Preston Manning - Keynote Address

7/29/2019 Preston Manning - Keynote Address

1/7

1

STATE OF THE CONSERVATIVE MOVEMENT

remarks by Preston Manning

to the annual

Manning Networking Conference

Ottawa March 9, 2013

[Check against delivery]

Introduction

When I first got into the management consulting business many years ago, my first client was a

scrap metal dealer in Edmonton. He had his heart set on buying one of those big machines that

crush old car bodies into bales for sale to a steel mill. I did all the analysis and came to the sad

conclusion that he would go broke if he bought that machinenews my client did not want to

hear. This raised the question that every political candidate and leader must also address: Do

you tell them what they want to hear, or do you tell them what they need to hear?

Of course, the Canadian answer to such questions is, Do both.

So today in surveying the State of the Conservative Movement in Canada I want to say some

encouraging things that we will wantto hear. But I also want to say some things that I feel we

need to hear, unpalatable as they may be, if we want to see conservatives continue to win

elections and govern successfully by conservative principles once elected.

ThanksBefore doing so, I want to express a special thank you to each of you for your attendance at

this conference, to our much-appreciated sponsors, and to Blair Nixon for his kind

introduction.

Blair is typical of the directors of our Foundation and Centre. He is the CFO of a large

company and a highly respected lawyer but he devotes hours and hours of unpaid time, as do

all our directors, to strengthening the conservative movement in Canada. So lets show our

heartfelt appreciation to Blair and his fellow directors for their service to our cause and

country.

Intellectual Strengths and Weaknesses

Each year for several years we have surveyed market-oriented opinion leaders about the state

of conservative intellectual capital in Canada. Where do they consider conservatives to be

strong in terms of ideas and policies and where do they consider us to be weak or disengaged?

One encouraging conclusion from these surveys is that conservatives are consistently

considered strong on the economythe number one issue in the minds of the electorate.


2/7

2

But one disturbing conclusion is that conservatives are generally considered (and this by our

friends) to be weak or disinterested on the environment the issue of greatest concern to many

of our children and grandchildren and the policy area where perceived weaknesses in this area

have become the number one obstacle to getting Canadas petroleum resources to market.

Whether we agree or not, whether its fair or not, the bad news is that this perceived deficiency

on the environmental front has become a political and economic liability. The good news,

however, is that this need not be the case.

If you visit the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains, one of the most beautiful places on the

planet, you will encounter a remarkable breed of Canadiansthe eastern slope ranchers. On

the one hand they are rock-ribbed fiscal conservatives who want minimal government

intervention in their businesses and the economy. But at the same time, embodied in the same

individuals and their enterprises is a deep commitment to conserving the landscapes,

grasslands, and aquifers of that part of the world.

These people may rightly be called Green Conservatives or grassroots conservationists. They

recognize that conservation and conservatism come from the same root and can peacefully co-

exist intellectually and politically. They support the principle of living within our means which is at the heart of fiscal conservatism. But they recognize that this is actually an

ecological principle because inputs and outputs of ecosystems must be kept in balance for them

to be sustainable. And so they extend their support for fiscal deficit reduction and budget

balancing to reducing the ecological deficit and balancing the ecological budget.

As conservatives they also believe in the efficacy of property rights and markets institutions

which can also be effectively harnessed, if we make the effort, to the task of environmental

conservation as an alternative to mass governmental intervention in the marketplace in the

name of environmental conservation.

There should be a welcoming place in the Big Conservative Tent for Green Conservatives.

In his recent book, How to Think Seriously About the Planet: The Case for Environmental

Conservatism1, Roger Scruton demonstrates that there is a responsible moderate alternative

between the polarizing positions of environmental radicals prophesying planetary doom and

those who completely deny the seriousness of environmental problems and contend that all the

statistics are either wrong or grossly misrepresented.

There are more effective ways of tackling environmental problems including global

warming, proliferation of plastics, urban sprawl, and the loss of biodiversitythan by treaties,

top-down regulations, and other approaches offered by big governments and their dependents.

These more effective ways focus on harnessing a multitude of local and small-scale

initiatives to the taskthe little platoons of civil society that the great conservative EdmundBurke so fondly extolled.

Without denying that some large environmental issues require national action and international

cooperation, the conservative focus and starting point for environmental conservation should

be at the other endwith individuals, families, communities, and enterprises who are prepared

to make sacrifices to improve the quality of their own surrounding environments and

1 Oxford University Press, 2012.


3/7

3

neighbourhoodsa focus and starting point which can and should distinguish the conservative

approach to environmental conservation from left wing alternatives.

So what does acceptance of this analysis mean for the conservative movement? It means that

conservative political strategists and policy makers need no longer treat the environment as a

shield issue as we have in the past, but begin to treat is as a sword issue on which we can

take a positive and proactive approaches to selling community and market-based solutions toenvironmental challenges.

When we classify an issue as a shield issue it is usually because we feel that someone else

occupies the high ground on that issue. We feel we cant win on that issue and so we adopt a

defensive posture. But on the environmental front at the federal level there is no one on the

high ground. Its ours for the taking if we resolve to do so.

But to do so also means there is a major job to be done in mobilizing grassroots support for

conservative environmentalism. A great starting point is to support the formation of the

grassroots coalition movement, Conservation Works Canada, which former minister Monte

Solberg proposed earlier in this conference.

Green conservatives of Canada, unite! And change the climate of environmental discourse in

this country.

Strengths and Weaknesses in the Training of Conservatives for Public Service

As many of you know, the main focus of the Manning Centre and Foundation going forward is

to support and expand our School of Practical Politics to strengthen through training the

knowledge, skills, ethical foundations, communications and leadership capacities of our

political practitioners especially those who subscribe to conservative values and principles.

For what purpose? So that they can win more elections, yes; but more importantly so that they

will govern in accordance with conservative values and principles once elected.

With these objectives in mind, let me now share with you some of the results of our surveying

and consultations to determine what the emphases and priorities of our training efforts should

be.

In a recent survey we asked Canadians how important they thought it was that their political

representatives possess such skills as the ability to analyze, make decisions, and communicate

effectively. Predictably, 64% to 70% of respondents ranked these skills as highly important,

with communication skills ranking the highest. But when we asked these same respondents to

grade our current political class on the extent to which they actually possess these skills, only

15% gave the current political class a ranking of high to excellent. In other words, there is ahuge gap between the skill levels that our citizens say they wish our politicians to have in these

areas and the actual skill levels we politicians are perceived to possess.

Lots of need and room therefore for skill training not just for candidates for public office, but

also for constituency executives, campaign teams, volunteers, and political staff all those

whose services are needed by politicians to do their jobs better. And as in hockey if our

forwards and defensemen are better trained than those of our opponents; if our goalies are

better coached than theirs; we ought to win more games, play-offs, and Stanley Cups.


4/7

4

Even more interesting, I was involved recently in a small focus group in the Lower Mainland

of BC which involved some federal, provincial, and municipal politicians some retired, some

still active, but all conservative-oriented. When they were asked what do you think is the most

important reason that voters support you? surprisingly no one mentioned their political

values or ideology. No one mentioned their policy stand on some issue. Instead all mentioned

how we treat people our constituents, our staff, our opponents, and the media as the

primary basis on which voters determined whether to support them or not.

There is such a thing as ideological politics which appeals to people on the basis of right,

left, or centre ideological postures. There is also such a thing as issue politics which

appeals to people on the basis of whether they support or oppose your policy on a particular

issue. But we need to constantly remind ourselves that at the most fundamental level there is

always character/personality politics in which the primary appeal of the politician to the

voter is on the basis of character and personality perceptions.

When we explored this dimension further through our recent national opinion survey, the

personal traits which respondents said they most desired in their politicians were strength of

character, industriousness, and civilized conductwith personal charisma being much loweron the list of preferred traits.

What all of this suggests is that, besides giving attention in our School of Practical Politics to

raising the knowledge and skill levels of conservative political participants, we ought to give

even more attention to strengthening those character traits which voters consider fundamental

to earning and retaining their trust.

Ideological Strengths and Weaknesses

Now finally, Id like to say something about the ideological strengths and weaknesses of the

Canadian conservative movement. And by the conservative movement I mean not just theparties but also the think tanks, the advocacy groups, the conservative volunteers and voters

who make up the whole extended conservative family.

As most of you will know, the Canadian conservative movement is not a monolithic entity but

is a broad coalition comprising conservatives of various related but distinctive ideological

dimensions:

Libertarians for whom freedom from constraint is the most important dimension. Fiscal conservatives for whom budget balancing and living within our means

financially is the most important.

So called progressive conservatives whose interests and priorities are more socialthan fiscal. Green conservatives who apply the principle ofliving within our means ecologically

as well as fiscally.

Social or cultural conservatives for whom the strengthening of family and traditionalcultural values are most important.

Democratic conservatives for whom the involvement of rank and file people inchoosing and directing their governments is most important.


5/7

5

Constitutional conservatives for whom subsidiarity and decentralization of power isthe most important.

From my perspective, and I hope yours, allof these people who self-identify as some kind of

conservative are part of the conservative family. All have something to contribute and the

support ofallis required to win electoral majorities if our aim is to form governments that can

act on conservative values rather than merely talk about them in opposition. Thus the fiscalbrother cannot say to the progressive sisterWe have no need of you in the family. Nor can

the libertarian uncle say to the social conservative aunt There is no place for you at the family

table if we want the family as a whole to be united and electorally successful.

But if the breadth and depth of this coalition is its strength, what is its weakness, its Achilles

heel, its greatest vulnerability? Is not its greatest weakness intemperate and ill considered

remarks by those who hold these positions deeply but in fits of carelessness or zealousness say

things that discredit the family as a whole, in particular, conservative governments, parties, and

campaigns?

Two recent examples from Alberta:

A derogatory reference to homosexuals by a social conservative candidate, made inthe past but dredged up during the recent provincial election to derail the Wildrose

campaign in that province.

A questionable comment by a prominent libertarian and a good friend of mine, whichseemed to imply that the freedom of an individual to view child pornography had no

serious consequences for others.

A genuinely free society and the broad conservative movement itself may tolerate such

comments out of our commitment to free speech, and employ free speech to qualify, mitigate,

counter, or denounce such comments. But at the same time, in an era of intense partisan

competition and gotcha journalism, conservative governments, parties, and campaignssimply cannot afford to be blindsided and discredited by these incidents when the individuals

involved are clearly identified with those governments, parties, and campaigns.

In addition, these incidents provide perverse incentives and opportunities for human rights

commissions and the courts as in the recent Whatcott decision of the Supreme Court of

Canadato further restrict rather than safeguard or expand freedom of speech.

To be honest, I must confess to personally contributing to this problem at one time and not

addressing it early or resolutely enough. In the early days of the Reform Party, we were so

anxious to allow our members the freedom to express contrary views that we virtually let them

do and say as they pleased. But in later years I have come to see the wisdom of Edmund

Burkes observation that before we encourage people to do as they please, we ought first to

inquire what it may please them to do.

So, three suggestions for reducing these discrediting incidents and their impacts to a minimum:

(1) Expand training efforts to teach our spokespersons and candidates, especially whendealing with value-laden issues, to be wise as serpents and gracious as dovesnot

vicious as snakes and stupid as pigeons.


6/7

6

(2) Democratically debate within the conservative movement where the lines in the sandshould be drawn when we speak as free individuals and when we purport to speak for

conservative governments, parties, campaigns, or organizations. This subject,

difficult as it is, is better discussed at conferences like this than at party conventions.

If I am only speaking for myself and I am the primary bearer of the consequences of

what I say, the horizons of free speech should be as broad and expansive as the sky.But if in speaking we are identified with a conservative organization made up of

many others who will also bear the consequences of what we say, there are limits to

what we can say defined by that line in the sand and the responsibility we owe to

colleagues.

(3) For the sake of the movement and the maintenance of public trust, conservativeorganizations should be prepared to swiftly and publicly disassociate themselves

from those individuals who cross the line.

This does not mean that we as individual conservatives on a personal level ostracize or

disassociate ourselves from those who cross the line. Everyone makes honest mistakes,

conservatives believe in second chances, and we need to rally around those who have been

lured across the line by opponents rather than piling on.

The Canadian public, however, has a right to say to any and all aspirants to political office and

the rest of us active in the political arena: If you cant govern your own zeal, if you cant

govern your own prejudices, if you cant govern your own tongue why should we trust you to

govern us? We earn the right to govern others by first learning and practising the government

of ourselves.

Concluding Overview

In conclusion, and on a more uplifting note, let me lastly summarize the big picture of the

State of the Conservative Movement in Canada:

Majority conservative-oriented governments in Yukon, Saskatchewan, NewBrunswick, Newfoundland, and of course Ottawa.

Challenges to retain a conservative-oriented government in BC where the NDPthreatens and in Manitoba where the NDP is still in power.

Challenges in Alberta where an aging progressive conservative administration has lostits way both ethically and financially and either needs to be completely overhauled or

replaced. Great opportunity in Ontario where Tim Hudak, with hard work and help from all of

us, is in a good position to replace a discredited Liberal administration.

An enormous amount of work to be done to apply conservative values and principlesat the municipal level right across the country the level where there are 25,000

elected officials compared to around 800 at the provincial and territorial level, and

308 at the federal level.


7/7

7

And an enormous amount of work needing to be done to strengthen both conservatismand the economy the two go hand in hand almost everywhere east of the Ottawa

River.

Are conservative leaders, parties, and candidates up to the task? I believe so, particularly if the

conservative movement does its work to strengthen the knowledge, skills, ethical foundations,

communications, and leadership capacities of those who participate in Canadas politicalprocesses from a conservative perspective.

In pursuing this task, let us take inspiration and resolve from those who have gone before, in

particular from Canadas first Prime Minister, John A. Macdonald, who faced the daunting task

of building both a governing party and a country at the same time.

In stewarding the ideological coalition which is the modern conservative movement, let us take

inspiration from his success in creating and managing the Great Coalition that brought Canada

into being.

In raising up and training a new generation of leaders, let us take inspiration from his success

in turning narrow and unsophisticated colonial politicians into statesmen and Fathers ofConfederation.

In shaping and communicating the Big Ideas of this conference, let us take inspiration from his

success in shaping and communicating the Big Idea of Canada itself.

Thank you.

Documents

Preston Manning - Keynote Address