The future identity of the Manitoba Progressive Conservatives

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 08/02/2025 (242 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

The Manitoba Progressive Conservative party is in the midst of a leadership contest in which Obby Khan, MLA for Fort Whyte in Winnipeg is facing off against Wally Daudrich, a former two-time candidate from Morden and Churchill. The outcome of the contest will affect the identity and future electoral prospects of a party which since 1969 (the year of the first NDP victory) has lost nine times and won only six times.

The last three PC governments led by premiers Pallister and Stefanson between 2016 and 2023 followed a contentious, mostly limited government policy approach, leading to a backlash from many citizens. A divisive negative campaign sent the PCs into opposition after the October 2023 election and led to the present search for a new permanent leader.

These developments, along with numerous other changes in the political environment, will affect how party members see the desirable future identity of the party and how the next leader will embody that identity in his words and actions.

The leadership contest might be seen as a clash between an urban, progressive, centrist candidate (Khan) and a rural, conservative, right-wing candidate (Daudrich), but that characterization would exaggerate the ideological differences between the candidates.

The conventional wisdom is that the PC party can only win more frequently by adopting a moderate right of centre identity based on policies and messaging which aims to bridge geographic, ideological, class and ethnic divides within the province. Along these lines, Mr. Khan claims that he will lead a “big tent” party.

In contrast, Mr. Daudrich argues that past attempts to broaden the appeal of the party watered down its commitment to traditional conservatism. Under his leadership, the party would revert to “true conservative values.” Restoration would be symbolized by dropping the hybrid PC party label, which he argues is an oxymoron. A party cannot, in his view, be simultaneously both progressive and conservative in its philosophy and policy positions.

A further argument is that voters deserve a pure conservative party, not one which follows other parties to the “mushy middle.” A gradual rightward shift in the broader political culture suggests this is an opportune time to refine what the party stands for. Current strong voter support for the hardline conservatism of Pierre Poilievre, leader of the national party, is supposedly a good omen for clarifying the identity of the provincial party.

In my view, seeing the leadership contest as a choice between two brands of conservatism is unduly simplified.

First, there is a difference between conservatism as a philosophical disposition and as an ideology represented by a political party which shapes its policies, messaging and image in a competitive environment. Debating conservatism in the political arena cannot resemble an academic seminar.

Second, over time and during any particular period, multiple varieties of conservative thinking have existed within Conservative parties at the national and provincial level in Canada. The adoption of the dual PC label happened back in the 1940s under historical circumstances which cannot be reviewed here. Under that label, those parties developed evolving organizational cultures in which certain ideas were more ascendant at different times reflecting the changing external environment.

A restorative project to return the Manitoba PC party to its supposed foundational values ignores this diversity of ideas. Also, it might be seen to diminish the impressive policy legacy of PC premier Duff Roblin (1958-1967) who governed based on the belief that a “progressive centrist” approach matched the political culture of the province at that time.

Political parties are often described as groups of like-minded individuals who compete for public office, That description hides the extent to which parties act as “umbrella” associations comprised of people with a range of opinions on different topics.

Accommodating such differences within the messaging and governing approaches of the PC party has been difficult, has led to infighting, and contributed to more frequent leadership changes than in the NDP.

To provide some sense of the conservative tradition, here are some brief thumbnail sketches of a number of past and present belief systems within the PC party culture:

Progressive (Red Tory) conservatism which supports conservative values, but accepts a role for government in terms of policies which serve a collective societal purpose.

Fiscal conservatism which stands for limited government, low taxes, balanced budgets, deregulation and privatization of existing government functions.

Social conservatism involves traditional family and religious values on issues like abortion, sexual identities, euthanasia etc., as well as strict law and order policies.

Institutional conservatism involves respect for the principles, practices and norms of behaviour of the constitutional order, including cabinet-parliamentary government.

Populist (with streaks of libertarianism) conservatism has strengthened recently, partly in response to the pandemic, reflecting mistrust, grievance and anger towards institutions and elites of various kinds. Calls for “common sense” in governing are part of appeals to disenchanted voters.

Populism has reflected and reinforced the rise of identity politics and political correctness as powerful, divisive forces within the political culture. It is widely recognized that left-of-centre parties have worked identity issues to their political advantage. Less recognized is a conservative variety of identity politics which capitalizes politically on a backlash to issues of identity and inclusion being brought forward.

The identity of a party and the image of its leader often become fused in the public mind. Hardline adherence to any variety of conservatism, without a willingness to recognize and accommodate other perspectives, will not bring enduring political success in a provincial political culture which is evolving, but remains mainly moderate and pragmatic.

Paul G. Thomas is professor emeritus of Political Studies at the University of Manitoba.