The Conservative Party of Canada
Nice. I think I'll join the party (never joined a party before)
90% of PC's, and 96% of CA's. It is an undeniably great way for the party to start.
A few points:
Listened to David Pratt (Lib MP from Nepean-Carleton) in a CPAC interview (he was the Liberal observer) - he mentioned numerous times that this was an Alliance takeover and said the only policy issue the two parties had in common was military spending. The interviewer suggested that Pratt had his campaign talk in full gear already.
Well, the truth is that Pratt will have to start campaigning now if he hopes to be an MP in a few months. His riding is one of many in Ontario that will greatly benefit from the merger. Last election results:
The takeover talk is really popular amongst the anti-mergites. Mackay was very clear when this was brought up. It is a merger of equals. He again stated the rules of the initial policy convention and the leadership race that is about to begin - that each riding will be given equal weight in those two key processes.
The anti-mergites like to say that if Harper wins the leadership then it is proof of the takeover. It is pure fear mongering. Could 90% of PC delegates be fooled into such a relationship? Also consider that the membership of the party will rise from the current combined level of ~300,000 to probably something like 500,000 with most of the gains in Ontario where I suspect both parties have relative weak membership. The party will soon resemble the pre-Reform PC party in its membership and therefore it's inclusiveness.
Joe Clark presided over the party for nothing. No gains of any type were made during his time and membership is half of what is was when he was elected leader. I could really care less if he, Borotsik, and Bachand sit with the new party. If they aren't up for a debate in the Conservative party on policy then goodbye and good riddance - they had no policy in the last election other than 'We aren't the Liberals and we aren't the Alliance so vote for us.' The new party doesn't need that kind of vision.
90% of PC's, and 96% of CA's. It is an undeniably great way for the party to start.
A few points:
Listened to David Pratt (Lib MP from Nepean-Carleton) in a CPAC interview (he was the Liberal observer) - he mentioned numerous times that this was an Alliance takeover and said the only policy issue the two parties had in common was military spending. The interviewer suggested that Pratt had his campaign talk in full gear already.
Well, the truth is that Pratt will have to start campaigning now if he hopes to be an MP in a few months. His riding is one of many in Ontario that will greatly benefit from the merger. Last election results:
| Michael Green | Canadian Reform Conservative Alliance | 22,310 | 37.37
|
| Bill Knott | Progressive Conservative Party of Canada | 9,536 | 15.97
|
| Isobel McGregor | The Green Party of Canada | 805 | 1.34
|
| Lester Newby | Natural Law Party of Canada | 118 | 0.19
|
| Craig Parsons | New Democratic Party | 2,223 | 3.72
|
| David Pratt | Liberal Party of Canada | 24,570 | 41.16
|
| Jacques Waisvisz | Canadian Action Party | 131 | 0.21
|
The takeover talk is really popular amongst the anti-mergites. Mackay was very clear when this was brought up. It is a merger of equals. He again stated the rules of the initial policy convention and the leadership race that is about to begin - that each riding will be given equal weight in those two key processes.
The anti-mergites like to say that if Harper wins the leadership then it is proof of the takeover. It is pure fear mongering. Could 90% of PC delegates be fooled into such a relationship? Also consider that the membership of the party will rise from the current combined level of ~300,000 to probably something like 500,000 with most of the gains in Ontario where I suspect both parties have relative weak membership. The party will soon resemble the pre-Reform PC party in its membership and therefore it's inclusiveness.
Joe Clark presided over the party for nothing. No gains of any type were made during his time and membership is half of what is was when he was elected leader. I could really care less if he, Borotsik, and Bachand sit with the new party. If they aren't up for a debate in the Conservative party on policy then goodbye and good riddance - they had no policy in the last election other than 'We aren't the Liberals and we aren't the Alliance so vote for us.' The new party doesn't need that kind of vision.
