Q&As on the Merger
Process.
The following points are based in part on a legal opinion provided by Gardiner Roberts LLP, October 23, 2003
Regional Meetings
Question: Can the Agreement-in-Principle be implemented by any method other than a properly constituted national meeting?
Answer: No. It cannot be implemented by a mail-in ballot, regional meetings, or any other truncated version of a national meeting. Article 14 of the PC Party Constitution says "Amendments to the Constitution may be made at any national meeting." Period. Under procedural law, the greater the implications of the decision, the greater the obligation of those in responsibility to adhere to proper procedure. Since the dissolution of the Party is the most extreme constitutional amendment possible, it demands strict compliance with the Constitution.
Question: Aren't linked regional meetings in effect a National Meeting?
Answers: Not according to the constitution. Article 14 refers to "National Meeting" in the singular, not plural. A National meeting is where Tories form Vancouver talk directly to Tories from Montreal or Halifax. The Linked meetings dampen debate, are more vulnerable to manipulative politics and to technical errors.
Question: Why National Meetings?
Answer: The reason why the constitution calls for National Meetings is so that delegates from all the regions of Canada can meet face to face,discuss the issues before them in depth, debate, and reach consensus and a national coalition. Regional meetings violate the spirit of this provision in the Constitution.
Question: Isn’t it too complicated to organize a national meeting at this time?
Answer: After just organizing a highly successful leadership convention, the organizational resources are well practiced and available. There are a variety of conference spaces available at the time required, including the Toronto Convention Centre.
Question: Won’t a National Meeting cost the party a great deal?
Answer: Rather than loosing money, the party made $1,000,000. on its Leadership Convention. What the Liberals can not accomplish with months and at a loss of millions, Progressive Conservatives can do in weeks and at a profit.
Membership
Thousands of new members are joining the PC party. Canadian Alliance members are on record as saying they are joining the PC party for the sole purpose of voting it out of existence, and have publicly stated that they will be voting twice for the merger, once in the CA and once in the PCs. Yet the Management Committee is keeping the membership lists open. Alliance MPs such as Brian Pallister have mounted web sites for the sole purpose of inundating the PC party with Alliance members.
Question: Would it be undemocratic to hold in abeyance the new memberships that have been taken out after October 15th?
Answer: It is true that the PC Constitution make no provision for suspending new memberships other than 14 days before a critical vote. However it is also true that Article 5.1 of the Constitution says that: Every person who: is a citizen or permanent resident of Canada, has attained the age of fourteen (14) years, and actively supports the Aims and Principles of the Party is eligible for membership in the Party:
Canadian Alliance members who are joining the PC party for the sole purpose of dissolving the PC Party can in no way be held to be actively support[ing] the Aims and Principles of the Party.
Question: Canadians who want to preserve the PC party can sell new memberships as well. Why don’t those who want to preserve the party outsell those who want to destroy it?
Answer: Those Canadians who wanted to join the party and promote its aims did so a few months ago during the leadership race. Right now, the only people buying passage on a sinking ship are enthusiastic saboteurs.
Question: What can be done about the two card CA members who are only taking out PC memberships to vote for the merger?
Answer: The Management Committee administers the National Membership Program, one obligation of which is to verify the qualification of a person as a Member…" under Article 5.7.3 of the Constitution. If the Management Committee allows these public admissions by CA members to occur without some investigation they may be breaching their duty as provided for in the Constitution.
Bylaw 3.15 permits the National Director of the Party to make additional arrangements for the receipt of membership applications. This would permit a protocol for dealing with suspect membership applications.
Bylaw 4.71 allows constituency associations to protest delegate selection elections that may have been tainted by improperly admitted members. If the national meeting is held to be improperly constituted, or decisions taken at the meeting are successfully challenged because of failure to properly enforce membership admission criteria, the results of the meeting will be void.
Leadership
Question: Isn't the job of the leader of a political party provide decisive leadership? Peter MacKay has brought the party to this merger, now the party should follow his leadership.
Answer: The leader of a party is indeed supposed to provide leadership, in accordance with the constitution of the Party and with accountability to the membership. When Peter MacKay was elected to lead the Progressive Conservative Party in May, one of his slogans was "I am not the merger candidate". The self-declared merger candidate at the leadership convention received less than 1% of the vote. Article 5.1 of the Constitution says that members, presumably including the leader, will "actively support the Aims and Principles of the Party…" The constitution of the Progressive Conservative Party provides no provision for the Party to be dissolved.
Globe and Mail
Jan 24, 2003
MP Peter MacKay said, “the polls show that joining with the Alliance to fight the Liberals won't work. Not only would we jeopardize our own base of support, but we would forfeit the support of the broad spectrum of Canadians that we need to win," Mr. MacKay further said. “The Alliance is out of step with Canadians on almost all major issues...”
Unite The Right and Vote Splitting
Question: Doesn't the right have to unite in order to provide an alternative to the Liberals?
Answer: The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada is a broad based party of the centre, reflecting "the regional, cultural and socio-economic diversity of Canada". When the Party has succeeded it has been because it embraced these values. When the party has failed it has failed because has been a party "of the right."
The Canadian Alliance, nee the United Alternative, nee the Reform Party, is a twice worked over western protest party, that has failed to capture support in central, eastern, or northern Canada. The current demographics of the two Parties has the CA taking over the PCs, with over twice as many members and 4 times the number of sitting MPs. The voters who have rejected the Canadian Alliance will continue to reject the new "Conservative Party."
Time Limit
Question: A federal election is coming up next year, maybe in the next six months. The goal is to beat Paul Martin. Aren't we in a hurry to get the parties united to prepare for the election?
Answer: We seem to be in a hurry to get the parties united instead of preparing for the election. The new "Conservative Party" will likely enter the next election with no constitution, no policy, no elected national council, and possibly no leader. All this on the heels of an acrimonious merger spearheaded by two leaders who broke their promises to their own parties. And then they ask the electorate to trust them?
Management Committee Liability
Question: Will the Management Committee or its individual members be exposed to personal liability for unilaterally acting to implement the Agreement in Principle?
Answer: Yes. On a number of legal grounds and in a number of areas including the donations being directed from the PC Canada Fund to the new "Conservative Party" fund, the PC Party debt, donations to constituency associations, and other fiduciary obligations. As previously stated, where a decision has more significant implications, higher standards of procedure are expected, not lower.
PC Canada Fund
Question: What about the PC Canada Fund?
Answer: The management Committee may be individually liable for all claims from donors to the PC Canada Fund if they divert the funds to another beneficiary, as the donations have been made for a specific purpose to promote the goals of the PC party.
Remnant of the Party
Question: What happens to the PC Party if the merger is ratified and the "Conservative Party" is established? Can dissenters retain the assets of the party?
Answer: Yes. Caselaw suggests that loyal dissenters who adhere to the original objectives of the Party may be entitled to retain the assets of the original association. These assets would include the name of the PC Party, raising an intellectual property or Canada Elections Act issue potentially prohibiting the use of the name "Conservative Party of Canada" by the proposed new party.
The following points are based in part on a legal opinion provided by Gardiner Roberts LLP, October 23, 2003
Regional Meetings
Question: Can the Agreement-in-Principle be implemented by any method other than a properly constituted national meeting?
Answer: No. It cannot be implemented by a mail-in ballot, regional meetings, or any other truncated version of a national meeting. Article 14 of the PC Party Constitution says "Amendments to the Constitution may be made at any national meeting." Period. Under procedural law, the greater the implications of the decision, the greater the obligation of those in responsibility to adhere to proper procedure. Since the dissolution of the Party is the most extreme constitutional amendment possible, it demands strict compliance with the Constitution.
Question: Aren't linked regional meetings in effect a National Meeting?
Answers: Not according to the constitution. Article 14 refers to "National Meeting" in the singular, not plural. A National meeting is where Tories form Vancouver talk directly to Tories from Montreal or Halifax. The Linked meetings dampen debate, are more vulnerable to manipulative politics and to technical errors.
Question: Why National Meetings?
Answer: The reason why the constitution calls for National Meetings is so that delegates from all the regions of Canada can meet face to face,discuss the issues before them in depth, debate, and reach consensus and a national coalition. Regional meetings violate the spirit of this provision in the Constitution.
Question: Isn’t it too complicated to organize a national meeting at this time?
Answer: After just organizing a highly successful leadership convention, the organizational resources are well practiced and available. There are a variety of conference spaces available at the time required, including the Toronto Convention Centre.
Question: Won’t a National Meeting cost the party a great deal?
Answer: Rather than loosing money, the party made $1,000,000. on its Leadership Convention. What the Liberals can not accomplish with months and at a loss of millions, Progressive Conservatives can do in weeks and at a profit.
Membership
Thousands of new members are joining the PC party. Canadian Alliance members are on record as saying they are joining the PC party for the sole purpose of voting it out of existence, and have publicly stated that they will be voting twice for the merger, once in the CA and once in the PCs. Yet the Management Committee is keeping the membership lists open. Alliance MPs such as Brian Pallister have mounted web sites for the sole purpose of inundating the PC party with Alliance members.
Question: Would it be undemocratic to hold in abeyance the new memberships that have been taken out after October 15th?
Answer: It is true that the PC Constitution make no provision for suspending new memberships other than 14 days before a critical vote. However it is also true that Article 5.1 of the Constitution says that: Every person who: is a citizen or permanent resident of Canada, has attained the age of fourteen (14) years, and actively supports the Aims and Principles of the Party is eligible for membership in the Party:
Canadian Alliance members who are joining the PC party for the sole purpose of dissolving the PC Party can in no way be held to be actively support[ing] the Aims and Principles of the Party.
Question: Canadians who want to preserve the PC party can sell new memberships as well. Why don’t those who want to preserve the party outsell those who want to destroy it?
Answer: Those Canadians who wanted to join the party and promote its aims did so a few months ago during the leadership race. Right now, the only people buying passage on a sinking ship are enthusiastic saboteurs.
Question: What can be done about the two card CA members who are only taking out PC memberships to vote for the merger?
Answer: The Management Committee administers the National Membership Program, one obligation of which is to verify the qualification of a person as a Member…" under Article 5.7.3 of the Constitution. If the Management Committee allows these public admissions by CA members to occur without some investigation they may be breaching their duty as provided for in the Constitution.
Bylaw 3.15 permits the National Director of the Party to make additional arrangements for the receipt of membership applications. This would permit a protocol for dealing with suspect membership applications.
Bylaw 4.71 allows constituency associations to protest delegate selection elections that may have been tainted by improperly admitted members. If the national meeting is held to be improperly constituted, or decisions taken at the meeting are successfully challenged because of failure to properly enforce membership admission criteria, the results of the meeting will be void.
Leadership
Question: Isn't the job of the leader of a political party provide decisive leadership? Peter MacKay has brought the party to this merger, now the party should follow his leadership.
Answer: The leader of a party is indeed supposed to provide leadership, in accordance with the constitution of the Party and with accountability to the membership. When Peter MacKay was elected to lead the Progressive Conservative Party in May, one of his slogans was "I am not the merger candidate". The self-declared merger candidate at the leadership convention received less than 1% of the vote. Article 5.1 of the Constitution says that members, presumably including the leader, will "actively support the Aims and Principles of the Party…" The constitution of the Progressive Conservative Party provides no provision for the Party to be dissolved.
Globe and Mail
Jan 24, 2003
MP Peter MacKay said, “the polls show that joining with the Alliance to fight the Liberals won't work. Not only would we jeopardize our own base of support, but we would forfeit the support of the broad spectrum of Canadians that we need to win," Mr. MacKay further said. “The Alliance is out of step with Canadians on almost all major issues...”
Unite The Right and Vote Splitting
Question: Doesn't the right have to unite in order to provide an alternative to the Liberals?
Answer: The Progressive Conservative Party of Canada is a broad based party of the centre, reflecting "the regional, cultural and socio-economic diversity of Canada". When the Party has succeeded it has been because it embraced these values. When the party has failed it has failed because has been a party "of the right."
The Canadian Alliance, nee the United Alternative, nee the Reform Party, is a twice worked over western protest party, that has failed to capture support in central, eastern, or northern Canada. The current demographics of the two Parties has the CA taking over the PCs, with over twice as many members and 4 times the number of sitting MPs. The voters who have rejected the Canadian Alliance will continue to reject the new "Conservative Party."
Time Limit
Question: A federal election is coming up next year, maybe in the next six months. The goal is to beat Paul Martin. Aren't we in a hurry to get the parties united to prepare for the election?
Answer: We seem to be in a hurry to get the parties united instead of preparing for the election. The new "Conservative Party" will likely enter the next election with no constitution, no policy, no elected national council, and possibly no leader. All this on the heels of an acrimonious merger spearheaded by two leaders who broke their promises to their own parties. And then they ask the electorate to trust them?
Management Committee Liability
Question: Will the Management Committee or its individual members be exposed to personal liability for unilaterally acting to implement the Agreement in Principle?
Answer: Yes. On a number of legal grounds and in a number of areas including the donations being directed from the PC Canada Fund to the new "Conservative Party" fund, the PC Party debt, donations to constituency associations, and other fiduciary obligations. As previously stated, where a decision has more significant implications, higher standards of procedure are expected, not lower.
PC Canada Fund
Question: What about the PC Canada Fund?
Answer: The management Committee may be individually liable for all claims from donors to the PC Canada Fund if they divert the funds to another beneficiary, as the donations have been made for a specific purpose to promote the goals of the PC party.
Remnant of the Party
Question: What happens to the PC Party if the merger is ratified and the "Conservative Party" is established? Can dissenters retain the assets of the party?
Answer: Yes. Caselaw suggests that loyal dissenters who adhere to the original objectives of the Party may be entitled to retain the assets of the original association. These assets would include the name of the PC Party, raising an intellectual property or Canada Elections Act issue potentially prohibiting the use of the name "Conservative Party of Canada" by the proposed new party.
