Not wildrose?
Thursday June 17, 2010
Phil Elder

As Alberta’s Progressive Conservative government continues to self-destruct, voters can at last imagine its defeat in the next election. The big question is, what should replace it?

A centrist combination of traditional opposition parties is preferable to the new offerings on display.

Many voters are dismissing the Liberal and New Democratic parties, as lacking the appeal or potential to challenge for government. This may be because of their leaders’ image, the ideological baggage implied by their names or history, or other reasons, but to date neither one, acting alone, has galvanized enough people to seem a credible alternative.

There is a buzz around the Wildrose Alliance Party whose unexpected victory in the Calgary-Glenmore by-election and its new leader have added a new possibility to the mix. Dissatisfied voters may be parking their support with Wildrose, but is Wildrose the best choice to replace the present government? I don’t think so.

Let’s take a look.

Even at this early stage, we can sense the territory the Wildrose party will occupy. It will involve a distrust of big government, following the old saw that “that government is best which governs least.” It will lean toward the “watchman state” and stress rights-based individual freedoms over utilitarian considerations of “the greatest happiness of the greatest number.”

Most Canadians prefer a judicious mix of these two ethical principles.

In its most extreme form, neo-conservatism is deeply misanthropic - for example, Margaret Thatcher denied there is such a thing as society. For her, Britain consisted of atomistic individuals who compete for everything, mediated only by criminal law and the great market levers of supply and demand. Planning is out, government regulation is minimal, people sink or swim, aided largely by charitable organizations (like food banks), not government-funded social security.

The implications for Alberta of such economistic market worship are ominous. There would be a continuation of the government’s hands-off approach to the timing or phasing of tar sands exploitation (even the new Minister of Energy questioned this approach, until the Premier hauled him into line), with mere exhortation to the oil patch to undertake voluntary improvement of environmental devastation. Apparently, royalties would be lowered even from their present unacceptably low level.

Albertans want political change, but is Wildrose the flavour of government they want? Even former Premier Peter Lougheed has called for the government to “act more like an owner” and the whole province has become infamous for its “dirty oil.” Surely we have the right to demand better reclamation and more environmentally benign exploitation technologies, instead of saying “the market will decide.” Surely too, we should ensure a manageable pace of phased development of new tar sands projects, instead of wringing our hands while continuing a destructive boom-and-bust cycle.

Most Albertans want a moderate, centrist government, one which is pragmatic but compassionate, not an ideologically driven one. We also want a mixed market economy, mediated by government regulation and the realization that some values cannot be monetized. We want sounder fiscal management, but not at the expense of savage social service cuts which will be borne by the most vulnerable. (For example, the present government’s slashing of mental health programs has added significantly to the unnecessary homelessness tragedy.)

The best way to get a competent and caring government is for the moderate opposition to stop splitting the vote and work together. After the 2008 election, there could have been 22 or more opposition members, instead of only 11, if the Greens, Liberals and New Democrats had agreed not to run against each other where only one of the three had a chance. (In twelve seats, the combined vote for these three parties exceeded that cast for the victorious Conservative.) This kind of cooperation would encourage the legion of non-voters to realize their vote can make a difference if they turn out to cast their ballot in 2012.

Moderate Albertans should pressure the Liberals, New Democrats and Greens (when they reorganize) to reach a “non-compete” agreement for a fair mix of exclusive candidacies. Conservatives have had their forty-year turn at government. It’s time for opposition parties with a track record to show Albertans that they’re ready to govern.

Any centrist new party initiatives would play into the hands of Wildrose and the Conservatives, because they would split that vote even more than before. The Tories and Wildrose must be licking their chops as they watch the Renew group's attempt to found a new "progressive" party.

The answer is electoral cooperation by Liberals, New Democrats, independent Greens and other centrists, who should let Wildrose and the Tories split the shrinking conservative vote and skate up the moderate electoral middle to victory.

Phil Elder is Co-chair of the Alberta Democratic Renewal Project (Calgary) and a former New Democratic Party candidate. He resigned from the NDP when it refused to cooperate with the Liberals and Greens.


-- Phil Elder

Column ID#: 132

**Opinions expressed by guest columnists do not necessarily reflect the views of Connect2Edmonton members, partners or sponsors.**

discuss