Wildrose Party AGM 2013. The evolution continues.

wildroseI have been very involved in the Wildrose Party having joined the party while it was in it’s past incarnation as the Alberta Alliance Party which held a lone seat in the Alberta Legislature. Every year the party has learned new lessons (often in a hard way) and made changes to better reflect the needs and will of Albertans. This ability and willingness as a party to learn and evolve is what has led the party from being the tiny rump in the legislature in 2004, to serving as official opposition today, to very possibly becoming Alberta’s next government in 2016. Every year at every Annual General Meeting the party has made the changes required to better manage itself and to appeal to a broader range of Albertans. This year’s AGM was no exception to that trend.

With such explosive growth there will always come some growing pains. Last year it became evident that the party was suffering under some very serious managerial challenges on the executive level. This was rectified as members gathered in Edmonton and we had a nearly clean sweep of the Executive Committee. While policy was not on the table for alteration at last year’s AGM, discussion of our policies sure was. We took advantage of the gathering for some very frank self-evaluation which is what led to the great policy changes we made at the AGM in Red Deer this year.

Some policies we had were obsolete, some really simply made little sense (these will always build up in a policy set and need periodic flushing), and some policies were simply not acceptable to Albertans. We struck pretty much all of those this year.

The basis of the Wildrose Party is grassroots in nature. This means we are expected as a party to reflect the will of Albertans in policy and actions rather than dictate. To do that our policies must remain ever-fluid as the views of Albertans will constantly change as the social end economic environment around them does. The Wildrose Party is staying true to that principle. One needs only to look to the flaccid and almost non-existent Social Credit Party of Alberta to see what happens when a party stubbornly insists on clinging to outdated policies and principles.

I am going to start with the policies that we still had that reflected the “Alberta Agenda” otherwise known as the “Firewall Letter”. At the time when the Alberta Agenda was drafted by folks such as Stephen Harper and Ted Morton, Canada was in a period of unprecedented regional division. The Quebec Referendum of 1995 where secession was only avoided by a tiny margin was still very fresh in people’s minds and we had just come from the 2000 federal election where Jean Chretien won a strong majority through pandering to Quebec while demonizing Alberta. Albertans felt bruised, battered and defensive after that gross display of federal regionalism in electoral politics particularly in light of how successful it was.

In light of the political atmosphere 12 years ago, the Alberta Agenda made perfect sense to many (likely most) Albertans at that time. Times have changed dramatically since then though and it is quite clear that Albertans in general have little use for policies that are as potentially regionally divisive as those that stemmed from the Alberta Agenda.

While there was some debate on it, there was no contest when it came to the votes by members to strike the policies listed below from the Wildrose policy book.

Under Justice we had: “explore the feasibility of creating a provincial police force.”

The above policy is now gone for a number of reasons. To begin with, some people interpret that as a shot at the RCMP which while not perfect, is an iconic national police force that is well respected by most Albertans. It was pointed out that we as a province had just signed a 25 year contract with the RCMP for policing and we were reminded that we do have the Alberta Sheriffs. To put it simply, the policy was pointless as it stood and really, there is nothing to stop us from examining the feasibility of anything at any time. It is what we choose to act on that is important.

Under Economy: “withdraw from the Canada Pension Plan and create an Alberta Pension Plan. The Alberta Plan will offer at minimum the same benefits while giving Albertans control over the investment fund”

Personally I still don’t think that policy is all that bad. Quebec has opted out of the federal plan so it isn’t totally unprecedented. All the same, it has been difficult to explain the need for such a move to people at large and some pensioners have expressed fear that this may threaten their economic well-being. As with other policies as well, times have changed. Great improvements have been made to the management of the Canadian Pension Plan and the plan does not look like the economic dead end that it appeared to be 12 years ago. If there really is a need for a provincial plan, the proponents of it will have to make a better case to Albertans for it. For now, such a plan does not reflect the will of many Albertans thus does not belong in the policy book.

Under Democratic Reform: “propose a Constitution for Alberta, within the confines of Canadian Confederation.”

This is just a recipe for inter-jurisdictional conflict and endless time in the courts. Our federal constitution is in dire need of reform as it is when one looks at things such as the Senate scandal. Why would we want to mire things further with trying to draft a parallel constitution? When asked this, Wildrose members overwhelmingly agreed to get rid of this policy.

In writing I see that there is a gap in my notes on one policy resolution as to whether or not it had passed and I honestly can’t remember at this time. Either way, there was a resolution under economy that would have gotten rid of the policy for Alberta to provincially collect it’s own income tax and I am pretty confident that the resolution to get rid of that policy passed. I may be corrected on this though. Again like other Alberta Agenda type policies, it simply is not required, there is no demand for it and it is out of date.

Rest assured I still have a good deal of regionalistic jingoism within me as an Albertan. Until we can clean up our own act within the Alberta legislature both fiscally and democratically though, we are in no place to cast stones at federal policies right now. As a provincial party we need to remain focused on our local needs rather than getting distracted by perceived federal injustices. We will be much better placed to lecture the federal government and pursue changes from them if we form a provincial government and then lead by example through building a fiscally responsible and democratically fair Alberta first.

The Wildrose Party never really has had a large set of socially conservative policies but we certainly have managed to wear the mantle of extreme social conservatism thanks to the likes of Alan Hunsperger and a few others. We did have a couple stinkers in our policy book with that regard all the same though and we rightly cleaned them out.

One policy that caused us a great deal of grief was the one calling for the protection of “conscience rights” of healthcare professionals. This policy had always been most frustrating as it caused us untold grief as a party and it was calling for the protection of rights that are already protected under the Charter and under medical legislation. This policy was a bone tossed to hardcore pro-life folks years ago and it was well past time to get rid of it.

The move to strike that pointless policy was put forward by multiple constituency associations. In the first round of vetting the proposal to strike was supported by 95% of the room. When the move to strike the policy was brought to the floor it was overwhelmingly supported by the membership. It is now gone and never to return. I am still pissed that it was ever in our book to begin with. Lesson learned.

Another big policy problem for us on the social end was our policy on the Human Rights Commissions.

The policy used to read like this:  “amend the Human Rights Act to unequivocally protect the freedom of speech and freedom of the press and should disband the Alberta Human Rights Commission.”

I still think we should disband the Human Rights Commission as it provides nothing that a court of law doesn’t and it has been abused terribly as a way to stifle free speech with little in the way of legal controls such as presumption of innocence and rules of evidence.

People purposely used that policy to try and wrongly claim that the Wildrose Party wanted to abolish the Human Rights Act itself or opposed human rights in themselves. While this was nonsense, it led us to constantly have to explain ourselves on the distinction between the Human Rights Act and  the Human Rights Commission. This was nearly impossible to do in the heat of an election and on doorsteps. The policy simply was dragging us down right or wrong.

The drafted and overwhelmingly accepted new policy does not call for the abolition of the Human Rights Commission. The new policy does the next best thing in that it calls for changes to the rules for the commissions and explains the exact part of the act that needs reformation. The new policy is below:

amend the Human Rights Act to unequivocally protect the fundamental rights and freedoms in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by removing section 3 of the current Act and reforming the complaint process to introduce rules of evidence, the presumption of innocence, and protection from frivolous and vexatious claims.

The new policy is a solid statement affirming the protection of human rights while setting solid targets for the reform of the current system.

Many other policies were amended, deleted and added over the weekend. Much of that was simply housekeeping and helped tidy up our policy set.

There were some contentious propositions last weekend to change the party constitution last weekend as well. For some reason, a group of folks felt that we needed to consolidate the party’s powers more solidly within the leader’s office rather than within the executive. I wrote in detail on these proposals a few months ago when they first came out.

The most offensive of these proposals was the one that would have given the leader a direct veto over the selection of the party’s executive director and in the formulation of the powers of that role. It was heartwarming to see that resolution overwhelmingly shot down by the gathered membership. The vote was not even close.

While the membership was very open to the evolution of policies to better reflect the wishes of Albertans, the membership very clearly got their backs up en masse whenever something appeared to threaten the grassroots, bottom-up nature of the party. Every one of the proposals to centralize power in the party was overwhelmingly shot down by the membership. For those who claim they can no longer see the difference between the Progressive Conservatives and the Wildrose Party, this is one of the most glaring differences.

The Wildrose Party is led by the membership and that was made crystal clear last weekend.

Last weekend’s Annual General meeting of the Wildrose Party was a success by every measure. The meeting was well organized, the staff and volunteers did an excellent job, and of course most importantly the party took great strides forward in it’s evolution as a political organization that is preparing to govern Alberta. Members left the meeting feeling upbeat and unified and the message going out to Albertans was clear in saying that we as a party are listening and will change to best represent the province’s needs and wishes. We are true to our principles and are growing up.

The policies of the party are still not perfect (they never will be), but as long as we retain our open process of policy formulation and discussions we will continue to have the best set in the province. While some who feel a strong connection to some socially conservative policies may feel excluded, they really need to swallow a dose of reality and pragmatism.

The party used to actually have a policy against gay marriage back when I joined it nearly ten years ago. My wife Jane and I both found that policy regressive, offensive and unnecessary. Jane fought against some pretty dedicated supporters of that policy but won in the end and it was removed from the party policy book. Had that dog not been removed, the party would surely still be sitting at one seat in the legislature with no hope of forming government at best or even influencing it. Instead of turning our back to the party due to policies that we didn’t like though, we got involved and used the grassroots means to change those policies. If unfettered, grassroots policy formulation will always work as the collective wisdom of the membership guides the evolution of the party.

Last year the party focused on introspection and the reform of it’s internal management. This year the party focused on the policies and perceptions of the party. Next year I expect we will be focusing on bringing the party before the electorate again. We are in for an exciting couple years as we head towards finally forming a new government in Alberta.


16 thoughts on “Wildrose Party AGM 2013. The evolution continues.

  1. Shorter version: don’t like the PC party’s vaguely left-wing gruel? Now you can have WR’s vaguely left-wing gruel!

    WR is dead. There is only PC and PC redux.

  2. Most everyone will have to admit that this convention was a masterpiece of political maneuvering. The press coverage has been uniformly positive for Wildrose.

    The convention was also a masterpiece of political manipulation – not so much about policy as politics. You could hear it in many of the rationale for policy proposals…often the sole justification was “we won’t get elected” and nothing about the intrinsic merits of the proposal.

    Further, 30 seconds given to random people from the floor is not policy discussion, really. And observationally, it excluded seniors in the party who have trouble getting to the mike in 30 seconds, let alone formulating their impromptu thoughts. While the grey hairs held the majority of the audience, it was the young bucks at the mikes.

    The actual rationale was not included in print for any of the policy proposals, so the proponents had to explain the entire back story in 60 seconds with no questions or rebuttal. Hardly makes for good policy. Hardly reflects the will of the members, especially with “straw vote” results summarized by the moderator, at times with dubious accuracy.

    Finally, the ultimate in political manipulation with the special resolution on human rights. It was clearly voted down in the breakout session, as were numerous other policy proposals. Yet it was the only one to merit the invention of a special resolution from the floor. Who decided that? Where in the constitution is that? Knowing the politically explosive nature of that debate, what brave soul would stand up to the mike to even discuss the resolution, particularly in the face of the the prearranged lineup at the other mike led by the member from Airdrie and the array of tv cameras 10 feet away? It was not a forum for reasonable debate, rather it was a masterful piece of convention railroading.

    Agree that we now have some good people on EC. And Danielle is irreplaceable and excels at all she does, made clear again this weekend.

    PR outcome…wonderful. Grassroots, member-driven outcome…not so much.

  3. Well thanks to the WR(k)P’s latest convention I have one less party to vote FOR thus I am now restricted to negative voting instead of positive voting. In other words my vote will consider only who will do the least harm instead of who will do the most good. Right now they are all a wash so maybe I will just stay home.

    Speaking from my perspective the problem was never the policy but rather the lack of communication of said policy. If instead of drawing attention to a certain set of ‘hubcaps’ the party and its leadership had explained where it wanted to go and why, we would have a different party in power. Instead W(k)RP spent its time trotting out Jennifer and wound up looking like Les Nesman. BTW Alan Hunsberger did not cost W(k)RP the election. It was lost about the time the ‘hubcaps’ showed up on the bus. A non serious leader of a non serious party now flipping and flopping on to the rapidly discredited AGW. Brilliant move boys and girls absolutely brilliant. When asked of the W(k)RP now I echo Mr Carlson, “As God is my witness I thought turkeys, aka Wildrose, could fly”.

  4. Thoughtful commentary. I’ve been asked after the weekend, “So now what’s the difference between the Wildrose and PCs?” The answer is “We’re not them”. During the last election that was THE winning issue early in the campaign but in the latter part it focused exclusively on Wildrose and all its warts, perceived, imagined, bogus or otherwise. Hopefully now we can fight an election on the government’s record, credibility, honesty and integrity and not how Wildrose might destroy Alberta, perceived, imagined, bogus or otherwise.

  5. Wildrose has lost my support because they caved on climate change. What else will they change their tune on for political expediency? More campaigning from the right only to spring a left-leaning agenda once in power? Now I’m disenfranchised because there’s nobody who has my support.

  6. I see zero difference between the WR and PCs. You’ve watered down this party until there is no reason left to vote for you.

    Now I’m certain that in your arrogance you will lift your noses & sniff that the rubes, hicks, rednecks and socon looneys are not needed to win. Please do this.

    I am one of those socons you hate so much Mr. Morgan (not to mention a redneck as well). I am one of those you so reluctantly “throw bones” to. Tell you what, keep your bones. I don’t want them. I wil be sitting at home watching a rented movie the evening of the next election.

    Maybe you CAN win without my vote, maybe not. Who cares? It’s no longer any of my business.

  7. Great summation Cory. And a shout out to all those members of the original “Wildrose Party” members, just under two hundred of us, formed at that same Hotel a few years earlier that two years later merged with the Alliance Party to form the “Wildrose Alliance Party”. I saw many of them there this weekend. I recall the debate of or name that it should be all one name Wildrose and not Wild Rose as we were concerned it may be shortened to Wild.

  8. Great wrap up, Cory. Thanks for keeping us abreast of what happened at the AGM. I couldn’t be more pleased to see the WRP dump the controversial social policies that ended up costing the last election and kept them out of the urban areas. This is a true step forward to inviting ALL Albertans into the dialogue. Good job, WRP. These are positive and exciting changes!

  9. Thanks very much for the insight Cory. Well written. I learned a lot about your process and rationale.

    Alberta Party

  10. We now have a watered down PC Party that will lose much of its core membership. Good that the Policing item was struck down. Good that the Human Wrongs Commission was explained and that it should instead be changed to actually protect Albertans instead of being a front for the Secularist Left Wing Religion insurgents, but not good because of the degradation of the traditional social values which are designed to re-engineer the fundamental values that enabled Alberta to rise to the best socio-economic status in Canada. Much like the Human Wrongs Commission, it is one thing to be developing and supporting policies that are anti ‘something’, but it is another matter when certain social agendas by secularists are being promoted. There did not have to be a policy supporting or not supporting something like gay marriage, which is really an oxymoron.

  11. Premier Manning, who was one of the best Premiers this province ever had and who built this province to be what it is would turn over in his grave if he saw how the Conservatives have re-engineered Alberta, and hence the resulting corruption we are now seeing. Roman Empire destruction — here we come!

  12. from the national post “On Friday, Smith told reporters she is on side that climate change is real and that the human race has a role to play in causing it.”

    if there was ever a non-statement this is it. If climate change were not real we would still be in the Little Ice Age. Of course the human race has a role. How big a role is the real question and after 17 years of non-rising temps the IPCC still advocates a position unsubstantiated by any facts and now WR has bought into it?

    from the national post “This weekend, Wildrose delegates approved by wide margins two resolutions to take steps to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that lead to climate change and environmental damage through drought, rising water levels, melting glaciers and extreme weather.”

    anyone who knows anything understands that greenhouse gas emissions lag temp by 800 years. The WR position is excellent PR but clueless.

  13. Good summary and I found the information useful. I just read Paul Wells on Harper. Wildrose has completely revamped policy based on political expediency and desire for power. The commentary from members shows there is a disconnect between leader views and follower views. That bodes well for PC party. It is also interesting to note that the Wildrose speaks exactly in the same attack tones and negative name calling mode as their friends in Ottawa, the conservatives. It seems that the younger generation is absolutely not happy with that kind of nagging. Read the Atlantic Monthly about changing demographics and learn…..Could Albertans have just ONE political party that had some solutions or at least a solution based approach to our problems…..for example….what is your policy re education and the arts in this province? What insight do you have into solving the health care wait times? I could ask 20 million more questions. Let’s change opposition to mean something besides nagging about money, please.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.