I have some friends and acquaintances in UCP land. Leading up to the convention this weekend, I heard from more than a few of them. Party conventions are both business and pleasure; members vote on the party business but it’s also a place where you see people from around the province that you met at another convention or who you might only know from social media or party emails. While there’s a friendly gathering aspect— old friends telling campaign war stories and such— there’s also the fact that everyone there is excited to share everything they think, think they know, or actually know about what’s going on in politics.
Some people are happy, some are not, and many have an agenda. Whether it’s board elections, policy resolutions, or just personal ambitions, there is a lot of politicking at political conventions. The dynamics of political conventions are interesting because you have party brass— those who volunteer their time to the party board, and individual constituency associations— members who show up during campaigns or just generally support the party, and, the VIPs. By VIPs, of course, I mean the elected officials.
I’ve been to conventions and fundraisers for parties who are in government as well as those in opposition and the most compelling dynamic is between elected officials and the membership. I attended conventions because I like the atmosphere and conversation; die-hard supporters do it because they want to be heard, and elected officials do it because they have to. I’m not saying they don’t want to be there, I’m just saying they are expected to put in some face time; this is the group who will donate more, as well as volunteer for campaigns. It’s also a space where the party leader and their caucus can attempt to get the membership on board with their priorities; hence, the mandatory face time.
The politicking comes from many angles; supporters of everything the elected officials are doing, revolutionaries who are advocating for some specific change, and the elected officials who want to leave the convention and still be able to manage the expectations of those outside of that very committed, but ultimately small group of people that actually shows up in between elections.
Something old
The first UCP convention after Jason Kenney had thwarted both the PC and Wildrose parties was full of new people that many “old school” members from the separate parties didn’t recognize. This was especially noted by those who had been on the Progressive Conservative side, but also remarked upon by those from the Wildrose side. In contrast, at this year’s convention especially, I have a feeling that Danielle Smith and the former Wildrose caucus members (and those whose memories go back with enough clarity to remember the before times) found themselves with a severe case of déjà vu.
Think of Ric McIver standing up at the mic at the UCP convention in 2018 to implore the members not to vote against allowing kids to have GSAs in schools and make them the “lake of fire 2.0”. Or Nate Glubish in 2020 stating that a public-private hybrid would make the MLAs lives difficult because they campaigned on a public health guarantee.
Political parties are built up by people who want to see a government do certain things; enact particular policy, support certain viewpoints, or make decisions with a certain value in mind. In most parties, while engaged volunteers and members could influence government decisions, the party was separate from the governing body. Wildrose was created differently.
Essentially, the Wildrose was set up as a direct democracy where elected officials are meant to take direction from the membership. Their policy resolutions are not “suggestions” and they are not a wish list; they are marching orders. This is what Jason Kenney didn’t understand. That David Parker and his Take Back Alberta movement was influential in Jason Kenney’s takedown is not in doubt, but it enjoyed inflated influence that had little to do with David Parker’s participation and activism and more to do with the fact that it aligned with a tenet of Wildrose’s core principles; the leader does what the membership wants or the leader will be replaced.
Jason Kenney may not have understood, or wanted to believe this, but Danielle Smith went into the UCP leadership with her eyes wide open. She knew precisely what she was getting into because she had dealt with it before and she understood what would be required of her in the role if she became premier. It’s the reason she champions policy that is offside with a majority of Albertans and downplays, or ignores— and if in danger of having to take responsibility explicitly lies about— the potentially devastating consequences of that same policy. It’s a trade off that allows her to do things she wants to do, too.
It’s also why what happens at UCP conventions is more important under Danielle Smith’s leadership than it was under Jason Kenney’s; he tried to lead as if he held the pen, she knows she’s there to take orders.
Pitter patter, let’s get at ‘er
I follow separatist hooey enough. It’s illogical, fantastical, and always leads to the happiest of endings; it’s fanfic. In case you missed it, I sat through three hours of an independence panel earlier this year and broke it into three parts, I, II, and III.
Rather than quell separatist sentiment in their own party, Jason Kenney and then Danielle Smith have carried it around, snuggled, pampered, and fed it. Now it’s grown bigger, doesn’t fit in her lap anymore, and she’s trying to make it stop hopping into bed at night because her partner keeps getting pushed out and is getting grumpier about sleeping on the couch.
Alberta hasn’t been prosperous enough, they said, because of Liberal policy. Without Liberal policy oppressing Alberta’s oil, everyone in this province— not just big oil companies— would be rich. All we need is more pipelines.
So, Danielle Smith— all by herself, with absolutely no assist from the malignant growth of her ideological brethren south of the border that turned on Canada— got a Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Prime Minister to restructure and/or repeal Trudeau-era policies to unleash pipeline development.
And she was booed for it at her own AGM.
She was also booed for saying that she supports “an independent Alberta within a united Canada” after the new head honcho of the separatist movement asked who in the crowd supported a free and independent Alberta.
“We did that to send a message to Danielle Smith, and to send a message to this Cabinet that their party is an independence party,” separation activist Jeffrey Rath told James Dunn from Edmonton’s City News.
“Their party wants a free and independent Alberta and they better start leading like we’re going to become a free and independent country because that’s what their members demand.”
I spoke with a few people attending the convention this weekend. One said that he was hopeful the board elections would go in favour of the “saner” side of the membership because the board has been split for the last year over any issues that are seen as separatist v. federalist and it’s been frustrating party business. What is it they say about doing the same thing over and over while hoping for a different result? I know there is at least one.
Of the nine spots available to new board members, Danielle Smith’s slate came up short of the separatists 5-3. One position, VP Fundraising, is being recounted because it was “so close”. The two vying for the role are Darby Crouch, the UCP’s by-election candidate who altogether oozed a tragic caricature of an NDP-hating rural Albertan… as a supposedly serious candidate… in former NDP leader Rachel Notley’s riding of Edmonton-Strathcona; and the separatist’s pick, Helen Holder. I’m scared to ask what the difference between them could possibly be, frankly.
Another person I spoke with said they felt the vote against no-fault insurance was a silver lining of the whole weekend.
It’s not exactly the moment that the argument for direct democracy falls apart but it’s close, because while separatism is a threat to the economy and social fabric of our country, insurance companies pretending that they exist to protect those they insure is an immense threat to both the insurance industry as well as the industries of absolutely everything they “insure”.
Insurance companies make money by insuring people for things at a rate that compensates for the likelihood of those things happening. It’s less expensive to get life insurance when you’re a healthy 22 year-old than when you’re 42. Insurance companies started asking if you were a smoker even before Danielle Smith was arguing that smoking wasn’t that bad for your health.
I could go on.
The problem with direct democracy is that the people who are insisting upon it do not have access to either the information or the expertise that the government can rely on to make their decisions. The insurance industry wants out of the car and home insurance business and they are eyeing up the never-ending payday of health insurance premiums.
Danielle Smith and the UCP know this. It is my opinion that Danielle Smith and the UCP are trying to stall until Pierre Poilievre can form government and eliminate the whole universal payor health system that Canadians support as a matter of principle.
The last thing they needed was the membership (who calls the shots) to put up a road block.
The membership has spoken
Jason Kenney was expected to bow to the membership and he didn’t. Danielle Smith has every intention of doing so, but calling it out ends up sounding misogynistic. So instead, let’s pretend gender isn’t a thing.
The UCP membership believes they have the power to dictate policy without being held personally accountable. Stop me if this sounds familiar. They don’t care if MLAs lose their jobs, they don’t care if MLAs have to find some way to get elected on the membership’s fantasy policy playoff list. That’s not the membership’s problem; they aren’t accountable to the electorate, after all.
I just want Albertans to understand that this isn’t their grandfather’s political party. The Wildrose took over the PCs and they show up. They’ve always shown up. They are holding their copy of the latest fanfic close to their chests. They believe.
One UCP member who refused to pay for a ticket this year said that he’s okay with the party spending four years in time out if that’s what it takes to purge his party of their bullshit. He doesn’t support the NDP and I can’t imagine a scenario in which he would— but accepting the downfall of his own party is not a glib statement.
It is, however, what I would consider a warning.
Thanks to everyone who reads, shares, and becomes a free subscriber. Please consider becoming a paid subscriber to support my work; to those who have, your support is greatly appreciated!
You're correct Ma'am (in my best Ed McMahon impression), the membership are not accountable to the electorate. They do not represent the electoral regions, just the riding associations . I give hardworking rural & small town people far more credit for decency & tolerance than these de facto Wildrose fans.
The AGM has wrapped up. Apart from the tire marks in the Expo Center parking lot, they've left no impression here in Edmonton.
I always referred to it as grassroots populism. Whatever the name it's a disease that attracts stupid people. People who end up steering the ship and now, fighting over the wheel.
It's going to take more than a 4 year time out to restore any semblance of sanity.