Hugh Mackenzie
Huntsville Doppler
Over the past many years I have co-directed and produced at least a dozen musicals in Muskoka, from Gilbert and Sullivan’s Pirates of Penzance to Fiddler on the Roof. It was a passion of mine.
My one regret was my inability to put together a production of Les Misérables, to me one of the greatest musicals ever written. The royalties were too high and production requirements too complicated. I attempted to arrange a production of Les Mis as the opening event of the then-new Algonquin Theatre in Huntsville, but I was unsuccessful.
One of the pieces from Les Mis that has again caught my attention in recent months is a song by the production’s hero, Jean Valjean. He was searching for his identity and the song was entitled “Who Am I?”
When it comes to politics, another life-long passion of mine, I too, especially in recent times, am searching for my identity, and in that context (and no other) wondering who I am. I know I am basically conservative, believing in less government, sound fiscal management, and responsibility for those in need. But in reality, there is not a single political party in Canada at the national level in which today I would feel entirely comfortable.
I have always been a bit of a rebel and I made no exception of that when it came to politics. I remember a time in my early thirties, when I was chairman of Muskoka and also a vice president of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party. The PCs were having their bi-annual policy conference and one of the items up for discussion was legislation that allowed municipal unions to impose mandatory membership on all municipal employees where a union existed. The trade-off was that going forward unions would have to conduct a secret ballot of their members for approval of any collective bargaining agreements.
I was against this legislation. I knew a number of hard-working and capable people at the District of Muskoka who did not want to join a union. I believed that was their right. And so, in what I believed was a closed committee session on this matter, I said what I thought, which was that compulsory check-off (mandatory membership) was wrong and in any event there should never need to be a “trade-off” with unions or anyone else in a democratic society for a secret ballot.
When I turned around after speaking, I was right in the face of a reporter from The Globe and Mail. How he got in the room, I don’t know, but he dutifully made sure there was a headline in the next edition of his newspaper that there was division in the ranks of the Davis Conservatives.
Of course, I got my fingers rapped, a gentle message from the premier’s office that members of the team stuck together and did not go public with their disagreements. And so, I sucked it up and pretty well toed the party line.
A few years later, when Frank Miller was treasurer of Ontario, there was a proposal for the Government to buy Suncor. Frank Miller, whose ministry would be the lead on that, was opposed. Premier Davis arranged for Miller to go to New York to meet with the Province’s bond holders. While he was gone, the premier announced the acquisition of Suncor.
Frank Miller was furious, and I asked him later why he did not resign on principle. In reply, he reminded me of a federal cabinet minister who had resigned on principle and subsequently faded into oblivion. Miller was not prepared to do that, and he went on to become premier of Ontario. That, too, was a lesson I have always remembered.
But now, especially at the federal level, things are different. I really do not know what the Conservative Party of Canada stands for anymore. I have great respect for our local Member of Parliament, Scott Aitchison. I believe his heart is in the right place and that he works hard on our behalf. I also like Erin O’Toole. I think he would be a good prime minister.
But there is clearly what I call a “Trump rump” in the Conservative Party which is, in my view, gaining traction and which I cannot condone. They are right-wing extremists who stand for many things I stand against.
If these people had their way, the issue of abortion would have been on the table again at the party’s policy convention that was held this week. They want this issue to become a political football once again. This is not a matter, in my view, that should ever again be on the public agenda. It is divisive and it is personal. People have a right to their own opinions and a right, whether or not we agree with them, to their own decisions. One thing I did agree with Pierre Elliott Trudeau on was his statement that the government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.
The final straw for me, however, or very close to it, is the motion that was on the table at the Conservative convention this week regarding climate change. Party leader Erin O’Toole had the legs kicked right out from under him.
I feel sorry for Erin O’Toole. He delivered what I believe was a very effective keynote speech to his policy convention. He said if the party was ever going to win an election, it had to change and it had to show that it has changed. He was right. The one motion that would have clearly demonstrated that his party was with him was the one on climate change, which O’Toole supported.
It was a simple motion. It said, “We recognize that climate change is real. The Conservative Party is willing to act.” Erin O’Toole said climate change is real; 54.8 per cent of the delegates to his policy convention voted against this motion. They turned their leader down flat.
Are they nuts? For one thing, they have almost guaranteed they will not win the next election. Of course climate change is real. All scientific evidence points to it. How catastrophic a reality it is is debatable and certainly whether a carbon tax is any kind of an effective inhibitor has not been proven.
However, climate change itself is real and it needs to be recognized and effectively addressed by any competent government. To refuse to acknowledge climate change is akin to refusing to acknowledge that Tuesdays fall on Tuesday or that our current pandemic is not real. Sounds like Trump rump to me.
So, here I am, all dressed up with nowhere to go. I am not a socialist. I could never vote for the NDP. And I cannot vote for a Liberal government as long as it has a spendthrift attitude toward the economy and, frankly, an unqualified prime minister.
In my heart I am still, at least by my definition, a conservative. But the increasing elements of Trumpism in the Conservative Party of today scare me. One thing I know for sure is that is not who I am.
I am not quite there yet, but metaphorically speaking my Conservative Party of Canada membership card is sitting on my desk.
And my scissors are close by!
Hugh Mackenzie
Don’t miss out on Doppler!
Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
The conservatives and liberals are masters at crippling our democracy and very institutions that were created to protect it. Question period is a great example of how they deflect and avoid any meaningful dialogue. The fact that this charade is playing out in every legislative assembly in the country is cause for concern. When problems arise Prorogue parliament to avoid further scrutiny.
The same rules that apply in a court of law should apply to every legislative assembly in the country. Charges of perjury, and obstruction of justice would help to address what are two main stream parties are content on destroying, any opportunity for meaningful dialogue.
How do we move forward as a nation when are elected officials game the system and are never held accountable.
They let us all vote so that we think we actually have a say in how the country is run.
To quote the late George Carlin it’s a big game and your not in it.
Hugh, I do like the way you frame your opinions. Nicely and positively persuasive indeed! Are you sure you don’t want to be in politics?
Going back to your “Who am I” thought, I’m wondering, “Who does Erin O’Toole think he is now?” Given he is at odds with his party’s vote on Climate Change, will he follow the Party on this or will he lead in an opposing direction? He needs your assistance on this one. Jump in!
Hugh,
Thanks again for your insight. I am not a member of any political party. I believe that we should be making important choices, like who we vote for, based on a thorough understanding of what is important to us and the qualifications of the people running for public office. I believe that the party system, particularly in Canada where the whip has the job of getting everyone in line with the party line, is particularly divisive by nature. If the government, any government, proposes something, the opposition speaks out against it because it is their job to do so (Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition). They cannot call it a good idea even if it is.
Reading your article seems to support this theory as “right-wing” and “left-wing” thinking seem to be drifting further and further apart. Despite my personal inclination to avoid any reference to Trump, it does seem to be a line of thinking that is becoming more… fashionable, for lack of a better term. Both extremes of the political spectrum are undesirable if not dangerous.
So…
How can we fix it?
I am reminded of the movie “Tomorrowland” and a scene where the young girl is in high school listening to her teachers prattling on about climate change, wars, famine, gun control and many of the other issues we see on our newscast every night and when she finally gets the chance to ask the question she has been trying to ask in every class, the bell rings and her question goes unanswered.
The question: “What are we doing to fix it?”
How do we overcome what appears to be the hard-wired pre-disposition for politicians to resist change?
I enjoy you column and appreciate the opportunity to comment.
It is sad. They are not progressive conservatives. Just the old-fashioned kind.
While old men struggle to retain their loyalty and ties to parties that exhibit ignorance and denial the younger are moving to Green. There are acceptable polices and moralities over there that more and more people are recognizing.
Mr. Mackenzie; the “reform party” and “unite the right” has had this somewhat predictable outcome.
However, I commend you for sharing your concerns and reflections.
Contrary to what you might think, I have not always voted NDP, though admit well-run public ownership is my preference. I usually take time to listen to platforms and am now totally turned off by populism, it is not healthy. I don’t have a clue as to what you can do for the Conservative party right now. The climate science, etc. has not been visible for quite some time, so the convention results were not totally a surprise.
All DF has done has been to go to court to fight for his stickers on gas pumps, concerning the carbon tax.
Waste of money. Remember that “comprehensive climate plan” promised by the DF government? Wondering, where/when did that appear?
I am sure that it is no consolation to you. But I am convinced that this is not a “conservative” problem.
I am at the other end of the spectrum politically…..the role of government expands exponentially as the years past (this is particularly true since the death of capitalism). I am a hard core Rousseau social contract person.
Like you I can’t find a home in which I am comfortable. Trudeau Liberals: clearly more suiting to my political bent than the PCP. But how can I continence years and decades of growing income inequality mostly on their watch and they say nothing. NDP: largely MIA in both the province and country.
I mention this not to sway you from the errors of your ways nor to illicit any sympathy. But rather to say that something has happened since the days of our youth to the “political party”. And whatever it is, it is neither “right” or “left”.
My current thinking is that the change that has “ruined politics” is likely one of two things (which are not mutually exclusive):
The first possibility is that parties have deviated from the notion of a coherent and consistent set of policies that reflect a political philosophy. I remember the day when a political party laid out a clear “vision” for the country/province first and foremost (I am thinking Diefenbacher; Pearson; Trudeau; Mulroney). Policies naturally flowed from that vision. And you voted on that vision; not on some “one off” policy to buy your vote. I think that shifted (forever) from Chretien on.
The second possibility is that politics has become such a big business that it attracts big money who demand “win at all cost”. Policy now is built not out of a political philosophy about governance. But rather policy is determined by (f*&^*(ing) polls and administered by 20 something “wonks” in PMO. Inevitably this leads to inconsistencies and huge waste of taxpayer money (yes a “big government” guy is vehemently opposed to wasting precious taxpayer resources).
The only solution that I can offer then is that we do away with “first past the polls” elections. When it is a game of winner takes all…buying votes by using dubious polling is the only thing that matters.
I think that the current set-up grossly underestimates the voters. Oh how, I long for the day when a politician would simply tell us what his/her Canada would look like and then tell us how to get there……That is what true leadership is. It is sorely lacking in Canada (and probably all the western democracies)
Hugh,
Could this not be a photo of any of our elected members!
If only we were not stuck with the same old parties election after election.
Surely there has to be new ideas somewhere?
Hugh,
I was frustrated by the result of the vote at the Policy Convention too. As I said many times during the last election campaign, the Conservative Party environment policy was detailed in many areas, but I described the climate change policies in our plan as a ‘good start’. I have been one of the many voices on our team who have argued that we need a real plan to combat climate change and reduce our carbon footprint and I am pleased that Erin O’Toole has made it clear that we will have a comprehensive plan going forward.
I would note though, that despite the vote over the weekend at the Convention, the Conservative Policy Declaration currently refers to climate change more than “lower taxes” and “job creation” combined. The opening line of the policy currently reads as follows:
“Climate change is a real global problem that will require decisive action at the federal level.”
This is not a partisan issue for me. The tools we will propose to reduce our GHG emissions should and will be part of a vigorous discussion with Canadians, but the reality of climate change is not a matter of debate.
Please don’t cut up that card, our party needs us!
Hi: The PPC is the most traditional Conservative party in this country. And Maxine Bernier looks and talks like the most credible and honest politician out there. O’Toole has no charisma, lacks prime ministerial presence and has regrettably a short future with the PC party of Canada. Norm
Hugh, I understand your dilemma. Like you, I have voted Conservative most often but not always. I now believe the most important characteristics of a party and its leader are that first, they are honest, fair, and generous of spirit, and secondly, their priorities are the 3 most important long-term issues. I believe all three current main party leaders fit those criteria, but all 3 have some dissenters in their ranks.
The world is in transition from the OLD energy paradigm to a new one. Mother Nature is sending us undeniable signals to help us understand that change is urgently needed. As you say Hugh, the degree of impact is debatable, but there is no good long-term outlook for a world of 8 billion going on 10 billion people without both a healthy environment and an adequate supply of energy. Canada makes only 1.6% of global emissions, but on a per capita basis, we are among the highest. There are lots of understandable reasons for that, but as one of the top 7 industrial democracies it is incumbent on Canada to do what we know we can do to reduce our carbon footprint. Like a pandemic, Canada will not be free of the impact of climate change until the world is free of it.
On one end of the political spectrum are those who fear the winding down of fossil fuels and can’t bring themselves to say the words “climate change is real”. At the other end of the spectrum are those who want to cancel fossil fuels pre-maturely, who have an unsubstantiated FAITH that the world can run on wind and solar power alone, and who have an unsubstantiated FEAR of nuclear power. Canada is fortunate to be among the biggest producers of hydro power, but there are good reasons why our hydro power is likely to become less seasonably reliable as climate change progresses. That’s already happening in the NW USA.
All 3 parties have some of REALISTS on the middle ground who know that climate change is real, and that “a rapid but calibrated transition” from fossil fuels to ALL forms of clean energy is necessary to avoid a global energy shortage on top of a global climate crisis. Canada is ideally positioned to benefit from oil and gas production for as long as they are needed, and to grab the many opportunities in the NEW energy paradigm. It’s a question of which party has the biggest majority supporting a credible plan that engages everyone. PRODUCERS can only make what CONSUMERS want to buy.
Anyone that has been alive on this planet for more than 50 years knows without a doubt that things are warming up. What we can do about it is a different matter any kind of tax is not going to help. Frankly I don’t think there is any way that mankind is going to stop it after all it’s been going on for thousands of years so why do we even think we can stop it now. Pollution is something else and is something we can a should be doing something about. I’m not sure what each of us can do but I have tried buy buying a small car and upgrading to efficient appliances so hoping it helps a bit.
I like to think of myself as a political moderate and one who, in a runup to an election, looks at all the party’s values and policies and all the candidates themselves to see which party and candidate most closely aligns with my values. I have, over the years, probably voted for ever party at some point. But, over the past several elections the Conservative party has consistently disappointed me and that angers me. Why can’t they field a set of policies and a candidate that at least comes close to my values and allows me to give them serious consideration? Scott Aitchison, who I know well, has been able to do that but even then I have had to “hold my nose” about some of the Conservative values to support him. Please Conservative party give we moderates a chance to support you so that we really do have a choice when we go to the polls.
Further to my earlier comment: Hugh you spoke of provincial politics predominantly so I followed suit, however, I do equally respect Annamie Paul and look forward to her run when next we have an election.
Might I suggest the Green Party Hugh? Mike Schreiner is sounding better all the time..review his 2018 platform..it seems all the more relevant to our current times.
Sharpening my scissors too!
Ostriches stick their head in the sand…….but cannot fly.
Nor will a Conservative part with this orientation.
Too bad for us small “c” conservatives. More important, too bad for our country!
Good on ya Hugh. I was wondering how the news would impact my conservative friends back home and was hoping you would comment on it. After living through those terrible bushfires in Australia I promised myself I could never vote for anyone who could not look me in the eye and say “I believe climate change is real.” It is a promise I intend to keep, regardless of how good the local representative is. But this failure of the Conservatives to embrace scientific evidence would mean I could not in good conscience even vote for my nephew, a long-serving Conservative MP. Fortunately he is retiring! I am saddened to learn that Trumpism has infiltrated the party to this extent.
Hugh, I had the same reaction as you. We unfortunately have no idea about the conversations around this subject. We do know that many Conservatives and if truth be know many Liberals don’t like being gouged by the Liberal carbon tax. Is it possible a number of people felt the question was more about this hated tax, than acknowledging “Climate Change “ is real?