UCP DYSFUNCTION STARTS AND ENDS WITH KENNEY
Premier's bunker mentality poses very real threat to party's future, Todd Loewen writes.
When you're a hammer, everything and everyone looks like a nail. That, ladies and gentlemen, is my best description of Jason Kenney's leadership style.
It's a style I became all too familiar with over the past two years, and ultimately, it is what will hand Alberta's government back to Rachel Notley and the NDP.
In electing Jason Kenney as UCP leader in 2017, the wider conservative movement believed it finally had its golden knight. A leader's first duties are to unite the party and to inspire its members. In the early days, Kenney publicly showed flashes of brilliance in this regard. He often spoke about grassroots involvement, conservative values and restoring Alberta's economy.
Looking back, it's easy to recognize that, for Kenney, these words were just a means to an end. However, it wasn't until after the 2019 general election that I started to see the warning signs of what was to come.
Shortly following the election, I was selected by my fellow UCP MLAS to serve as chair of the UCP caucus. I was proud to accept. Following the success of the unity movement and the election campaign, our members were excited to get to work representing their constituents and looking forward to working with a government that pledged to actually listen to Albertans. However, it soon became apparent Jason Kenney had a fundamentally different idea regarding the role of caucus and its relationship with his leadership.
Jason Kenney would consult caucus in the way former premier Alison Redford consulted with Albertans, routinely only to inform once he had already made decisions. For him, caucus would not be a tool to provide valuable grassroots perspectives in crafting policy or a sounding board to keep his government on track. Instead, caucus became something to be managed, manipulated and threatened.
Regularly, Kenney would do the opposite of what the majority of MLAS recommended at caucus meetings. Constructive criticism was rarely taken in the spirit in which it was given, and the premier's response invariably veered into an attack, with any new ideas belittled and derided out of hand. I can personally attest to the premier berating one of my female colleagues to tears, while others were called to the “principal's office” (i.e., Kenney's Whip's office) and lectured. This type of leadership is not acceptable; not in any professional environment anywhere, let alone within the halls of government.
Over time, the premier's behaviour only escalated. Rather than allow me to do my job and set the agenda for caucus meetings as the members requested, the premier shifted that responsibility to a group of his appointed leaders. He also sought to limit the time provided for MLAS to raise concerns in caucus while simultaneously ignoring virtually all of what they had to say.
During caucus meetings with more than 60 MLAS, the premier felt that they should have no more than a total of 45 minutes to speak. There were times when I could negotiate up to an hour and a half of caucus speaking time, but even that was hardly enough with all the issues of concern. Caucus meetings are normally held no more than once a week, and sometimes there are weeks between them. On multiple occasions, caucus meetings were cancelled with little notice and no reasons given. Members were coming to me, asking what they could do, how they could break through the iron dome of this premier's control. I was at a loss.
I worked hard to fulfil my duty to my fellow UCP caucus members, but there comes the point at which you have to draw a line. These are the events that led to my decision to step down as UCP caucus chair and publicly call for new leadership.
I honestly hoped my decision would serve as a wake-up call, but what came next didn't surprise me in the least. At the very next meeting, Kenney made it abundantly clear that he would accept no public criticism, and I and another MLA were voted out of caucus.
Even with the UCP losing board members, lifelong conservative volunteers, donors and electoral support, this premier remains incapable of change.
At his core, Jason Kenney remains insecure and incapable of accepting criticism as anything less than heresy. His bunker mentality poses a very real and immediate threat to the future of the United Conservative Party. The last provincial election in Alberta was a referendum on Premier Notley's performance. The next election will be all about one man: Jason Kenney.
The UCP was created to unite around conservative values, not blind loyalty to one man.
For the good of the party, the unity of the conservative movement, and the future of the province, Kenney has to leave.
Constructive criticism was rarely taken in the spirit in which it was given, and the premier's response invariably veered into an attack, with any new ideas belittled and derided out of hand.