• Graham Thomson of the Edmonton Journal paints a harsh picture of the Wildrose AGM.
• Rick Bell is, well, Rick Bell.
• The Calgary Herald tries to give a positive spin on the Wildrose ditching their values for electoral success. There is now an open revolt in the comment area of the page reacting the the Wildrose’s about-face.
• Daveberta pays lip service to the event, with his regular anti-Liberal inflective while, at the same time, heralding the Wildrose’s activities akin to big Liberal Lawrence Decore.
• I wrote a piece on Friday about how neither here nor there the Wildrose policy book was. Two months ago I wrote quite a negative post on the Wildrose (which, by the way, is the fourth link on a google search when you look for “wildrose blog”).
• Climenhaga gives his thoughts, projections, and advice to Danielle Smith and her fledgeling Wildrose.
• Ms. Smith’s keynote address (video) and a transcript.

And myself?

There’s nothing different between the PCs and the Wildrose now. Vision-less and only vying for power for power’s sake. With this AGM out of the way this is bluntly clear. Danielle Smith has chosen, along with her party, to ditch their ideological positions (guns, nuclear energy, property rights) in favor of telling platitudes and bland blatherings on nothingness. Thomson of the Edmonton Journal said it perfectly:

Some of their resolutions, such as one encouraging “environmentally responsible” development of non-renewable resources, were so mainstream they would have been at home in a New Democrat convention.

What’s strange (and you can see this in the transcript) is that Ms. Smith declares that the Wildrose is a centrist, big tent party. Hm. The problem with this is that she says that she wants to turf the Big L Liberal-like baddies out of office in Edmonton–which are entirely imagined, seeing that those Liberals haven’t been in power for almost a century and, of course, if you’re centrist aren’t you supposed to pull in people–oh, I don’t know–that are a bit left of center?

Obviously she and the entirety of the Wildrose are just paying lip service to lull people into voting for them. No definable trait has emerged from the party–at all–from this convention.

The nuclear power resolution failed. The guns-as-property-rights resolution failed.

The “essential services”, and limiting stoppages of those, resolution was a wishy-washy affair where, as Thomson eruditely points out:

Under the old policy, teachers were declared an “essential service” and denied the power to walk off the job. The new policy says a Wildrose government would review what services should be deemed essential and “implement reforms that will ensure those employed in ‘essential services’ are treated fairly.”

It is a policy so warm and fuzzy you could wear it to bed. But it is also so vague it could yet be used a jackboot against teachers and anyone else the party deems to be working in an essential service.

The environment resolution was tossed to the wayside because it stated that, in fuzzy terms, that all steps to stem climate change should be tempered by science… And why does this toss it to the way side? Ms. Smith still thinks the science hasn’t bee settled yet She’s a self-proclaimed “realist.” By undercutting the 30 years of science pointing to the fact that global warming exists she makes her resolution sound nice and pleasant, but the truth behind her pleasant facade is quite plain. No action, nor movement, and no guts on climate change or the environment will come from the Wildrose–at least, according to the resolutions passed and their previous statements.

And the anti-gun control resolution? It was so loosely worded to begin with it didn’t matter whether or not it passed, although it did fail anyways. I suppose that’s all fine and dandy, except, err, that means that the Wildrose just dodged the topic and didn’t actually commit to anything.

In summary, the AGM seems to be a wishy-washy affair where the only thing that is clear is that the Wildrose is pissed, angry at Ed Stelmach, and are not the Progressive Conservatives. That’s not much to build the party on. That’s not much of anything.

If Danielle Smith wants her message to resound with voters in the great province of Alberta she needs to change her tune. Albertans have never reacted well to negative nancies. It’s vision. And the Wildrose and Danielle Smith have shown that they just don’t have it.

At 15% support Ms. Smith has fallen from the 42% (according to Angus Reid) she held in December and from the tie with the PCs she had only a few months ago. She and the Wildrose have dropped some thirty points and, with this AGM, is bluntly clear as to why. With no vision, no plan, no credibility the Wildrose has had its day in the sun and will be expected to quietly make its exit.

One Response to “Wildrose AGM Recap”