30 replies to this topic

[Wild Bill]

The reason I asked to question was in one of the committee hearing when Schreiber was on the hot seat, when asked a question by one of the Conservatives on the panel, he said he had given money to the Liberals and the Conservatives, to which the Tory member said, "That's not us, that was the Progressive Conservatives". So I am still wondering what is the difference. Now, I think the difference is Harper uses the name "Conservative" to get the votes in the East but rules like a reformer.

Well, the short answer is that legally the Progressive Conservatives, the former Reform/Alliance and the present CPC were and all completely different animals!

A party is not some kind of high school club. It is a legal entity, like a corporation. It has its own money and its own debts. Each is responsible to the law for only its own sins. The CPC is no more responsible for something the old PCs did than is the Liberal party or General Motors!

So if the PCs gave a bribe to Schreiber the present CPC has no responsibility at all. It was not just a completely different group of people but a completely different organization.

Would you blame the Boy Scouts for a sin committed by the Shriners?

[fellowtraveller]

Now, I think the difference is Harper uses the name "Conservative" to get the votes in the East but rules like a reformer

Much scarier than that, Harper rules like a Liberal.

[Topaz]

Well, the short answer is that legally the Progressive Conservatives, the former Reform/Alliance and the present CPC were and all completely different animals!

A party is not some kind of high school club. It is a legal entity, like a corporation. It has its own money and its own debts. Each is responsible to the law for only its own sins. The CPC is no more responsible for something the old PCs did than is the Liberal party or General Motors!

So if the PCs gave a bribe to Schreiber the present CPC has no responsibility at all. It was not just a completely different group of people but a completely different organization.

Would you blame the Boy Scouts for a sin committed by the Shriners?

What I'm saying is, if Harper had kept the name "Alliance" and had not gone to the "Conservative", would he still get the votes in the East? Also, if they aren't the same party, then why use Prime Minster Diefenbaker as Tory hero?

[Wild Bill]

What I'm saying is, if Harper had kept the name "Alliance" and had not gone to the "Conservative", would he still get the votes in the East? Also, if they aren't the same party, then why use Prime Minster Diefenbaker as Tory hero?

From the trend back then, the PCs were only shrinking and Reform/Alliance were steadily growing. I remember how the PCs had no leader for a time, since no one wanted the job. Finally Joe Clark came out of retirement to lead the party, rather than see it die for a lack of leader.

As I saw it, Reform/Alliance was just too impatient to wait a few elections for the PCs to finally die! They were very small in the Maritimes but their support was also very loyal. Sooner or later the Maritimers would give up on the PCs when they saw they would never again be strong in the rest of Canada but the Alliance wanted to get into power right away! They thought that if the two parties merged then they would end up with the combined total of supporters. Of course, that never happened and it was very naive to think that it would! There were many people who just didn't want to see a merger and they drifted away to the Liberals and the NDP.

To get agreement on the merger took a lot of talk and a lot of promises, some broken, like that of Peter McKay and David Orchard. The merged parties didn't keep enough of each other's supporters to win the next election but they did gain somewhat to be a stronger opposition. Then we saw an eventual CPC minority government that eventually became the present majority.

There was much butt kissing by the Alliance towards the PCs to get their support. The PCs were given power within the new party far beyond what their low numbers deserved. Now it appears that so many concessions have been given to the PC portion that the CPC looks very much the same as Mulroney's old Progressive Conservatives!

So yes, Harper would have gotten those eastern votes but not as fast as he wanted. As for using Diefenbaker as a party hero, it's all part of mending the wounds from the parties having split and smoothing over the hard feelings after the merger. The reason why the old PCs get more than the Alliance members is that the Alliance members HAVE to stick with the CPC for lack of any other choice! The PCs could easily defect to the Liberals.

They never were all that different anyway!

[WLDB]

I dont think I'd ever vote for any version of a conservative party but I must say I prefer the old PCs by far to the current federal Conservative Party.

[TheNewTeddy]

Looking at what happened when the PC Party vanished, I'd say there's a good chance that a new PC Party would mean the death of the Liberals.

[Wild Bill]

I dont think I'd ever vote for any version of a conservative party but I must say I prefer the old PCs by far to the current federal Conservative Party.

Exactly! Like many on the left, this nostalgia for the old PC party is just a hope that the CPC will become more "leftish", like the old PCs.

We all have our dreams but the plain fact is that more people voted for the CPC than any other party. These people tend to be strong in their beliefs, just as the supporters for the other parties.

If Harper allowed the CPC to become too much like the other parties he would lose his support base almost overnight. Wishing for that to happen is like wishing for an enemy to commit suicide.

[madmax]

So if the PCs gave a bribe to Schreiber the present CPC has no responsibility at all. It was not just a completely different group of people but a completely different organization.

Would you blame the Boy Scouts for a sin committed by the Shriners?

I would leave it to a forensic account to follow the money. I never trust money with a Conservative.

[Argus]

Much scarier than that, Harper rules like a Liberal.

He's not THAT bad.

But yeah, he certainly does have a strong tendency for expedience.

[Argus]

What I'm saying is, if Harper had kept the name "Alliance" and had not gone to the "Conservative", would he still get the votes in the East? Also, if they aren't the same party, then why use Prime Minster Diefenbaker as Tory hero?

You do understand the "conservative' is an ideological description and not just a name, right? The Conservative Party was what we used to have long ago. Then they merged with the Progressive Party to form the Progressive Conservative Party. Gradually, over the years, the progressives pushed the conservatives out of power and used the word 'conservative' in their title even while disdaining all conservative ideas and ideals. Eventually, the conservatives simply abandoned them and formed a new party. Turned out without the conservatives, there weren't many people willing to vote for a Progressive party. Those with that mentality voted Liberal. That left the PCs flopping along like a fish on dry land that doesn't know it's dead yet. When they merged with the Alliance the new (old) name Conservative was used to signal that the progressives were no longer in charge.

You can see the same sort of thing in Alberta, where gradually, the progressives in the Alberta PC party pushed all the conservatives out of positions of power, and ignored them when it came time to setting agendas and plans. Now the conservatives are starting to abandon the PC party for a new conservative party. Yes, it didn't happen last election. But how often does a new party come out and go from nothing to government in one election? Wildrose did a lot better than Reform did its first election. And as it proves itself and shakes off the newbie mistakes, the Alberta PC party will die just like the federal PC party did. Why? Because it's not the least bit conservative in any way, shape or form, and Alberta has a very strong conservative streak.

[waldo]

...the Alberta PC party will die just like the federal PC party did. Why? Because it's not the least bit conservative in any way, shape or form, and Alberta has a very strong conservative streak.

care to offer an example of a "real conservative" Federal ruling government? You know, one not in name only.

in line with most Canadians, I'd suggest Albertans are more progressive than most pundits and other parts of Canada accept/realize. Given the Liberal brand was/is so tarnished in Alberta, progressives, to some degree, had/have a somewhat "forced" affinity to the Alberta PCs.

[dre]

care to offer an example of a "real conservative" Federal ruling government? You know, one not in name only.

Sure... The government of Iran. The government of Saudi Arabia.


In terms of the west though its all relative. Our "conservatives" are some of the most liberal people on earth. In relative terms though all they really are is "more conservative" then westerns who are "less conservative".

[Newfoundlander]

And as it proves itself and shakes off the newbie mistakes, the Alberta PC party will die just like the federal PC party did. Why? Because it's not the least bit conservative in any way, shape or form, and Alberta has a very strong conservative streak.

Doubt it. I read an interesting article about the Alberta PCs a while ago, it argued that they have basically been a centrist party that changes with the times and the public. They were more conservative in the 90's because all governments were more conservative after the recession. They are more progressive now because despite the recession Alberts is doing great and many people want investments in infrastructure, education and healthcare. I believe it was Don Martin who said that Alberta is not at all as conservative as it was. If Redford doesn't work out and needs to be replaced in a few years they will likely go with a more conservative leader. It's possible the Wildrose could form a government, buyI don't think the PCs will die.

[MiddleClassCentrist]

I would not likely vote for the current conservatives at some point.

I would likely vote for Progressive Conservatives at some point.

[Bryan]

It's already been mentioned, but it bears repeating: if there was a split among conservatives, and/or a new conservative entity formed, it would be because the current Conservative party of Canada had veered too far left, and one to the right of it would emerge. Any notion, even as a hypothetical, that a conservative party that is more centrist than the CPC would happen is utter nonsense.

To play the game though, I never voted for or supported the federal PCs in any way. I doubt I ever would.