The Trudeau Liberals unwrap a new seat

Monday’s by-elections can be viewed as a win for the governing Liberals.  They held two seats and won a third from the Conservatives.  In answer to my November 20th post, the voters in South Surrey-White Rock gave like Santa to the Liberals and passed out votes like Scrooge to the Conservatives.

b5kff47cqaeq2op

That present is from South Surrey-White Rock

By-elections are a great opportunity to send a message.  If the government is screwing up, why not vote against them and shake it up?  Evidently, there’s not a lot of voter anger in South Surrey-White Rock.

In Monday’s by-elections, the only riding where the Liberal popular vote actually went up was South Surrey-White Rock, which was the only place the Conservative vote went down.

Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 10.39.35 AM.png

Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives can take some consolation that they reduced the margin-of-victory in Scarborough-Agincourt from 13.9% to 8.9%, and they scraped themselves off the basement floor in Newfoundland, though they haven’t found the stairs yet.  In Saskatchewan, like Alberta, they ran up the score, which is nice, but not very meaningful.  As for the Liberals, I doubt they are too concerned about the ridings where they slipped.  In all three cases, the result looked inevitable, and tough to motivate voters in that case.

South Surrey-White Rock should sting a bit for the Conservatives.  This was a safe seat in 2011 and for decades before that.  In 2011, a backbench Conservative MP edged the Liberal 53% to 19%.  That’s a remarkable turnaround in six years.

The notion of a Liberal win was unthinkable in the summer of 2015.  Liberal strategists had a hard time believing the numbers they were seeing from that riding, against Dianne Watts no less.  They almost beat her despite sacking their candidate halfway through the campaign.  The Liberals had no history of winning there.  They couldn’t even win in Surrey during Trudeaumania I when they took two-thirds of the seats in BC – and the Liberal candidate was “nursery man” Bill Vander Zalm.  Trudeaumania plus the Zalm?  How could they lose?

Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 11.03.39 AM.png

So, there has been a change in South Surrey-White Rock and it remains to be seen if it will be a sea change.   Liberals may have a bit of deja vu when it comes to winning federal by-elections in BC.  In 1998, a Reform MP resigned in Port Moody-Coquitlam and, very similar to South Surrey-White Rock, the Liberals ran a popular mayor, Lou Sekora, while the Reform Party ran a parachute candidate from Langley.  Sekora won in a riding the Liberals had not held in a long, long time.  In 2000, a young whippersnapper by the name of James Moore defeated Sekora and went on to hold the seat for 15 years.

Screen Shot 2017-12-12 at 11.39.49 AM.png

Lou Sekora: lost to a young whippersnapper

Let’s not forget about the NDP.  In Monday’s by-elections, their share of vote dropped in all four races.  While none of these seats were NDP targets, they certainly did not demonstrate any grassroots enthusiasm for the new NDP leader.

Congratulations to Gordie Hogg and the Liberals.  We’ll see if success in South Surrey-White Rock is fleeting or not.  Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives did not collapse, on the contrary, they made some incremental progress.  But where it mattered, they could not rally their base to withstand a vigorous effort by the Liberals.  Now that the government is in the back nine of its mandate and showing its resilience, Scheer will not be able to count on the government losing the election – he will have to try to find a way to win it.  A tall order for any Opposition.

Advertisements

Tonight’s by-elections will be indicator of Trudeau government’s resilience

There have been seven by-elections in Canada in 2017 so far, with four more to come today (December 11th), including a hotly contested race in South Surrey-White Rock.

trudeau-byelection-20171202

Will Justin Trudeau and Gordie Hogg be cheering tonight?

Are there any trends?  Any signs that may predict outcomes tonight?

First, you have to look at Alberta separately.  Three Conservative titans resigned their seats – Rt. Hon. Stephen Harper, Hon. Jason Kenney, and Hon. Rona Ambrose.  One might think the loss of those candidates would depress results in a subsequent election.  Wrong. The Conservatives scored over 70% in each seat, surpassing already strong 2015 numbers.

Conservative vote in Alberta byelections
2015 2017 DIFF
Calgary-Midnapore 66.7% 77.2% 1.16
Calgary-Heritage 63.8% 71.5% 1.12
Sturgeon River-Parkland 70.2% 77.4% 1.10

Moving on to Quebec where there have been two by-elections, it’s a very different story.  The Liberal Party held most of its vote in St. Laurent (Stephane Dion’s seat), and in October, doubled its vote in Lac St. Jean to take a Conservative seat held by Denis Lebel.  Unlike Alberta where support for the Blues was amped up, les bleus went the other way in Lac St. Jean, dropping from 33.3% to 25.0%.  Les oranges dropped in Lac St. Jean from 28.5% and second place to 11.7% and fourth.

Liberal vote in Quebec byelections
2015 2017 DIFF
St. Laurent 61.6% 59.1% 0.96
Lac St. Jean 18.4% 38.6% 2.10

Finally, there were two by-elections in Ontario in 2017.  In both cases, the Liberals only retained about 90% of their 2015 vote, but nevertheless held a majority.

Liberal vote in Ontario byelections
 2015  2017  DIFF
Ottawa Vanier 57.6% 51.3% 0.89
Markham-Thornhill 55.7% 51.4% 0.92

Overall, it’s a pretty good result for the governing Liberals thus far.  Holding on to their own seats while taking one in Quebec from the Conservatives.  Running up the scoreboard in Alberta does little for the Conservatives.  Their numbers in the 2015 election were already through the roof – the Harper Conservatives had 375,000 more votes than the provincial PCs and Wildrose combined.  The Conservatives are in danger of becoming ‘Alberta Island’ if its numbers drop in the rest of Canada but increase in Alberta.

Here are the 2015 election results for the four by-elections:

2015 results LIB CPC NDP
Bonavista-Burin-Trinity 81.8% 10.1% 7.3%
Scarborough-Agincourt 51.9% 38.0% 7.9%
Battlefords-Lloydminster 16.5% 61.0% 17.6%
South Surrey-White Rock 41.5% 44.0% 10.4%

Bonavista and Battlefords both appear very comfortable for the Liberals and Conservatives respectively.  It will be interesting to see if Battlefords-Lloydminster follows a similar pattern as the Alberta by-elections.

Scarborough-Agincourt is tighter and will be the first real test of Jagmeet Singh and whether he has any game in the Toronto outskirts.  You would think the NDP could do better than 7.9%.  That could help Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives, and a win there would be huge, but they are certainly downplaying expectations.

I looked at South Surrey-White Rock in detail a few weeks ago.  A strong candidate for the Liberals and lesser-known candidate for the Conservatives is the reverse scenario compared to the 2015 election.  With a thin margin, the Liberals could prevail this time on the candidate match-up alone – everything being equal.  Two years into a mandate, you would think this would be a vulnerable time for any government.  Given the prolonged controversy over small business taxation in the summer and early fall, one might also think that that issue would hurt the Liberals in the upper-income, professional enclave of South Surrey-White Rock.  We won’t know until the polls close if it did – and if Hogg does win, one can ask, “What was that all about?” – a big national issue that had no teeth.

I was surprised that the Conservatives reached back to 1993 to attack Hogg on an issue that had been dealt with conclusively in his provincial by-election win in 1997, when his main opponent was a BC Reform candidate.  That appeared to be the move of a campaign running out of steam.

A Liberal win tonight in BC – and in Scarborough – will be an impressive show of strength by a mid-term government.  Not a guarantee of future success, but a sign of resilience, and an indicator of the magnitude of the challenge facing Andrew Scheer.  His pathway to winning the next election will be made more difficult not by the actual reality of a by-election loss, but by the perception of that loss among his own supporters (I’ve been there).  He’s going to have to demonstrate how he can build his party’s market share beyond Alberta and its diminishing strongholds across the country.  But hey, low expectations can be very beneficial (I’ve been there too).

Jagmeet Singh will also take away some lessons tonight.  He hasn’t been on the job long, but he did enjoy considerable positive publicity in the lead up to his election.  Can he translate that into votes?  You would think the NDP should get a little bump with Singh in place.

Tonight’s results will be another marker on the road to 2019 and, so far, the electoral road has looked fairly smooth for the Trudeau Liberals.

The Vancouver Fog and the future PM

There has been a thick fog enveloping Vancouver this week.  My mind always turns back to stories my mother has told me about the Vancouver fog in the 1940s.  The fog, she says, was so thick that my grandfather would have to get out of the car to find the bridge so that they didn’t drive into the Fraser River.  You literally could not see the hand in front of your face.

I’m not an air quality expert, but this photo from the City of Vancouver archives (1936) of the sawmills on False Creek tells a large part of the story.   In weather conditions like today, the pollution would exacerbate the fog.  Add to that home heating – people burned coal and wood to heat their homes.  Despite the huge increase in population over the years, natural gas and electricity have led to huge improvements in air quality.

d6aac711-c905-4e3d-9507-9f22799668a1-a75580

CVA: 260-561 (James Crookall photographs)

Which leads me to the story of the Vancouver fog and the future prime minister.  Round about the time my mother was sitting in the car waiting for my grandfather to find the bridge, John Turner was attending the University of British Columbia.  He was a phenomenon.  The phrase “Big Man on Campus” was probably  invented for him.  Paul Litt’s biography of Turner, Elusive Destiny, chronicles his early years at UBC and his triumphs in academia, sports, and student life.  He was awarded a Rhodes scholarship upon graduating from UBC.

turner_biopg1According to the UBC Sports Hall of Fame, Turner was one of the three fastest men in Canada between 1947 and 1949.  He led UBC to two Pacific Northwest Conference track championships and his Canadian-best in the 100 and 200 yards qualified him for Canada’s 1948 Olympic team. In June of 1947, at a track meet in Seattle, Turner recorded the fastest time by a Canadian in the 100 yard dash, covering the distance in a UBC record 9.8 seconds.

What does this have to do with fog?

In 1948, at the peak of his athletic career, Turner was on his way home from attending a football game in Bellingham.  He lived near UBC on Vancouver’s west side. Paul Litt tells the story in Elusive Destiny:

As they passed over a level crossing on Arbutus Street in Vancouver, a train appeared out of the heavy fog. “We were lucky we were only hit in the front of the car and not in midship,” Turner recalled. “I saw this light coming out of nowhere and was able to turn and roll with the train as it hit us.” The train was not moving rapidly, but it still drove the car a hundred feet down the track. Turner’s left knee was smashed. Surgeons were able to piece it back together, but his leg muscles atrophied as he waited for the bone to heal. By the time he could run again, it was too late to train for the Olympic trials in Vancouver that June. He showed up anyway and gave it a shot, but his knee gave way and he collapsed on the track.

The Vancouver fog dealt a punishing blow to Turner’s Olympic hopes, but he would go on to have an outstanding career in politics and serve as prime minister – and the first PM with a British Columbia pedigree.  He represented Vancouver-Quadra for 9 years and must have cursed the Arbutus Line every time he crossed it.

So, enjoy the fog today, it’s not as bad as it used to be.  And while the trains may be gone, watch out for those bikes on the Arbutus corridor!

Will voters be in a giving mood in South Surrey-White Rock by-election?

A federal by-election has been called for December 11th in South Surrey-White Rock, which will provide an interesting read of the political thermometer two years out from a general election.

Traditionally, this area has been inhospitable to Liberals.  In fact, I can’t remember the last time the South Surrey-White Rock area had a federal Liberal MP – not in my lifetime.  They took a pass on Trudeaumania (and candidate Bill Vander Zalm!) in 1968, electing an NDPer. At that time, Surrey and White Rock were encompassed in one riding – how times have changed.  Since 1974, the Conservatives have owned the riding.  Voters were Scrooge-like toward my old friend Reni Masi (later elected as MLA) who ran twice as a Grit in the area, but gave like Santa when it came to voting for Progressive Conservative Benno Friesen.

Screen Shot 2017-11-20 at 2.00.57 PM.png

On December 11th, will South Surrey-White Rock voters continue to be Scrooge-like toward the Liberals?  Or give like Santa?

Gordie Hogg tried in 1993, unsuccessfully, as a Chretien Liberal, losing to upstart Reformer Val Meredith.  MLA Wilf Hurd resigned his seat to try it on as a Fed Lib in 1997 and lost; Hogg then took Hurd’s seat in the Legislature and served for 20 years.

Will this time be different?  After a brief two-year stint in Ottawa, Conservative Dianne Watts resigned her seat to contest the BC Liberal leadership.  If successful in her quest, she will be on a very short list of people who have served as Mayor, MP, and MLA.  In the meantime, Gordie Hogg may do the same if elected on December 11th, becoming the first to do so since (I think) Gerry McGeer, the former mayor of Vancouver, who accomplished that feat, plus senator.

The Liberals are bullish and must be encouraged by not only Hogg’s candidacy, but a strong turnout for PM Justin Trudeau last week in White Rock.

Let’s take a look at 2011 and 2015 numbers for BC and  South Surrey-White Rock:

Screen Shot 2017-11-20 at 1.38.29 PM.png

The Conservatives hung on in 2015 – barely.  Despite Dianne Watts’ profile as longtime mayor of Surrey, the Conservative vote dropped from 52.9% to 44%.  Taking a closer look, however, it appears that Watts ran ahead of the curve, salvaging the seat.  In 2011, the Conservatives ran 1.16X the BC popular vote, whereas in 2015, they were 1.47X ahead.

The Liberals were shot out of a cannon in 2015 compared to 2011.  The Liberal vote in BC increased 2.63X, but in South Surrey-White Rock, the gain was only 2.18X.  Had the trend been replicated there, Judy Higginbotham would be the MP.  There are extenuating circumstances – Judy wasn’t supposed to be on the ballot.  The longtime Liberal warrior jumped in when the initial candidate was ejected mid-campaign for a since-forgotten gaffe.  Arguably, the Conservatives benefited from that bit of luck.  At the outset of the campaign, it must have looked like they would cruise to victory with Watts and, by the end, they were in an unexpected fight of their life.  It’s one of the few toe-holds they have left in Metro Vancouver.

With the Liberals leading the Conservatives by about five points in the BC popular vote in 2015 but losing this seat, it stands to reason that the Liberals need to be as popular relative to the Conservatives in BC now in order to win the by-election, and trust that Gordie Hogg’s profile in the area lifts them a few additional points over former MP Kerry-Lynne Findlay, who has parachuted in.

The NDP is not a factor here.  I’m sure that strategists at Big Orange are devising ways to drive up Justin’s negatives in the by-election to aid the election of a Conservative.

The latest public polls (caveat emptor) are contradictory regarding federal party standings in BC.   Angus Reid has a four-point CPC lead; Nanos has a six-point Liberal lead; and Abacus has an 11-point Liberal lead.

Then there is turnout.  The 2015 general election had a 75% turnout.  It was a high turnout election to begin with, but in South Surrey-White Rock, they have voting circled in their calendars – it’s an event.   I would expect a drop in turnout like any by-election but not as steep a drop as other places.  Older people will disproportionately vote in a by-election compared to a general election (I have no data at my fingertips to back up this claim, but I think it’s true).  That should give the Conservatives a bit of help.

The Upshot:

The Conservatives had a stronger candidate in 2015 relative to 2011, and the Liberals had candidate trouble.  The Conservatives over-performed; Liberals under-performed.

The Liberals have recruited a strong candidate in 2017; the Conservatives have a good candidate but she is not personally well-known in the riding.  Advantage: Liberals.

The atmosphere in BC is the wildcard.  The Conservatives have a new leader in Andrew Scheer – are they better or worse off than 2015?  Likely worse off as Scheer is not very well-known or defined.  CPC has to make the by-election ballot question about the Liberals and Trudeau, not about local representation.

To that end, just how damaging are the Morneau-small business tax changes?  This riding should feel this issue more than most – it’s full of upper income, white collar professionals with a small ‘c’ conservative tilt.  Many of the people who voted Liberal last time in South Surrey-White Rock are the type of voters that Scheer needs to attract.  If anything, this by-election is a litmus test as to whether that issue – which dominated federal political headlines in August-September, has any teeth at the ballot box.

In three weeks, we’ll know if the voters are feeling like Santa or Scrooge when it comes to the mid-term government.  For the Liberals, this is a seat they never win so they have little to lose so long as they manage expectations.   For the Conservatives, it will be tough loss for a new leader, on the heels of losing a Quebec seat to the Liberals recently, though also an opportunity for momentum for a new leader trying to get established.  Right now, the Conservatives look like they have their work cut out for them.

 

 

 

 

Rafe Mair: an agenda setter

It’s impossible to blog about politics in BC without acknowledging the passing of Rafe Mair.

While his radio career stretched three decades, Rafe’s radio hey-day was the 1990s.  He set the agenda on major issues.  His editorials were must-listen radio for anyone involved in politics.  Back in those days, you had to have the dial at CKNW 98 during Rafe’s editorial or you were going to miss something.  Either you would cringe, have a sigh of relief, or cheer – particularly if the other guys were being gored that day.  He left an indelible mark on the Meech Lake and Charlottetown Accord debates.  Where he arguably was the difference-maker was stopping the Kemano Completion Project, advanced by Alcan, in the mid 1990s.  His advocacy was followed by then-Opposition Leader Gordon Campbell opposing the project, which made it virtually impossible for the NDP government to lend its support.

Screen Shot 2017-10-10 at 8.51.28 AM.pngThe CKNW talk radio line-up of the day was impressive.  Rafe set the agenda, but he was followed by Bill Good, then later on by Phillip Till.  Rafe’s passing highlights the current day fragmentation of our media landscape.  There is no dominant medium, nor any journalist today, that has the bully pulpit like Rafe did, or Jack Webster before him.

In politics, Rafe, then a Liberal, helped organize the “majority movement” during the Barrett years, where the free enterprise side of the spectrum rallied forces, ultimately, behind Bill Bennett and the Social Credit Party.  Rafe found his way onto the ballot in 1975 and served under Bennett for six years.  His departure in 1981 was highly significant as it proved to be a seminal moment in BC politics.  The Socreds had modernized its party apparatus and surprised the NDP in a bellwether seat.  No governing party had won a by-election since 1981 until Christy Clark did so in 2011, and the by-election Rafe created in 1981 sowed the seeds of Socred victory in the 1983 general election.

It’s noteworthy that Rafe’s post-politics career had an early setback.  Originally signed on as a radio host with CJOR in 1981, he was supplanted by former NDP Premier Dave Barrett a few years later and relegated to the midnight shift on CKNW.  He worked his way back up the line-up all the way to the top.  At that time, he was in his 50s and had to reinvent himself.  It must have taken a lot of perseverance and humility.

On a personal note, my parents knew Rafe from high school and UBC.  My Dad and Rafe ran against each other for head of the Zeta Psi fraternity and engaged in many political debates, I’m told.  In 1991, the Rafe Mair Show invited the youth wings of the Socreds and the NDP onto their show in the pre-election period.  As a young organizer for Gordon Wilson’s BC Liberals, I was outraged! Why weren’t the Liberals invited? (Of course, we had no seats in the Legislature at the time).  So I did what anyone would do in this situation, I faxed Rafe Mair and demanded to be in the show.  He agreed.  Along with my team of young Liberals – Bruce Young and Christy Clark – we appeared on his show from the CKNW studio at the Plaza of Nations.  I was nervous and absolutely terrible, intimidated by the legendary host.  At the first commercial break, I mentioned who my parents were and, at that point, Rafe’s tone changed and took it easy on us.  Thanks for that Rafe.  Years later, my father passed away, and though he and my Dad had not kept in touch very much over the years, he was kind enough to note his passing on his show, a kind gesture of a broadcaster at the top of the heap, remembering an old friend from days gone by.

 

Throne Speech: what was that all about?

 

From May 9th to June 28th, BC politics had some of the wildest, uncertain times – even by BC standards.  I wrote about my experience with the Green negotiations and the throne speech in the Vancouver Sun (August 19th print edition).

govt house mm cc.jpeg
FILE PHOTO Premier Christy Clark arrives with her Chief-of-Staff Mike McDonald before a provincial cabinet swearing-in ceremony at Government House in Victoria, B.C., on Monday, June 12, 2017. CHAD HIPOLITO / THE CANADIAN PRESS

On June 22, Lt. Gov. Judith Guichon delivered the final Throne Speech of the Christy Clark B.C. Liberal government. It was the exclamation mark on a turbulent six week period of intra-party negotiations, internal caucus discussions and a genuine attempt to gain the confidence of the House and the confidence of the people of B.C. in the event the parties were sent to the polls for a makeup summer election.

Throughout the period following the May 9 election, I was at the heart of discussions. At Premier Clark’s direction, I worked with our negotiating team and staff to identify common ground and innovative solutions. Despite productive and vigorous discussions, less than one hour before our planned final session, the B.C. Greens pulled the plug and never entertained a formal proposal.

With Green becoming Orange, the B.C. Liberals regrouped. At first, the prevailing sentiment was that time in the ‘penalty box’ wasn’t a bad thing. But as time wore on, and the implications of what the NDP-Green pact would do to parliamentary traditions, let alone the economy, the approach changed to ‘putting six attackers on the ice.’

Coming out of the negotiations, we recognized that our proposal contained elements that voters would strongly support and they could all be accomplished within a balanced budget and provide tax relief.

In the background was the unpredictability of B.C. Green party leader Andrew Weaver. Today, we now know he is prepared to prop up the Horgan NDP government at any cost. In June, we believed we needed to test the strength of the NDP-Green pact, which was predicated on the false promise of the NDP attracting a Liberal to serve as Speaker.

Throughout early and mid-June, Weaver privately expressed his misgivings about his course of action. Some observers suggested that we fold our tent and take defeat with “dignity.” Hogwash. Our responsibility was to find a way to govern, especially given that we hold the most seats. You don’t quit before the whistle is blown.

As June progressed, the B.C. Liberal Caucus met several times to consider Throne Speech content. The full caucus discussed ideas and every member was invited to submit ideas — and most did with many of the ideas incorporated.

The Throne Speech reaffirmed the core values that unify B.C. Liberals: Fiscal responsibility, economic growth and job creation, a fair labour relations climate and bridging urban and rural B.C.

Where the Throne Speech diverged from the May election platform was around four key areas where voters felt we had under-delivered.

Child care and early childhood education, a fairer society, communities and transit, and the environment.

There were many other proposals, notably, campaign finance reform.

The government issued a blunt mea culpa. Passing political finance reform on the floor of the Legislature in June should have been a no-brainer for the Greens.

Instead, the NDP, which collected eight of the top nine largest donations in 2017, duped the Greens to continue the current fundraising rules until further notice.

On a $50-billion provincial budget, the Throne Speech commitments would have amounted to about a 1.5% increase in spending — well within a balanced budget framework, especially following a massive $2.8 billion surplus that gave us more room to move.

The Throne Speech provided the most inclusive agenda that any government has ever brought forward without losing key distinctions between the B.C. Liberals and the NDP on our core values.

B.C. voters seemed to agree. In late June, Mainstreet Research found the B.C. Liberals with an 11-point lead on the eve of the confidence vote, including support for Throne Speech initiatives. While polling can certainly be unreliable, this pollster found that the B.C. Liberals had received a “throne speech bump”.

Without a doubt, some B.C. Liberal partisans were disoriented, not to mention the media. As one adviser told me, in order to grow, you must “alienate the base” — or at least make it uncomfortable.

We’ll never know if the political calculus would have worked, but what was clear to us was that we needed to demonstrate that we were capable of listening and responding.

Alas, the Greens rejected the Throne Speech and the Lieutenant-governor passed on a summer election. We essentially ‘hit the post’ as the buzzer sounded. One month later, Christy Clark retired from the arena, sparking a process of renewal within the B.C. Liberal Party.  The Throne Speech will fade away into the mists of political history.

My regret is not that we brought forward that Throne Speech, it’s that we didn’t do it sooner.

Now, the leadership aspirants have a clean slate to put forward their own vision for the province in entirely new circumstances. Whatever course they chart for the province, they should be no less bold.

Mike McDonald directed Christy Clark’s 2013 election victory and served as chief of staff in the final two months of her government. He was part of the B.C. Liberal negotiating team with the B.C. Green party. 

 

 

Opportunity knocks for BC Liberal leadership candidates

BC Liberals aren’t in the habit of electing leaders very often – only twice in the last 24 years.  I was fortunate to have directed the campaigns in both cases – Gordon Campbell in 1993 and Christy Clark in 2011.

Those races were very different.  Gordon Campbell was the outsider who joined the party on the eve of announcing his candidacy.  While the party was the official opposition, its organization was threadbare having gone from zero to 17 seats in a populist brushfire in the 1991 election.  Campbell’s leadership campaign, and subsequent efforts over seventeen plus years as leader, built the guts and machinery of the modern day BC Liberal Party.  The 2011 campaign featured three serious senior cabinet contenders – George Abbott, Kevin Falcon, and Michael de Jong – and Christy Clark, who ran from the outside in the aftermath of the government’s handling of the HST.  However, Christy was no stranger to the Party.  She had served as MLA for nine years until 2005, including Deputy Premier, and was one of BC’s most recognizable names.  Unlike Campbell who spent eight long years winning his way into government, Clark went straight to the premier’s chair.  She brought a fresh look and focused agenda, enabling the party to win an improbable election in 2013.

This time will be different yet again.  The party is in a stronger position organizationally than 1993 and even stronger than 2011, though not in government.   The next leader has a better opportunity than Campbell had to take power in the subsequent election and does not have as challenging an internal dynamic as Clark had in 2011.  Nevertheless, the final furlong is always the hardest and the next leader will be under huge pressure to deliver victory in a party that has grown accustomed to winning.

IMG_01421.jpg

The contenders are assembling at the gates for the BC Liberal leadership race

Vaughn Palmer wrote recently on potential leadership candidates with the headline shouting “BC Liberals slag own potential leaders”.  Of course, these are unnamed sources who hide behind the curtain.  It certainly doesn’t reflect my own view.

As someone who has worked in the engine room of politics, I try to follow Ronald Reagan’s famous maxim that “thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow [BC Liberal]”.  Leadership aspirants are contemplating making huge personal sacrifices to put themselves on the line.  Running in a leadership contest is a politically naked process – it’s all about you.  You can’t hide behind someone else.

What I see is a field of potential candidates that all offer something unique.  There is no question that each candidate has to overcome perceived weaknesses, but that’s why you have a leadership race.  The leadership race is a trial by fire where the most organized, most eloquent, most driven, most motivating and compelling candidates rise to the fore.

Another of my political maxims, based on years of scientific research, is that “You can’t win if you don’t run”.  Politics is full of surprises.  Joe Clark in 1976.  Bob Skelly in 1984.  Stephane Dion in 2006.  Andrew Scheer was hardly a front-runner for the CPC leadership when it started and Maxime Bernier was certainly not seen as a main contender.  Let’s not forget Jeremy Corbyn in the UK (twice) and Donald Trump.  Then there’s John Horgan – when no one wanted the job – and now he’s Premier.

When I look at the field of potential candidates that people are chatting to me about, they all have an interesting story.  Winning means taking it to a higher level than where they are today, but they all have something to build from.  My hope is that we have a race where individual candidates make great strides in reaching their potential, and in doing so, make a significant contribution to building the party going forward.

All leadership candidates will have to demonstrate they can lead and win at the highest level.    It’s not whether one is a liberal or conservative; rural, suburban, or urban; or male or female.  The best candidate will be the one who can sell his or her vision to the membership.  Rather than slag them, or rule them out on some superficial basis, I say “thank you” for considering running and encourage them all to step bravely forward to articulate their vision for British Columbia.