CKNW Editorial
for March 28, 2000

Charles II said of his brother-in-law, the Prince of Denmark … " I have tried him drunk and I’ve tried him sober and there is nothing in him." While Stockwell Day is, I understand, an abstemious chap and I haven’t been drunk for years I can only say I tried him sober and wasn’t much impressed.

A very nice chap … no doubt about that. And impressive looking … only 47 … and glib of tongue. But so far as I could tell, not much substance there.

Why do I say that?

Well anyone who truly thinks that homosexuality is a matter of choice simply either doesn’t know what he’s talking about or doesn’t want to. It is a matter of choice for gays to practice abstinence – as it is for heterosexuals but homosexuality is for most gay people something over which they have no control.

I did not ask Mr Day to like the idea of homosexuality – whenever I think of homosexual practices - which is seldom, I find myself repelled by the thought. But while his answer re gays and government entitlements to gay couples was suitably vague I still came away with the substantial feeling that his view of the matter is from a religious base not a secular one. Since he is not seeking to be the Pope, the Moderator of the United Church or a Bishop in the Anglican Church of Canada I was not after his religious views but his secular ones … and if I were gay or someone feeling that gays should not be discriminated against I would not have been happy with his treatment of this subject. That combined with his replies with respect to the death penalty and corporal punishment left me feeling that before I was going to like what he said, I would have to make a violent and substantial lurch to the right.

But it was on matters of reform that I really came away feeling empty. I have quizzed Preston Manning on this for years and have concluded that Reform doesn’t want to reform a damn thing except lower taxes and have free votes in the legislature.

I put to him what I think most British Columbians feel – it is wrong that 50%+1 of the House of Commons elected by 40% of the voters and nearly all from two of five regions should have 100% of the power. And what did he propose doing about it? That’s where the guts of the problem is and that’s what needs fixing. He rambled on about free votes and fixing the Senate and avoided what is the admittedly tough but nevertheless vital question – how are we going to reform a terrible system that bids fair to be the undoing of our country?

Neither Mr Manning nor Mr Day will admit that "free votes" are an illusory reform. But they are. For to permit MPs to vote as they please really changes nothing. On matters that are serious to the government, they’ll put the whip on anyway. And for those that are not critical, the Prime Minister will still exercise authority simply by letting it being known what his pleasure is and the knowledge that he will punish the bad and reward the good. I’m not saying that free votes aren’t a good idea – just that as a reform it’s pretty thin gruel.

On the plain down and dirty question as to whether he saw Canada as the embodiment of a two founding nations philosophy or ten juridically equal provinces he ducked and ran for cover endorsing both views depending on where you happen to be at any given moment.

This was Mr Day’s first chance to speak to a large number of people upon whose support he must depend. I think he blew it. He obviously wasn’t prepared for the questions … questions one would have thought were obvious.

There is no doubt that Stockwell Day is presentable and from the spin doctor’s point of view, a lot more saleable than Mr Manning. He speaks firmly … Mr Manning squeaks. He looks like a vigorous young man that’s with it … Mr Manning looks like a nerd who isn’t. Stockwell Day has the makings of some Vander Zalm like charisma – Manning is "what you sees is what you gets."

I will be interested in meeting the other candidates but I can say this … I think – unless there’s a hell of a lot more to him than I saw yesterday Stockwell Day is a political image not a man of lasting substance.

It may be, of course, that Stockwell Day wishes to leave the impression that he’s homophobic and "hang ‘em high" who cares less about articulating a philosophy we can judge … preferring not to alienate his right wing support than appealing to "middle of the road British Columbian. It may be that his concern is only to be elected leader and is thus appealing to the bottom feeders in his party and puts the gaining of votes in Ontario way in front of any considerations for those of the center who want a reason – any reason – not to vote Liberal.

At the end of the day we of the middle persuasion will probably be left with the horrible choice of either voting Liberal for reasons of social philosophy or for the Canadian Alternative for constitutional reasons.

What about the NDP or the Tories?

To vote for Alexa McDonough and her aging and motley crew would be wasting a vote for slogans of yesteryear. To vote for Joe Clark is something you would never want to admit for fear of being laughed out of your circle of friends.

No … there should be an center right option so far there none is obvious. Certainly Stockwell Day didn’t present one … at least not to me he didn’t.