New party still has lots left to do
Third of four parts
The most straightforward answer to the question of what comes next for the United Conservative Party is: lots. In very short order the party must conduct a successful leadership contest, establish an organizational structure and adopt a guiding set of policies based on the unity agreement’s founding principles.
By most objective measures, the founding principles are a solid basis for building a moderate conservative policy framework from which an appealing campaign platform can be crafted. But only if the UCP can avoid two menaces that have inhibited conservative success for a generation: populism and social conservatism.
Populism has appealed to Alberta voters and their most entrepreneurial political leaders throughout its history. The United Farmers rode a populist wave to government in 1921 only to be ousted by the populist Social Credit in 1935. Both effectively used populist election platforms to win votes even if they had less success in implementing many of their campaign commitments once in government. More recently, Preston Manning built the federal Reform Party in part by institutionalizing populist mechanisms within the party’s organizational structure, including the membership’s ability to tightly control policy determination, as well as promising to allow voters to decide important public policy measures by way of referenda. Both proved problematic. The first by hampering the leadership’s ability to react to changing circumstances while the latter proved electorally toxic.
Unlike in the early decades of the 20th century when populism helped get votes, promising referenda to the public in an election platform builds a populist trap for parties campaigning in the 21st century. Witness Stockwell Day’s dilemma during the 2000 election. As Alliance leader, he inherited Reform’s referenda policies which acted as a trap while campaigning. When asked to stake out a position on important moral issues, he could not. All he could say was that the Alliance would defer to the will of the people. But since the people hadn’t yet been consulted, the party couldn’t adopt a firm position, leaving it defenceless when its opponents proclaimed outlandish possible outcomes as they quickly filled the policy void with negatives.
The populist trap also exposed Reform/Alliance to accusations of harboring a “hidden” social conservative agenda. This combined with the party’s internal populism which allowed members to propose, debate, and in most cases ultimately defeat social conservative policy proposals. But in the absence of firm positions until the people were consulted, simply airing social conservative positions on moral issues allowed opponents to tar the entire party as a bastion for intolerance. When party members, candidates or even leaders make comments that reinforced the negatives, such as happened to Wildrose during the 2012 election “lake of fire” incident, the electoral results are disastrous.
Although social conservatives are an integral part of any conservative voting coalition, all conservative parties today must clearly demonstrate there is a line across which they will not allow social conservatives to drag the entire party. Essentially, social conservatives need to be told that they are welcome in the coalition. Indeed, they will get a great deal of what they want: a smaller, less expensive and less intrusive government. But mainstream Alberta voters also need to be reassured that by electing the UCP they will not be simply replacing left-wing social engineering with right-wing moral engineering. UCP policy and its 2019 election platform must make that clear at the same time it doesn’t unnecessarily constrain its first leader from developing a workable and marketable election platform appropriate for circumstances two years down the road and therefore yet unknown.
Both front-running UCP leadership candidates, Jason Kenney and Brian Jean, have learned the lessons about social conservatism. Both are personally socially conservative but apprenticed under Stephen Harper who clearly demonstrated the electoral utility of purging social conservatism from the federal Conservative party. Both Jean and Kenney have taken measures to reassure voters the new UCP will not be hijacked by a social conservative fringe.
Both are, however, struggling with populism. Jean launched his campaign by embracing referenda, quickly building the foundations of his own populist trap. UCP members would be wise to reflect on how far down that road they wish to follow him. Alternatively, Kenney has decided to eschew making specific policy pronouncements, instead deciding to concentrate on important membership recruitment matters. He has nevertheless implied that he will defer to the still-unknown party policy, leaving a policy void and thereby opening the door to having that vacuum filled with negatives by his opponents prior to him having the chance to fill it with positives.
Only time will tell which is the most effective approach to win a majority of UCP members’ votes in the Oct. 28 leadership contest. But the UCP and its new leader must address both its populist and social conservative positions prior to preparing a 2019 election campaign platform.