According to Peter MacKay, leader of the party formerly known asthe Progressive Conservatives, the newly united Conservative Party has “justbecome Paul Martin’s worst nightmare.” At least, that’s his position today;it can’t really be considered legally binding in the future.

Notwithstanding the fact that declaring oneself to be one’s opponent’s worstnightmare is a pretty tired political device (e.g. Ernie Eves said he was“Dalton McGuinty’s worst nightmare” and we know what happened to him), I’mprepared to grant that the new party will, in fact, be a nightmare. But, farfrom being a nightmare for Martin (or for the country), I would submit thatthe real nightmare will be for those who think that the RegressiveConservatives are poised to mount a serious challenge in the coming federalelection campaign.

Since 1993, the various incarnations of Canada’s political right haveconsistently blamed vote splitting for their failure to make a significantelectoral breakthrough. The reality is that Canadians are simply unwillingto embrace extreme right-wing policies. To the extent that there is anyappetite for less drastic conservative ideas, Canadians have been content tohave those ideas implemented by the moderate conservative party known as theLiberals. Particularly now that Paul Martin, whose credentials as a fiscalconservative are well-established, is taking over as Prime Minister, thereis no evidence that moderate right wingers will abandon the Liberal partyfor a more extreme alternative.

Moreover, the new party faces so many logistical hurdles on thepath to the next election that it is likely to be left gasping for breathbefore it even gets close to the finish line. For starters, consider thefact that the party will continue to have two “principal spokespeople”during the transition. Both Stephen Harper and Peter MacKay are expected tocombine their new spokesperson role with that of leadership candidate. Atthe very least, the inevitable sniping should be a salve for those who arenostalgic for the days when the parties officially hated each other.

Meanwhile, Senator John Lynch-Staunton will hold the nominal leadership ofthe party, apparently so that someone could “have signing authority.”Lynch-Staunton told reporters that he had not sought the position of interimleader, but had agreed to serve when asked. “It’s more to fill in a blank,”he said. Outside of the irony of a party that favours an elected Senate (ornot, depending on what is eventually decided) having an appointed Senator asits leader, I hardly think that Paul Martin is losing any sleep over theprospect of facing a “fill in the blank” as an opponent.

Not only will the party be leaderless until March 19 or 20 —just weeks before an anticipated spring election — but it has noorganizational structure, no money (outside of the combined party debts)and, as mentioned above, no policy. At least three, possibly more, membersof the PC caucus will not be joining the new party. The party will try towork out these details over the next three months, but the results can bepredicted: a hodgepodge of Reform and Tory policies that makes neither sidehappy. Bilingualism, gay rights, tax policy, health care, multiculturalismand capital punishment promise to be key areas of disagreement.

As formerConservative cabinet minister Flora MacDonald charged in her anti-mergerspeech on Saturday, “You will not be able to wish away these contradictions,or gloss over them. You are trying to create a party with no policy and nohigher purpose than opportunism.” She’s right, of course, about the party’soverriding objective; but, the word opportunism presumes an opportunity thatis not there.

Besides Martin’s Liberals, the primary beneficiary of thecollapse of the right will likely be the New Democrats. Four polls releasedin the last month have put the party in second place, and two of those fourpolls show that they will maintain that status even after the merger(proving that the idea that one can simply add the PC and Alliance votestogether is a logical fallacy). Even former Prime Minister Joe Clark ispredicting that “the party that’s going to gain is the party of the left,the New Democrats, because Layton has been able to hold them fairly close tothe centre, and when those votes inevitably get shaken loose, they’re goingto look for someplace reliable to go. I think there’ll be too muchapprehension about this new party.”

If voters want a fiscally conservative, socially moderategovernment, they’ll vote for Paul Martin. But other voters will be lookingfor a credible alternative to Paul Martin, and they’ll find it in the NDP.The new Conservative Party could well be relegated to third place or,depending on the strength of the Bloc Quebecois, possibly even to fourthplace. And, those who thought they were preparing the way for an extremeright wing government in Canada will have to find a new excuse for losing.

picture-2299.jpg

Scott Piatkowski

Scott Piatkowski is a former columnist for rabble.ca. He wrote a weekly column for 13 years that appeared in the Waterloo Chronicle, the Woolwich Observer and ECHO Weekly. He has also written for Straight...