CKNW Editorial
for July 30, 1999

Dear Mr Preston Manning … I find myself in a quandary and I suspect I’m not alone. Perhaps you can help.

Let me tell you what I am first and also let you know what I think some others who feel as I do are like.

My religion is a private matter. Although my religion has principles I feel that’s between me and my God. I feel very strongly that I don’t want even the slightest bit of mixing of state and religion … I’m interested in how my politicians perform as politicians, not how they might worship. And while I believe that there is a moral code common to all decent people I utterly reject the imposition of anyone’s personal moral code upon the way we are governed.

I also am a strong believer in the principle “live and let live”. While I may not agree with the positions taken by some groups within society I believe that all must be treated fairly. Just so you don’t think I’m using weasel words here, let me spell it out. I believe that gay people have the right to their lifestyle and to be treated by the state without regard to their sexual preference. I believe that gay couples in a committed relationship should be treated as married couples or indeed common law couples.

I also believe that society has an obligation to look after the weak within it. And I accept without reservation that some people are simply not cut out to be Horatio Alger types who grasp the nettle of free enterprise and with singlemindedness of purpose make a lot of money. I applaud – indeed I have a standing ovation for those who do battle the elements of the marketplace and make their way. Indeed without such people there would be no money for the social welfare I support. In fact, I think I am by most standards a highly successful person. But I believe as strongly as I believe in anything that I am very lucky to have been born where I was, to the parents I was and with the genes they passed on to me. And I’ve been damned lucky – all of which confers upon me an obligation to be my brothers’ and sisters’ keeper.

I believe that Canada is what it is – the best place in the world to live according to the United Nations – because it is a tolerant nation. It follows then that I am dismayed unto nauseated when I hear your senior justice minister condemn, in advance, applicants for refugee status as criminals. Because I also believe very strongly in the Rule of Law. I know, as any intelligent person knows, that the Rule of Law can be damned uncomfortable some times. It can let criminals through the net … it can provide legal aid to those notorious for being drug importers … and it can let people into the country that shouldn’t be here. But I believe that these failings of the system are its very strength … for the failures of our system are the insurance premiums we pay for that priceless word – freedom.

Now, Mr Manning, to the point of this letter. I have, in two elections and, as you know, before that, supported the Reform Party. I have done so because I believe to the depths of my soul that we must reform our institutions in this country or perish as a nation. We must have real, deep cutting reforms too. And although I have felt for the past few years that the reforms you support are pretty shallow and ill thought out, of all the options available to me, Reform, Liberal, Tory, or NDP your party is the only one that stands for reform.

Because of this I’ve gone along with arguments that your members and your party have been unfairly reported on by the Central Canadian media. I excused the anti-Semitism I saw as the mumblings of a few malcontents … I excused one of your MPs actually going to Singapore to see what contributions flogging could make to the judicial system as just being one kook … I excused the words of one MP about what he would do if he found out an employee was gay … and I even overlooked you, sir, giving succour to those of your MPS who played the silly flag debate for all it was worth as an ill disguised bit of triumphalism, like one has come to expect from the Orange Lodge in Northern Ireland. But I must tell you plain, Mr Manning, when your senior justice critic brands 123 refugee claimants as criminals before a single word of evidence is heard, that was the last straw. I concede – quickly concede – that events may prove John Reynolds right. That’s utterly beside the point. The end does not, repeat not, justify the means. But the instant reaction of one of your senior MPs is not to caution restraint as the matter is investigated according to the law of the land but to immediately play to the peanut gallery … to play to the worst instincts of society before a word of evidence was heard … that for me speaks volumes about your Party.

We’re not talking about some good old boy in his cowboy boots here Mr Manning … we’re talking about a man who, if you become government, will hold high office. I must take this reaction as being typical of the party. And it frankly makes me feel sick to my stomach.

So what do I do in the next election, Mr Manning? It was easy when you had no chance of achieving power because I could excuse social policy and behaviour which was to me unacceptable on the grounds that your influence might hold the government’s feet to the fire on constitutional and unity issues. But now you are serious about power, whether it is through re-inventing yourself as the United Alternative or some Faustian pact with Joe Clark and the Tories. How do I – and those who might share these limpwristed small “l” liberal views - support your party now?

I have no illusions about my influence Mr Manning but I can only say this. My father told me to always listen to my tummy. I have done that and this past week my tummy has made it pretty clear – the Reform Party does not stand for the kind of society I do. I may well break the law and destroy my ballot in general protest in the next election, Mr Manning, but unless there is a sea change in the Reform Party (and I see no hope of that happening) I will not complete the hat trick and support you a third time. For while I greatly admire many of your MPs – and Chuck Cadman comes instantly to mind but there are others – what your party stands for and what I stand for are too far apart for me ever to vote Reform again.