sounds a bit like an act of desperation on the part of the PC's. Tckachuk might see the growth potential for the Tories as being minimal in the next election and wants to savage whats left of a party barely breathing.

Harper has been advocating for cooperation on candidates since he became leader of the opposition. I'm not exactly sure where he has wanted to go with this. Either he thinks it will be of benefit to the Alliance, or he knows its a deal the PCs will never accept. Either way, I think Harper has been trying to position himself in such a way that the next election will solidify the Alliance's position on the Right in federal politics.

Whatever you may think about the general merits of the two parties on the Right, both leaders were chosen to do whatever is in the interests of their respective parties. This is the job they were chosen for, not some idealistic notion of what a unified Right is supposed to lool like. And my guess is that Harper is taking a shot at forming the government-in-waiting in the upcoming election. He's been stalling on all this other stuff since he became leader.

As for this do-or-die scenario that Neal is painting, I don't buy it. One-party rule is not a good thing. One more election confirming it won't be the end of the world. If thats when the Right unites then thats when perhaps a more formidable challenge will be mounted against the Liberals. Canada may have turned the wrong way after Mulroney, it hasn't commited suicide. Even some people on the Left bemoan the state of federal politics. Things can only get better. We conservatives are supposed to be optimistic anyway, right?

Even without a united Right in the next election, a lot will be settled once its over. Either one of the CA or PCs loses it altogether, which would mean that the Right would coalesce around the party still standing, or they both remain relatively intact, which would mean that the real process of uniting the Right would finally get under way.

Just my opinion.

[westcoast99]

Tckachuk might see the growth potential for the Tories as being minimal in the next election and wants to salvage whats left of a party barely breathing.

My only concern would be on the leadership of the new party. The best way to do this would be through a delegated convention with 1000 PCs and 1000 Alliance delegates so that neither party can force their current leader on the new party. Edited August 12, 2015 by Gugsy

[Neal.F.]

I agree Gugsy, with your suggestion of a delegated convention of 1000 from each party going in, and the moment the last ballot is cast, all current CA & PC cards become null and void while a new card for the new party is issued to all in time for the announcement of the new leader. Bit o' symbolism, but powerful nonetheless.

I think Mike harris or someopne of his calbre would step up pretty quickly should this scenario be accomplished.

Dennis, I must disagree, if there's a massive Lieberal majority under Martin that further weakens the CA and /or the PCs, just think about how difficult it will be THEN to raise funds for subsequent elections. On the other hand, if these guys can pull it together over the next 6 months or so, I think there will be no shortage of funds, since many votes are parked with the Liberals right now based on the premise that "there's nobody else to vote for". Give them a serious united alternative, and Martin is in deep trouble...

[Cameron]

Oh yess, this topic has been around for awhile. Let me start off by saying that the Liberal party of Canada is a virus that has infected this country since 1993, it is time to stop! The Liberals must be crushed!

In one breath I think this proposed merger would be a godsend to this country and a new opposition (or the majority party!) if it went through. With a new larger party we could have our voices heard, we could even drown out the liberals! But in another, I want to keep the beloved PC party as is, make all the Alliance members convert, we all know that won't happen. Amendments may have to be made to beliefs of members (give a little to get a little). If we are to unit we would have to have complete cooperation and we may have to vote for a new leader, but again, you gotta give a little to get a little...this topic should be kept open...

[Neal.F.]

Youi hit it on the head. Both PCs and Alliancistas would like to keep their parties and watch them ride on to victory, but it ain't gonna happen.

In fact , we are at the point where if they don't unite, it is possible that the Lieberals may take many seats in Alberta!!!! The three parties are all pretty close in support there, albeit with the PCs trailing , but in a healthy third. This split vote will allow Lieberals to come up the middle.

In order for the merger to happen, both groups will have to take some water in their wine. But that will be thr price of getting rid of the Liberals , and restoring a healthy Democracy before it is too late.

Judging by the posts i have seen on this board and others on this matter today, the vast majority from both parties are open to this idea. Reality is sinking in. They should run with it while they have the momentum.

[Cameron]

Right on Neal, we need to stop bickering and start gearing up for a Federal Election. We should unite within the time frame that an election needs to be called (5 months?) and start to sort out the different ideas and views and have a party that has a strong chance of winning. Look at the current demographic that is out there. On my end of the country (altantic) the three maritime provs. are Tory (hopefully Bins will win in PEI) the people NL need their heads checked for why they voted Liberal. Que. is better off with a Liberal gov. rather than the PQ. Ontario needs to keep Eves, I don't really know much about him, other than the robotic voice that he has. Manitoba and Sask. need a good influx of PC to rid them of the commies (NDP) that run the provinces. Alberta, well that's all I can say, rock on PC! BC hopefully we can count on them to all vote PC. The territories, well they seen to have their own form of gov't up there, good for them.

Ah well, enough bickering for tonight......naaa!

[Neal.F.]

I think that the Libs are on their way out in Newfoundland...Good riddance... as for the Quebec liberal party, Just in case you didn't know, they are in NO WAY affiliated with the Fedlibs. There are some Liberals in that party, but there are also many conservatives as well. What unites them is the fact that they are not seps.

I hope Ernie can hold on in Ont. Even diehard NDPsupporters are conceding that Calvert and his bunch of socialist goatherders are on their way out, and the BC Libs are really the Socreds under a new name. At least most of the country has something to balance out the outrageous Liberal govt in Ottawa.

Now, Unity would gain seats in every province in the country, though only very modest gains in Quebec.

It has to be done, with a view to a MAy/June 2004 election. If the will is there, it will be done. I think even the most ardent partisans of both parties are tired of glaring at the arrogant Liberals from the opposition benches.

[Cameron]

I think even the most ardent partisans of both parties are tired of glaring at the arrogant Liberals from the opposition benches.

HERE HERE!

[westcoast99]

Cameron,

Edited August 11, 2015 by Gugsy

[theWatcher]

A merger is not possible as long as the PC's hate the Alliance more than the Liberals.

Here's one for you Gugsy.

LIBERAL AND TORY CANDIDATES TEAM UP TO BEAT ALLIANCE IN ONTARIO

HALTON, Dec 14, 2000 (LSN.ca) - There have been rumours of collusion on the part of Liberal and Tory federal candidates in Ontario to keep the Canadian Alliance from winning. This gained credibility recently as Halton, Ontario PC candidate Tom Kilmer was caught by CBC cameras congratulating the Liberal winner. Kilmer congratulated Liberal MP Julian Reid saying "Hey, bud we did it. We kept the bastards (from winning)." Later in an interview Kilmer was unrepentant for his crude language and confirmed he was referring to beating the Alliance. "I said it and I meant it. I just find the Alliance so offensive. I'm glad we kept them out," he said in an interview which appeared in the December 8 Georgetown Independent.

Although Kilmer claimed there was no collusion with his Liberal opponent, the comments suggest otherwise. Indeed, in many of the 25 Ontario ridings where the added number of votes of the Tories and the Alliance exceeded the Liberals, the PC candidates were well aware that their role would basically be to ensure victory for the Liberal candidates. LifeSite sources within various campaigns across Ontario confirmed that some PC candidates going into the race new full well that they had no chance of winning but surely would knock out the Alliance, thus keeping the Liberals in power.

Liberal tory same old story.

We know what you really think of us.

"Radioactive Bastard Westerner"

[westcoast99]

Don't agree

Edited August 12, 2015 by Gugsy

[sir_springer]

Gugsy...

Surely to God you're too smart to believe simplistic crap like that.

On the firewall thing, Harper was dead on the money...and so far not one son of bitch has had the gonads to go head to head with him on this. Why? Because he'll shred them to pieces on the issue.

And what was he demanding? No more than Quebec already gets.

Okay for Quebec. Screw Alberta.

To hell with that noise.

As for the defeatist thing?

A nine second sound bite taken totally out of context and rammed for all it was worth by the CBC...Canada's version of Pravda.

Again, if one takes the time to investigate the full context of what Harper was talking about, one...assuming more than three working braincells are present...will discover quickly that once again he was dead on the money in delivering the truth about the corrupt and bankrupt federalism that has been the norm out of Ottawa since the Trudeau regime.

But like the old adage says...

Don't confuse people with the truth, eh?

[theWatcher]

My point Gugsy is that the PC's hate the Alliance more than the Liberals. That was just one quote proving it.

Firewalls are a protection, which was recommended to protect Alberta from a predatory government in Ottawa. Its not meant as an attack on other provinces.

The defeatist attiitude Stephen mentioned was more of an attack on the Liberals "buying" support in the maritimes, and a lot of people agree with him on that point.

Heres an example What Stephen Harper got wrong – and right

The chap who wrote that is the president of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies, a public policy think tank in Halifax

Alliance comments tend to be about practices and procedures, and the PC's are usually very personal with a lot of name calling, another tactic favoured by the Liberals. When you can't refute the message you're forced to attack the messenger.

Besides, if we follow your logic, a merger is irrelevant anyways.

According to you Alliance support is only at 9%. Since their power base is bigger in the west, that makes it signifigantly lower in the East. What do you need a piddly amount like that for? Your party is 30 points behind the liberals and thats just a drop in the bucket.

[theloniusfleabag]

I would think that there is a snowball's chance in hell of the alliance ever coming into power on their own. Their only choice above dissoultion is merger. The Reform party had it's chance, for it addressed the issue of having a responsible gov't, on many levels. However, Preston Manning did not have charisma, and Stockwell Day had no brains. (perhaps they both have gone to see the wizard)

The PC's are still recovering from the damage Brian Mulroney did, and that recovery may yet happen if they choose not to merge with anyone, lest they be seen as capitulators in a time of independent identity struggle.

The Liberals keep winning, though, for two reasons. 1. 'The devil you know is better than... mentality'

2. They are willing to maintain social programs even when their own mis-management makes socialism appear to be a bad thing.

The key factor, though, is that most Canadians are indeed socialists at heart. That is what makes us different from a lot of countries, including the US. We have a stong work ethic, vast resources AND we have a sense of caring for our fellow man. Most of us only wish our gov't would stop being such boneheads, so we could prove without a doubt that properly managed democratic socialism is THE template for national governance.

[PIK]

Gugsy...

Surely to God you're too smart to believe simplistic crap like that.

On the firewall thing, Harper was dead on the money...and so far not one son of bitch has had the gonads to go head to head with him on this. Why? Because he'll shred them to pieces on the issue.

And what was he demanding? No more than Quebec already gets.

Okay for Quebec. Screw Alberta.

To hell with that noise.

As for the defeatist thing?

A nine second sound bite taken totally out of context and rammed for all it was worth by the CBC...Canada's version of Pravda.

Again, if one takes the time to investigate the full context of what Harper was talking about, one...assuming more than three working braincells are present...will discover quickly that once again he was dead on the money in delivering the truth about the corrupt and bankrupt federalism that has been the norm out of Ottawa since the Trudeau regime.

But like the old adage says...

Don't confuse people with the truth, eh?

Some people got it back in the day