A
personal viewpoint by Dave Diduck
The Right
to Think
My views on the need to remove Preston Manning as leader of the Reform Party
of Canada have predictably met with disapproval from a few of our members.
I am not so naïve to think that it wouldn’t, but it will not stop
me from believing in Grassroots democracy and expressing that belief. I
have come to think that most supporters of Preston Manning have indoctrinated
themselves to the extent that it is nearly impossible for them to see the
harm he has done, and is doing to a party that had so much potential as
late as June 3, 1997.
Let us examine closely what has happened since that day after the election.
Supporters of Preston Manning invariably justify their trust in him
with comments like, "he built the party" or "it wouldn’t be Reform Party
of Canada without him." If we accept that as fact, logic tells us then
we must also accept any failings as his as well.
Currently, and I use the expression "currently" with all due consideration, supporters
of the United Alternative concept have begun to justify their belief because
"Reform Party of Canada can’t win in Ontario and Eastern Canada." These
supporters have also pointed out many times in the very recent past that
the Reform Party of Canada’s principles and policies are so good that other
parties including the Progressive Conservative Party have adopted them.
It was not at all unusual for Reformers to point out with pride that
Mike Harris got elected in Ontario with Reform Party of Canada policies.
Presuming this belief to be true, if Reform Party of Canada policies were
good enough for Ontarians at the provincial level, then why would our party
be rejected just a year or so later? There is only one conclusion, and
it is unpleasant for many to even contemplate honestly.
We have taken the easy path and have blamed the media, or any other handy
scapegoat to avoid the truth. Preston Manning has consistently been Canadians
most disliked political leader.
All of us working the telephones last election heard the refrain, "I like your
party, but I don’t like your leader." We made light of their flimsy stated
reasons, and we were not prepared to delve deeper. The result was a new
hair-do, laser eye surgery and voice training. There is absolutely nothing
wrong with any of those cosmetic aids. Many of us would do the same if
we could convince someone else to pick up the tab. No, the problem is that
it masked the real reason he is disliked: The furor over the Stornaway
issue should have tipped we Reformers off to a conclusion most Canadian
had already made. Simply put, it is a Lack of Trust in the man. It is an
excuse, but perhaps we Reformers were to close to the subject to examine
the issue thoroughly.
Let us look at a few facts. The press had a field day showing Jean Chretien
throwing a demonstrator to the ground on TV. Linking Chretien to the pepper
spraying of demonstrators is still a hot topic in the media. Despite being
portrayed as a violent bully and a supporter of dictators Chretien remains
at the top of best liked leaders. Could it be that the publics perception
of Preston Manning’s faults are even more serious than his? Denial is the
only option left.
I have already written a rebuttal to the original stated belief that by combining
RPC and PC votes a "Unite the right party" could become government. That
particular notion was dropped when the truth became known by even the more
gullible members, but it did accomplish what the camel wanted, a foot in
the tent. Lately an UA tactic has been to point out that the Liberals have
formed government with 38% of the popular vote. When questioned whether
any party; specifically ours, would refuse to become government with that
percentage of the vote, voices begin to mumble indistinctly.
As I stated earlier the most recent reason given to form a new party is that
Reform cannot win west of Manitoba. Perhaps the statement of an NDP MP
describes that mode of thinking best. "The Reform Party of Canada is the
only party in Canada that has given itself an non-confidence vote while
it is in opposition." We bridled at statements that we are not a national
party and argued vehemently against the very notion. Just where does that
admission by the party leader that it is impossible to win seats east of
Manitoba leave us? We have just agreed with the media and Joe Clark that
the Reform Party of Canada is not a national party.
For those among us that are still reluctant to look at our party’s constitution
or do not have access to the Constitution, I will sing my chorus again.
Article 13 a states: It is the duty of the Leader and the Chairman of the
Executive Council to uphold and enforce the provisions of this constitution.
It is a very simple sentence and grants no leeway or weasel room whatever.
Now we will turn to our statement of principles, which is part and parcel
of the very constitution the leader is obligated to uphold and enforce and read the first three:
1. We affirm our commitment to Canada as one nation, indivisible, and to our
vision of Canada as a balanced federation of equal provinces and citizens.
2. We affirm the need to establish a Triple-E Senate in the Parliament of
Canada - that is to say, a senate which is Elected by the people, with
Equal representation from each Province, and which is fully Effective in
safeguarding regional interests.
3. We affirm that political parties should be guided by stated values and
principles which are shared by their members and rooted in the political
beliefs of Canadians.
Is something unique equal? No, it is not, quite the opposite by my Oxford
dictionary and experience using the English language. Until such time an
assembly changes that principle Preston Manning has broken the first principle
by supporting the Calagry Accord and certainly changed Reforms stand on "Distinct Society" by doing so.
Can anyone recall Preston Manning speaking in support of an equal senate at
the United Alternatives conference? There were several attempts to have
the principle included at the conference and all were prevented from getting
on the floor.
Reformers at the 98 assembly were assured that a Triple-E Senate was one of the pillars
that an UA conference would be based on. Do you remember that promise Preston
Manning? If a leader cannot keep a promise to his own followers, does anyone
really wonder why our leader is disliked by so many Canadians?
Preston Manning has declared his candidacy for a political party with no stated
values or principles. When questioned about the lack of values and principles
the answer given is to the effect, "there is no party yet so there can’t
be any principles.". This is a simply matter of public record, and in doing
so he has broken the third principle.
