Just what we need more MPs AND another party!!??

2173 Views 28 Replies 9 Participants Last post by Macfury, May 14, 2007

MacDoc

Discussion Starter · May 12, 2007

Disgruntled Tories consider refounding Reform Party

GLORIA GALLOWAY
Globe and Mail Update
May 11, 2007 at 8:52 PM EDT

Ottawa — Somewhere in Kingston Saturday, a small group of disaffected Conservatives will meet to discuss what would have been unfathomable in the heady days that followed the last federal election: refounding the Reform Party.

Organizers say they have room for just 30 people, but that this weekend's event is a mere prelude to a much larger meeting later this month.

“It's now or never,” the online invitation says. “This new party will never be infiltrated by Red Tories, special interest groups or Quebec again.”

In another part of the country, Link Byfield is writing columns for his Citizens Centre for Freedom and Democracy that criticize the policies of the federal Conservatives.

“Has Stephen Harper been ‘Otta-washed?'” Mr. Byfield, a strong voice for small-c conservative Alberta, wrote on April 5. He went on to decry the March budget as a “massive spending splurge two or three times the rate of inflation [that] clomps big Liberal boots into all kinds of provincial responsibilities.”

When the Conservatives were elected in January, 2006, the former Reformers were jubilant at the thought of finally having a voice in Ottawa. But after a series of centrist decisions by Mr. Harper, they are again lamenting their disenfranchisement.

Connie Wilkins of Kingston, who owns freedominion.ca, one of the most popular conservative websites in Canada, has been invited to the weekend meeting.

At this point, she says, reforming Reform is just a discussion.

“The idea is just to get together and to decide how it would be best for people who have conservative values – stronger conservative values – to make their voices be heard better and to be listened to,” Ms. Wilkins said.

While it is impossible to gauge just how many on the right feel abandoned by the Harper government, she said Web traffic indicates their numbers are increasing.

Many were angry over what they see as the Prime Minister's capitulation on same-sex marriage. But it's not just socially conservative issues that upset the old Reformers, Ms. Wilkins said. “It's the fiscally liberal things that they have been doing lately that people have really started to get upset about.”

The fury began with the luring of David Emerson from the Liberals to sit as a Conservative cabinet minister, and the naming of Conservative organizer Michael Fortier as unelected senator and Public Works Minister.

Then came a vote to declare Quebeckers a nation, the budget, a settlement with Maher Arar that many found egregious, a reversal on income trusts, and a complete about-face on the environment.

A Conservative policy convention scheduled for November – an opportunity for expression of the dissatisfaction – has been cancelled.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070511.wxright0511/BNStory/National/home

Welcome to Balkanland North American version.

Save

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

CubaMark

· #2 · May 12, 2007

Disgruntled Tories consider refounding Reform Party

The article title is incorrect. The real "disgruntled Tories" continued to offer candidates under the "Progressive Conservative" banner. The Tories were conservatives, misguided, but at least they had a heart.

The Conservative party of Harper et al., is the reworked Reform Party with elements of the old Tory hard-right.

This new party, a refounding of the Reform party, would thus be disaffected members of the Conservative party - but they do not in any way merit the moniker "Tories".

M.

Save

BigDL

· #3 · May 12, 2007

Hopefully these righties will find success and splinter into ultra conservative populist parties.

Then moderate conservative parties could also form. Larger than the ultra conservative but smaller than the Conservative Party today. The ranks of the Conservative Party would diminish.

Perhaps the same could happen to the progressive thinking spectrum of politics as well. With my next views I do not I repeat DO NOT believe the Liberal Party is or has ever been a member of the progressive thinking spectrum of politics.

Then the Liberals and Conservative Parties will speak for the monied elite that are these Parties most important constituency. The same monied elite are in both parties and shift between the two in the direction as the political wind blows.

Perhaps if the political spectrum splinters and or we have electoral reform wherein a system of fair proportional representation is established perhaps then Canada will have true democracy in Parliament.

Save

GratuitousApplesauce

· #4 · May 12, 2007

BigDL said:
Hopefully these righties will find success and splinter into ultra conservative populist parties.

Then moderate conservative parties could also form. Larger than the ultra conservative but smaller than the Conservative Party today. The ranks of the Conservative Party would diminish.

Perhaps the same could happen to the progressive thinking spectrum of politics as well. With my next views I do not I repeat DO NOT believe the Liberal Party is or has ever been a member of the progressive thinking spectrum of politics.

Then the Liberals and Conservative Parties will speak for the monied elite that are these Parties most important constituency. The same monied elite are in both parties and shift between the two in the direction as the political wind blows.

Perhaps if the political spectrum splinters and or we have electoral reform wherein a system of fair proportional representation is established perhaps then Canada will have true democracy in Parliament.

A lot of truth in what you say.

I think the new Cons have always been a bit of an uncomfortable coalition. Centre-right, mostly fiscally con combined with harder-right social conservatives mostly from the west, who need to be kept muzzled if the new Cons are to have some kind of hope of mass appeal. The social-con nub has been quiet for a few years now and their foot-addicted mouths are jonsesing for a fix. beejacon If Harper doesn't get the success of a majority, that coalition will surely split up, something that would please me fer sure.

This move will put pressure on Harper to pay some more lip service to the harder-right social cons and the cons from the west in general. Of course this will mean that getting a broader Canadian appeal to gain that desired majority will be harder to do. I feel bad for your dilemma, Stevie — really.

As to PR, I think that will only occur if a party that has been previously burned by FPTP, somehow gets their hands on or near power and then gets a big enough push from the public in general. Some elements in the Cons remember getting shafted by FPTP previously and many prominent Reformers and PCers were in support of PR, until Harper came along and promised that he could create a right-wing coalition to make FPTP work for them. Those who are contemplating forming a right-wing splinter would have to recognize that they will be shut out without PR.

There is also the tiny, slim chance that the soulless power-mongers in all the parties might be beat out by those who actually support PR out of the principles of fairness and democracy. No, nevermind, that's just crazy optimism.

See less See more

Save

Macfury

· #5 · May 13, 2007

Thankfully, BigDL, your "progressives" are quickly getting run out of town.

Save

Max

· #6 · May 13, 2007

You can't stop Balkanization if that's what the people want. No use getting upset about it... better to try and figure out how to prepare for yet another party clamouring for attention. I also wonder if we'd be seeing hints at this kind of splintering if we actually had strong, dynamic leaders - ones who aren't always checking the polls and their media gurus before opening their mouths or - perish the thought - making a decision.

Sometimes I think the old days of only a very few parties (ones with strong, clear dividing lines) is gone forever. Now we appear to have a smorgasbord of groups that shape-shift to on a dime for whatever happens to be currently politically expedient.

As ever, the people get the kind of politics they (we) deserve.

Save

BigDL

· #7 · May 13, 2007

You can't stop Balkanization if that's what the people want. No use getting upset about it... better to try and figure out how to prepare for yet another party clamouring for attention. I also wonder if we'd be seeing hints at this kind of splintering if we actually had strong, dynamic leaders - ones who aren't always checking the polls and their media gurus before opening their mouths or - perish the thought - making a decision.

Like the Excited States two party system

Save

Max

· #8 · May 13, 2007

They fall victim to the same disease... media-fixation in place of policy-making and sticking to yer guns. It's a very modern disease and it's spreading.

Save

BigDL

· #9 · May 13, 2007

Macfury said:
Thankfully, BigDL, your "progressives" are quickly getting run out of town.

"Where's the meat" on that point? Easy to say so it must be Right, Right? So Right! It 's all Right in your world. Right? Is there ever enough Right in your view? "Right Right your bloody well Right you got every Right to saayhay"

ed note My apologies to SuperTramp

Save

Max

· #10 · May 13, 2007

Well, we're talking politics, so maybe we need someone to step up and give us The Illogical Song.

Save

Macfury

· #11 · May 13, 2007

Max said:
Now we appear to have a smorgasbord of groups that shape-shift to on a dime for whatever happens to be currently politically expedient.

Max: just as we used to have an ethical system based on ideas, we now have one based almost entirely on written rules. Political parties base their platforms on how they would react to 23 different randomly selected policy issues--anything beyond that scope is a mystery. Much better to have a party leader express a philosophy--such as "The government governs best that governs least" or "All your money are belong to us," to give us guidance as to how they will respond to a broad range of issues.

Save

Macfury

· #12 · May 13, 2007

BigDL said:
"Where's the meat" on that point?

If the Liberals are not Progressives (your definition), then looking at the remaining "left-side" parties shows a state of diminishing opportunity at the moment.

Save

martman

· #13 · May 13, 2007

This is great news!

I wish the new reform party lots of luck and a speedy set up.
I'd like to see them running in the next election.

Save

HowEver

· #14 · May 13, 2007 (Edited)

Save

BigDL

· #15 · May 13, 2007

Macfury said:
If the Liberals are not Progressives (your definition), then looking at the remaining "left-side" parties shows a state of diminishing opportunity at the moment.

Conservatives and Liberals put 'em in a bag shake them up and what drops out as government is similarly strange. Conservative Governments that spend like Liberals governments. Liberals Governments that stop peace keeping missions for the military and engage in the war on terror. I fail to see the minutia in the difference between these parties WHEN IN POWER. Perhaps you can and I bow to your superior keen attention to detail.

Save

Max

· #16 · May 13, 2007

Macfury said:
Max: just as we used to have an ethical system based on ideas, we now have one based almost entirely on written rules. Political parties base their platforms on how they would react to 23 different randomly selected policy issues--anything beyond that scope is a mystery. Much better to have a party leader express a philosophy--such as "The government governs best that governs least" or "All your money are belong to us," to give us guidance as to how they will respond to a broad range of issues.

Great idea... it'll never work, not as long as the current era of Technopolis reigns supreme. We'd probably have to revert to a less cynical, more idealistic time; I just don't see it happening.

The funny thing about technology (and our mediaverse which stems from it) is that the more innovations, it spawns the more reliant we are on those new systems; the less adept we become at managing without them. In short, technology is at once our salvation and our burden.

I'm guessing that this is merely a new way of saying that we tend to get the kinds of politicians we deserve.

Save

Macfury

· #17 · May 13, 2007

HowEver said:
When was that??

Before every nuance of human behaviour was described in a series of codes and regulations. The Ethics Practitioners' Association of Canada notes that regulations are quickly replacing a philosophy of ethics in this country.

Example: At one point it would be considered wrong to discriminate against Jews. It then became illegal. It then became illegal to say that the Holocaust did not occur.

Note: I believe the Holocaust occurred. This is just for illustrative purposes.

Save

Macfury

· #18 · May 13, 2007

BigDL said:
Conservatives and Liberals put 'em in a bag shake them up and what drops out as government is similarly strange. Conservative Governments that spend like Liberals governments. Liberals Governments that stop peace keeping missions for the military and engage in the war on terror. I fail to see the minutia in the difference between these parties WHEN IN POWER. Perhaps you can and I bow to your superior keen attention to detail.

There is very little difference. That may be the desire of the electorate for all I know. "Give me a change of underwear, but I happen to like the suit I'm wearing."

On the other hand, there seems to be very little desire to give "progressives" a chance to show how similar they are to the Shake N' Bake crew.

Save

BigDL

· #19 · May 13, 2007

Macfury said:
There is very little difference. That may be the desire of the electorate for all I know. "Give me a change of underwear, but I happen to like the suit I'm wearing."

On the other hand, there seems to be very little desire to give "progressives" a chance to show how similar they are to the Shake N' Bake crew.

I can't say I disagree with you. However my point, so it isn't lost, that I don't want a clear mandate for the progressives as well.

My point is that we could be well served by minority governments of all stripes because the voices of all sides can be heard. Democracy of all side if you will.

Good ideas might rise to the top if the politicians will embrace cooperation as their self serving agenda.

I am disappointed in Harpo's ( yes this is a disrespecful reflection of how dorky I feel our PM is) lust for the mantle of power. I thought he had more character. But alas it may not Harper but the backroom boy at the wheel.

Save

HowEver

· #20 · May 13, 2007 (Edited)

Save

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.

Top Contributors this Month