Harper issues invitation to PCs
Stephen Harper, National Post

Dear PC member,

All of us in the Canadian Alliance and federal Progressive Conservatives share the goal of defeating the Liberals and giving Canada the government our great country deserves. With that in mind, I want you to be aware of the proposal that I made to your leader, the Rt. Hon. Joe Clark, in early April of this year.

I proposed to Mr. Clark that:

- Our parties commit to running one slate of candidates in the next federal election.

- This effort begin with a Canadian Alliance-Progressive Conservative coalition in the House of Commons.

- The ultimate goal be the full amalgamation of our two parties.

The Canadian Alliance is strong and here to stay. It is the Official Opposition and the dominant party in most of Western Canada. It has a deep electoral base capable of re-electing the Official Opposition and making significant further progress even in the short term. Mr. Clark's strategy of waiting for the Alliance to collapse has not worked.

Your party remains a major force throughout Atlantic Canada. Beyond that, our parties in collaboration would create a significant "troisième voie" in Quebec, though much work would still have to be done. Above all, a combined force in Ontario would instantly end the Liberal hegemony in that province and probably its majority in the next federal election.

The success of conservative provincial parties, particularly in Ontario, demonstrates that our grassroots members are less divided than our career professionals. And polling data across a wide range of issues indicate that large portions of our voting blocs share basic political views.

For these reasons, the Canadian Alliance has spent a good portion of the past four years seeking a single slate of candidates between our parties. But, to be blunt, our party has indicated it is now past the point where it will entertain processes, exercises and committees without this clear electoral objective. Under our Westminster system of parliamentary government, we must either seek office together or as opponents. More limited forms of unity, such as local initiatives or parliamentary co-operation, will not function without broader electoral agreement at the highest levels.

My proposal is obviously based on the principles of the Progressive Conservative-Democratic Representative (PC-DR) coalition that Mr. Clark until recently championed. But it does more. It addresses a central reason for that arrangement's collapse -- Mr. Clark's hesitancy in committing to the electoral objective for which the coalition was established in the first place.

It would be wrong to dismiss a CA-PC coalition arrangement as a "junior partner" proposal simply because of the DR experience within the Clark coalition. It was not only their small numbers that made the DRs weak. They were organized in only about two dozen ridings, had merely a skeletal national structure and were not a registered political party. In short, they brought little to the table in electoral terms.

In contrast, the Canadian Alliance recognizes that a coalition with the PCs would make both parties critical to the venture's objectives. The influence of the PC party in the parliamentary coalition would inevitably be disproportionate to its relatively small numbers. And these entities would not long remain divided blocs. Once an electoral commitment is made and a parliamentary coalition is cemented, we are no longer rival political navies. We are all in the same boat.

Time is now our most valuable commodity. All the activities necessary to make this proposal operational -- approval of our caucuses and parties, joint candidate protocols, joint platform development, the disposition of your indebtedness -- require time, effort and incentive. We have no more than two years to the next election, for which our preparations are only now beginning. We cannot afford to leave this offer on the table beyond this summer.

My observation is that what many Progressive Conservatives value, far more than the causes which many of us share, is the preservation of your institution -- the "thin blue line" that links the party of Macdonald and Canadian Confederation to the majority governments of Brian Mulroney.

My proposal will assure the survival, within the bounds of political reality, of what is important about that legacy. No matter how old and distinguished, a legacy cannot assure its own survival. Proof of this can be seen in Quebec, British Columbia and Saskatchewan, where the historic PC Party has all but vanished.

The ongoing weakness of the federal PC party is already threatening the survival of its own legacy. Although our parties disagreed on many things during Mr. Mulroney's tenure, we acknowledge his positive achievements and believe the country should do the same.

Ironically, Mr. Mulroney's most lasting and worthwhile accomplishment -- continental free trade -- is more strongly attacked in your party than in any other. The growth of the David Orchard wing -- a result of your last leadership race and the weakness of your current organization -- is as much a threat to the Conservative legacy as any of your political opponents.

I am asking you today to give my proposal the most serious consideration. I invite you to discuss it with me or my representatives. Those who share democratic conservative principles and policies should work together to remove the Liberals and provide Canada with honest, efficient government.

Sincerely yours,

Stephen Harper,

Leader,

Canadian Alliance