fbpx
Connect with us

Opinion

FILDEBRANDT: Rempel should run

Rempel-Garner would be well advised to take up the mantel of Maxime Bernier and run with a clear and principled platform on immigration reform, Western alienation, and scrapping supply management.

mm

Published

on

The federal Conservative leadership race has a massive vacuum as Peter Mackay moves down an open and easy road to the Tory crown. With Rona Ambrose and Brad Wall out, there is no big Westerner in the race. With Pierre Polievre out, there is no big conservative or libertarian in the race. Unless Erin O-Toole can reinvent himself as the standard bearer of both, the top job will be Mackay’s by default.

For a party with its core in the West and on the right, it’s more than a bit curious that there isn’t a major candidate from either. In this wide-open field, Michelle Rempel-Garner has a rare opportunity.

In the 2017 race, Rempel-Garner (then just Rempel) sat it out not just as a potential candidate, but refused to even endorse anyone. Since then, she has fashioned herself into a unique and adventagous position.

She has staked out clearly and unambiguously that she supports gay rights and has zero interest in re-litigating issues that even most social conservatives have moved past. But she has not pushed herself into social-justice warrior, social progressive territory. She has been a champion of gun rights, a more rational immigration policy, and most notably, the West.

Rempel-Garner has the opportunity to put herself forward as the libertarian candidate à la Maxime Bernier (who would be in pole position to win if he were still in the party). Like Bernier, she has the ability to be an open champion of gay rights without falling into the trap of condescendingly lecturing everyone with more traditional views.

That said, if this is her plan, she isn’t off to a great start.

Richard Décarie emerged from the wilderness in Quebec to proclaim on national television that being gay was a “choice,” and that “LGTBQ is a Liberal term.” Nobody outside of this man’s village had ever heard his name before, but he successfully managed to grab headlines with his best caveman impression.

Rempel-Garner rightfully came out against him, but went too far in calling for the party to ban him from even running as a candidate. As repugnant as his views might be to even many reasonable social conservatives, barring him from running is an authoritarian approach to a man best dealt with at the ballot box. A more democratic and libertarian approach would have been to declare that she will wipe the floor with him as a canidate. He likely wouldn’t exceed much more than one per cent of the vote in any case.

But this was all in one of Rempel-Garner’s famous Twitter rants, which are surprisingly unrehearsed and genuine. One can hold out hope that calling to ban him from running was more akin to one of Trump’s impulsive tweets than deliberately thought-out policy.

The gay rights quagmire aside, Rempel-Garner has built strong bridges with the firearms community. While most Canadians don’t own guns, Canada still has one of the most heavily armed civilian populations in the world, and they are overwhelmingly CPC and PPC voters.

Rempel-Garner would be well advised to take up the mantel of Bernier and run with a clear and principled platform on immigration reform, Western alienation, and scrapping supply management.

Bernier came within a hair of winning the 2017 leadership race, and earned nearly 300,000 votes nationally, despite fears of “vote splitting”. Voters in a general election do not translate one-for-one into voters in an internal party leadership race, but PPC voters were an unconventionally ideological electorate willing to risk the “vote-splitting” boogieman based on policy principles. With the PPC now in limbo after the election, a candidate serious about appealing to them could bring many into (and back into) the fold.

While Bernier did remarkably well in the West, he had a glass ceiling on account of being an accented Quebecer. Bernier became the first francophone since Sir Wilfred Laurier to win Alberta in a major electoral contest, but that glass ceiling stymied his ability to run up the score in compensation for his weaknesses elsewhere.

Rempel-Garner doesn’t face this. As the only notable Westerner in the race, she would have home field advantage from Victoria to Winnipeg. Bernier’s leadership campaign was the only one to champion Equalization reform with a direct eye to winning over Westerners. While that was seen as radical at the time, it is probably the bare minimum that many Westerners will demand from leadership candidates this time – if the race is competitive.

It’s difficult to name anyone elected in Ottawa right now who has spoken more passionately and openly about the Prairie fire of discontentment with federalism right now. With an ear close to the ground in her Calgary constituency, she knows that it will take more than politicians donning “I love Canadian Oil & Gas” sweatshirts to make Westerners feel at home in their own country right now.

Rempel-Garner has built considerable public profile and would be an instant big name, but a run as a conventional establishment Tory would most likely be fruitless. The race already has those. In the absence of a candidate able to energize the conservative, libertarian and Western wings of the party, Mackay will waltz to an easy victory.

Only Rempel-Garner knows what’s in her heart. If it aligns with the leadership vacuum, she should run. And she just might win.

Derek Fildebrandt is the Publisher of the Western Standard and President of Wildrose Media Corp.

Derek Fildebrandt is the Publisher, President & CEO of Western Standard New Media Corp. He served from 2015-2019 as a Member of the Alberta Legislative Assembly in the Wildrose and Freedom Conservative Parties. From 2009-2012 he was the National Research Director and Alberta Director of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. dfildebrandt@westernstandardonline.com

Opinion

PARKER: Kenney is the wolf in sheep’s clothing

“Alberta conservatives were deceived by one of Canada’s greatest political showmen. He bought a new blue truck, put on a cowboy hat, and sang us a Siren’s song.” – David Parker, Guest Columnist

mm

Published

on

Guest Column: David Parker was the Regional Organizer for Central Alberta on the 2017 Jason Kenney Leadership Campaign and GOTV Membership Chair of the Wildrose Unity Campaign

In the Book of Matthew, Jesus gives his followers a warning, “Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves” (Matthew 7:15). Whether you are a Christian, follow another creed, or simply a person who cares about freedom, we should always pay attention to those who claim to be prophets. Jason Kenney came to Alberta as a kind of secular prophet. He claimed that he would unite the Wildrose and PC parties, restore the Alberta Advantage, defeat Ottawa, and lead his people back to the proverbial Promised Land. 

Now, he puts preachers in jail, destroys small businesses, takes on record levels of debt, and fills our province with fear. 

Even worse, he is not a leader. His true talents lay in being the right-hand man to a leader; but he has proven himself unable to make clear decisions or even adhere to any real comprehensive set of principles. He claims to be a conservative; but he has his government buy up and subsidize private businesses with record levels of corporate welfare. He says he is a man of faith (and he probably is); but he crushes those who wish to practice their faith in a manner that disagrees with his government’s authoritarian policies. 

This is evident from many angles; but the most obvious example of it is how he ran nominations. He is an authoritarian. I was the campaign manager for Rita Reich’s nomination race in Lacombe – Ponoka (one of Kenney’s staunchest supporters during both the PC and UCP leadership races). He disqualified her over a single Facebook post that said Hitler was actually a socialist. That was it, it did not praise Hitler, it just said that Hitler was a socialist based on the fact that he led something called the National Socialist German Workers Party, and repeatedly referred to himself as a “revolutionary socialist”. He did this to a woman who had him to her house for BBQs with hundreds of people and who sold hundreds of memberships in support of him. Why? It was easier for him to simply disqualify her than let her challenge a sitting MLA in a nomination. 

The list of loyal people that Jason Kenney has used and discarded is long and full of many very talented people. The worst case of this is perhaps the story of Caylan Ford, who Kenney praised as his, “political love at first sight” and who the UCP used in much of their campaign digital and visual messaging. When she encountered a targeted and malicious attack from a bad actor within the conservative movement, he dumped her as a candidate and left her to bleed out under the wrath of the SJW mob. Kenney folds to cancel culture like a cheap house of cards. Just like he bows to Rachel Notley when she calls for more lockdowns.

Alberta conservatives were deceived by one of Canada’s greatest political showmen. He bought a new blue truck, put on a cowboy hat, and sang us a Siren’s song. We don’t have to keep believing him. His actions have shown us who he truly is. 

The mask is dropped. We can now see as clearly as day that the sheep is truly a wolf. 

Guest Column: David Parker was the Regional Organizer for Central Alberta on the 2017 Jason Kenney Leadership Campaign and GOTV Membership Chair of the Wildrose Unity Campaign

Continue Reading

Opinion

SCOTT: Supreme Court injustice allows Ottawa to rule all

“In one fell swoop the Supreme Court of Canada has gutted any meaningful provincial jurisdiction, creating an untenable situation that, if left to stand, will add unbearable tension to the federation.” Mike Scott

mm

Published

on

Guest Column from Mike Scott, Reform MP for Skeena, BC from 1993-2000.

The recent Supreme Court decision, which provides legal cover for the Trudeau government’s usurpation of provincial jurisdiction on carbon taxes, should be of immense concern to all Canadians.

In essence, the Supreme Court did not take issue with the argument put forward by three provinces that the federal government’s carbon tax is an intrusion into provincial jurisdiction. 

What the majority on the court did accept is the Liberal government’s argument that such an intrusion is justified under the rubric “Peace Order and Good Government (POGG)”.

On the face of it, this is an astounding conclusion.

POGG was never intended to be a substitute for clear, constitutionally delineated jurisdictions, nor a tool for constitutional monkey wrenching.

This is a clear case of an activist court seeking justification – no matter how thin – to endorse a progressive political agenda.

First, the court is clearly taking sides in a public policy debate and the reasons for judgement underscore this. Public policy arbitration was never intended to be the purview of the court and, by venturing into this highly charged political debate, it is signaling a willingness to take ever more activist positions.

Citizens don’t get to vote for judges – the prime minister appoints – but it is vital to the credibility of the institution that the court remains assiduously neutral. Jurisdictional disputes must be weighed against the metric of the constitution and adjudicated based on longstanding principles of law – jurisprudence – not creative or specious arguments.

Secondly, by accepting the federal government’s “POGG” argument, one can see the door has now been swung wide open for future intrusions. This is the slippery slope the Supreme Court’s decision has set us on. Going forward, all the feds need to do is invoke “POGG” – there will be no judicial recourse for the provinces.

This is exceedingly dangerous for confederation. As the provinces come to understand that their constitutional jurisdictions are trumped by POGG – with the collusion of the high Court – what recourse do they have?

There is already far too much political power concentrated in Ontario and Quebec. Adding the Supreme Court to the list of institutions lined up against the country’s regions is exceedingly provocative. When, on this continuum, do we reach a tipping point?

It is worth quoting the dissenting voice of Supreme Court Justice Russel Brown who brilliantly spells out the ramifications.

“It is not possible for a matter formerly under provincial jurisdiction to be transformed, when minimum national standards are invoked…This would open up any area of provincial jurisdiction to unconstitutional fedreral intrusion once parliament decides to legislate uniform treatment”

Supreme Court Justice Malcolm Rowe, also in dissent, cogently adds; 

“Canada’s proposed doctrinal expansion of national concern should be rejected because it departs in a marked and unjustified way from the jurisprudence of the court and, if adopted, it will provide a broad and open pathway for further incursions into what has been exclusive provincial jurisdiction. (the act) is not an exercise in cooperative federalism; rather, it is the means to enforce supervisory federalism”

The Supreme Court’s willingness to allow POGG as a means to justify abrogating a clear provincial jurisdiction, is a threat to the regions of Canada that is unprecedented. It is an egregious assault on one of the very foundational principles of our constitution – the division of powers between the provinces and the federal government. 

In one fell swoop the Supreme Court of Canada has gutted any meaningful provincial jurisdiction, creating an untenable situation that, if left to stand, will add unbearable tension to the federation.

All provinces – particularly those in the West with significant energy resources – should see the writing on the wall.

Guest Column from Mike Scott, Reform MP for Skeena, BC from 1993-2000.

Continue Reading

Opinion

HARDING: Saskatchewan budget could have been worse

“It should be a disappointing budget for fiscal conservatives, but compared to the plans laid out in Ottawa and Alberta, it could be a lot worse.” – Lee Harding

mm

Published

on

As lockdowns return with a vengeance, the backlash in the West is markedly stronger than in the East. Saskatchewan’s crackdown has been a bit lighter than in most provinces, and was the first last year to have a plan for how and when lockdowns would be lifted. While residents of so many provinces are under virtual house arrest, Saskatchewan is not quite so bad. 

That’s the same assessment we can give the budget. It’s the province’s highest deficit ever, but it could be worse.

Finance Minister Donna Harpauer forecasts $14.5 billion in revenues, a 6.1% increase from last fiscal year. Meanwhile, expenditures will rise to $17.1 billion, a 6.3% increase from 2020-21. Although that gap is ‘only’ $2.6 billion, that’s government math at work. In reality, provincial debt will rise by $4.2 billion this fiscal year, bringing the all-time debt total to $27.8 billion. 

COVID-19 lockdowns, of course, are the elephant in the room, shrinking revenues and adding expenses. The budget listed $1.5 billion in spending as “COVID-19 supports.” This includes $90 million more for the health sector response, $20.7 million for Saskatchewan schools, and $6.8 million for the northern isolation program. To call the rest of the list a pandemic response is a bit of a stretch:

  • $488 million in capital spending;
  • $285 million for the SGI rebate;
  • $200 million to clean up inactive oil wells;
  • $174 million in SaskPower rebates;
  • $66 million for the home renovation tax credit;
  • $64 million for the small business tax reduction.

Inactive oil wells have nothing to do with COVID-19, nor does handling them address any pandemic-related problem. The small business tax reduction might be welcome, but businesses that took losses or went bankrupt during the pandemic will not benefit whatsoever. The government is loading its “pandemic response” spend with mostly non-pandemic related items to justify its large deficit. 

On the positive side, capital spending might provide a few jobs, but it would have been required anyway. Home renovations have at least a little relevance, given the lockdowns have given people more reason to spend time there, or even cause to carve out a home office. The tax break will come in handy given that current lumber costs are through the roof (pardon the pun).

Other initiatives are low-key – a little more for this – a little more for that. In this respect, Moe is following in the Brad Wall tradition of a steady-as-she-goes approach where the government refuses to make large promises or grandiose ideas doomed to fail in a bureaucracy’s reverse-Midas touch; one where things turn to lead, not gold, as government gets bigger.

NDP leader Dr. Ryan Meili used terms like “half-measures” and “uninspiring” to describe the budget. He wants a jobs plan and more government money for those affected by the pandemic. The problem is that everyone has been affected by the pandemic. More government responses would only recycle taxpayers’ money through inefficient intrusions. Besides, one could argue that most government responses to the pandemic have been worse than the disease itself. 

Meili’s NDP, some unions, and the media have left some unduly afraid of the coronavirus. This provides a small political alibi for why the province has not lifted the lockdowns altogether. In Montana, Texas, Florida and many other states, gathering limits have vanished altogether, business curfews have stopped, and the mask mandate has expired. In North Dakota, restaurants are allowed 80% capacity, up to 300 people. Ballrooms have 75% capacity. Mask mandates expired in January.

If Saskatchewan acted like these neighbouring border states, it would become a haven of freedom and a place of sensibility in a country full of senseless restrictions. Ask what someone could do in a Saskatchewan springtime, and the answer “normal life” would be enough. Heck, even religious conventions could draw outsiders in to spend money (but maybe not much on liquor). By contrast, Alberta is building fences around churches and sends in the armed police, measures normally reserved for radical theocracies or authoritarian regimes.

Most citizens have a measure of respect for governments that keep their promises, regardless of what they are. By this measure, the Saskatchewan Party delivered, following through on commitments made in last fall’s election. The primary exception is that balanced budgets originally slated for 2024 have been pushed back to 2026-27. 

There is hardly a government on the planet – let alone Canada – that has stuck to a balanced budget plan over more than a four-year term in government. The political discipline just doesn’t exist. Moe might get to it eventually if the NDP remain relatively uncompetitive; maybe.   

It should be a disappointing budget for fiscal conservatives, but compared to the plans laid out in Ottawa and Alberta, it could be a lot worse. 

Lee Harding is the Saskatchewan Political Columnist for the Western Standard

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard New Media Corp.