Ontario Reform oblivious to grassroots supporters

Campaign Life Coalition warns that pro-family Reform Party supporters should be concerned about the increasing social liberal direction of its Ontario branch. CLC national president Jim Hughes states that "Reform doesn't seem to have learned anything from its Ontario failures and is going further in the direction of alienating its natural constituency in the province."

In early August, the national Reform leadership in Calgary appointed Nancy Branscombe to be the executive director of an important "merge the right" initiative to increase its support in Ontario. Branscombe was the Eastern Ontario organizer for the party prior to the June federal election. During the election she was defeated as a Reform candidate in the riding of Peterborough.

In response to the CLC election questionnaire, Branscombe indicated that she considers herself to be pro-choice, does not oppose the sale and listing of the abortion drug RU-486 and supports legalized doctor-assisted suicide.

She was not the conservative family values candidate that most Canadians and most grassroots Reform supporters would expect a Reform candidate to be. In fact, the general calibre of Ontario candidates was markedly different (with notable exceptions) than those from the western provinces where Reform elected all of its MPs.

Notable difference between Ontario and western candidates

The graphs accompanying this article illustrate one of the reasons that Reform did not receive the votes it expected in Ontario, despite much greater planning and organization this time around. The graphs are based on responses and other candidate information received by CLC during the election.

There were more pro-abortion Reformers running in Ontario (17% vs. 10% in the west). Far fewer Reform candidates were solidly pro-life (11% in Ontario to 41% in the West). As well, CLC had a noticeably more difficult time getting Ontario Reform candidates to openly state their beliefs on the life issues, which directly contravenes Reform's policy of openness. In the end, a 20% greater percentage of Ontario candidates refused to give any indication of their views. Even a few previously enthusiastic pro-lifers seemed to have been intimidated by party organizers into only mouthing the party referendum policy.

Reform went out of its way in the election to avoid any identification with pro-life. CLC president Jim Hughes repeatedly requested a meeting with party leader Preston Manning. Assurances were given that this would take place, but in the end, Manning or his staff always avoided the meeting .

Pro-life campaign manager dismissed

The March, 1996 fiasco of the dismissal of a pro-life Reform campaign manager in the Etobicoke North by-election was the first indication that something was seriously amiss in the Ontario branch of the party.

Joe Peschisolido had run on a strong pro-life platform as a Reform candidate in the 1993 general election. He asked his friend Peter Smith to be his campaign manager for the 1996 by-election and Peter gladly accepted.

During an early campaign planning session with Ontario party brass, which included Nancy Branscombe, Smith innocently suggested a strategy was needed to get out the pro-life vote, among others, since Joe was pro-life. This caused the party staff to suddenly become visibly anxious. An interrogation took place. It was learned that Peter was previously an active member of Liberals for Life and comments were made that the campaign could somehow be endangered if this information became public.

Eventually, Joe intimated to Peter that it would be best if he resigned since it was threatened that all party support for the campaign would be withdrawn unless Peter was removed. Smith had no choice but to resign. Peschisolido subsequently followed a very timid, strict party policy stance on the life issues - and lost. It was impossible to mobilize pro-life support.

During the 1997 election it became obvious that Ontario Reform wanted nothing to do with the life issues. A shotgun approach was used to recruit candidates, going so ridiculously far as to officially invite members of the mostly far-left Toronto city council (one being an openly militant homosexual) to become Reform candidates.

Branscombe rejects another pro-lifer

In Bancroft, aspiring Reform nomination candidate, John-Henry Westen, was interviewed by

Nancy Branscombe. Upon learning that he was pro-life and would not commit to following the party's referendum policy on the life issues, Branscombe stated that there was no point in John-Henry showing up at the nomination meeting. She told him that "about 50% of the Reform party is pro-choice". Henry states "'this is not the pro-life party' seemed to be the message".

Immediately after the election, on national television, Reform leader Preston Manning proudly emphasized that his party "did not align itself with any special interests".

To pro-family leaders, the term "special interests" normally refers to the left-wing, government funded and supported groups that have caused great damage to life and family in the nation. To CLC, it seemed that Manning was referring to traditional family groups, especially pro-life.

Hamilton West Reform candidate Ken Griffith refused to respond to the CLC questionnaire stating "he does not become involved with special interest groups". Brant candidate, Daniel Houssar said he "will not actively campaign on either side of such issues". Gloucester-Carleton Reform candidate, Shanna Smith's campaign manager stated the candidate "would not inflict his (pro-life) views on his constituents."

Why is Reform avoiding life issues?

Campaign Life's Jim Hughes asks "Why go to such lengths to avoid these issues? What on earth was the advantage? It gained Reform nothing in Ontario and it's percentage of the national popular vote went slightly down from 1993." CLC is amazed that Reform persistently refuses to accept the substantial evidence that credible candidates never lose votes by being openly pro-life.

Rick Anderson, the party's Calgary based key strategist recently stated, in reference to the "merge the right" campaign, "We're going to be launching a pretty serious effort in Ontario to bring together voters who are looking for a fiscally responsible, democratically accountable alternative to the Liberals."

CLC questions whether the party's Ontario strategy is not to become more like today's PCs and Liberals in order to supposedly defeat them. Hughes states, "this is not only unnecessary, it is a tragedy. Reform can win seats in Ontario by going back to its original grassroots values and giving voters a real alternative on social, as well as economic issues." Hughes believes that, like the Ontario provincial PCs, who have also foolishly decided to avoid social conservatism, Reform will lose those many traditional voters who make that extra difference between success and defeat in so many ridings.

There appears to be a growing number of pro-family leaders who believe that Reform's often strongly enforced and totally unnecessary policy of mandatory referenda on only a few selected issues - the life issues - will prove to be the party's Achilles heel. It may gradually drive a powerful wedge between the party and its strongest grassroots support . Ontario Reform, taking it one step further by totally avoiding any identification with pro-life, appears to be the tail that may wag the dog on this trend.

CLC thankful for presence of Reform MPs

To balance the apparently negative impression of Reform given by this article it must be stated that the party is generally still far more friendly to life and family than the other major parties. There were a number of pro-life, pro-family candidates in Ontario and other provinces who indicated they would not abide by the local referenda policy on life issues. Most notable was former Liberal MP, Garnett Bloomfield, who ran for Reform in Perth-Middlesex. Garnett stated to the Interim that he "would rather offend man than God." A very prominent and successful new candidate from the West also refused to subject his conscience to the party policy on these matters of life and death.