Things are looking a little clearer now. For a long time, it looked like the United Conservative Party leadership race was between Brian Jean and Danielle Smith, both former party leaders. In a leadership debate however, you can always tell who is the one to beat: It’s the person everybody attacks..On August 30, that was Danielle Smith. Travis Toews, who conducted an energetic and detail-laden argument throughout, emerged as her closest rival. And it is hard to imagine what Mr. Jean would have to do to retrieve his former position..Anything could happen before the vote, of course. For one thing, there remains in Alberta a sub-culture of voters who once worshipped the ground upon which Ms. Smith trod, yet for whom the error of judgment she committed in abandoning the Wildrose Party to join Jim Prentice’s government remains unforgivable. For these, former finance minister Travis Toews had a few words: The Notley years were Ms. Smith’s fault. .For Ms. Smith, it is a handicap. But no reasonable witness to last night’s proceedings could say other than Ms. Smith was calm, focussed on her key message — confront Ottawa — and word perfect in her delivery. An armed opponent, then: Other candidates had lots to say about her, but nobody had much to say to her. .Hers was an impressive performance..So too however was that of Mr. Toews. Indeed, if one could have known that the main event of the entire debate would take place at the one-hour 35 minute mark, when Mr. Toews and Ms. Smith talked energy and the issue of the moment, how best to push back against Ottawa, one could have watched the rest with one eye closed..To be sure, it devolved for a while into the two of them thrusting sections of the constitution at each other: One pictures superannuated professors of the Calgary School leaning forward eagerly in their chairs, but perhaps not everybody else..Nevertheless, it was here the issue came out. Whatever the NDP wishes to make the next election about, the thing on the minds of people living in Alberta right now is the federal Liberal government’s plans to put the energy industry out of business..Ms. Smith would use the Sovereignty Act to force a conversation with Ottawa, one that would go much beyond energy..Mr. Toews is no less anxious to engage a federal government he describes as “completely blind to the realities globally right now.” But in talking about “bringing (US) Senator Joe Manchin to demonstrate the value of this province and this industry to North American energy security," he was in the weeds. There’s little reason to think the present US administration is any readier to listen to Albertans pitching energy security (or to Senator Manchin recommending Albertans) than this Canadian Liberal government is to listen to the grievances of Western Canadians..Mr. Toews had to say something. It just didn’t sound like much when he said it..Ms. Smith played to the anti-vax constituency; there would be no mask mandates on her watch, no lockdowns, no forced vaccination, either. Heavy applause..Mr. Toews also hit a home run when he told the crowd when it came to schooling, his first principle was “parents are the individuals primarily responsible for their children's education.” This was very much the right thing to say. That’s partly because it IS the right thing to say, but the audience had been primed by both Leela Aheer and Rajan Sawhney. There was code-speak going on that suggested they both had an expanded view of the role of the ATA in public education..When directly questioned, for example, Ms. Aheer said she was “all for school choice,” then quickly added she “strongly supported the public system.” One doesn’t have to be a genius to guess what choice she would recommend, especially after giving teachers, administrators, and organizers a shout out..Likewise when Ms. Sawhney said she was committed to “curriculum review” and the “need to get teachers onboard,” it did sound like Morse Code for subbing out the curriculum to the Alberta Teachers’ Association..And although they think it’s a terrible thing to ‘balance the budget on the backs of our children,’ it has to be asked: Isn’t it also a terrible thing to borrow money now for our children to pay back in 20 years time? Perhaps the balanced budget thingy isn’t such a bad idea?.For this audience, this was off-message. No surprise, then, that Mr. Toews got his ovation..There is no perfect leadership debate and with only two-hours, seven candidates and a host determined to preserve a deep veneer of civilized unity, this one was never going to be it. Indeed, moderator Jeff Davison spent almost as much time rebuking the audience for clapping out of sequence, as they did in clapping..Then add in the puff ball questions — ‘Mr. Loewen, what would you do to defend our agricultural sector from yet another harmful policy from Ottawa government?’ — and you knew there would be time to get up and go to the fridge. For the record, Todd Loewen contributed one of the evening’s original ideas, a ‘Right to Farm Act,’ protecting the right of farmers to “do their business and do their business way they feel is right,” and “say no to Ottawa.”.However, nobody fights about farm policy..Rebecca Schultz, the likeable MLA for Calgary Shaw, is one to watch. Not this time perhaps, but maybe next?.Which leaves Brian Jean. He does still have a significant following. He stayed on his message, made sensible commitments — yes, inflation is a big deal and ending royalties on gasoline for domestic use would be worth 15 cents/litre, and yes, we’ll take that. Yet, at the end of the night, Mr. Jean had not knocked the stool out from under Mr. Toews’s feet. .As for Ms. Smith, according to the relentlessly inquisitive polling companies that interrupt supper nightly, many Albertans already claimed her for their own. After tonight, they would have had no reason to change their minds..Ballots go into the mail on September 2nd.
Things are looking a little clearer now. For a long time, it looked like the United Conservative Party leadership race was between Brian Jean and Danielle Smith, both former party leaders. In a leadership debate however, you can always tell who is the one to beat: It’s the person everybody attacks..On August 30, that was Danielle Smith. Travis Toews, who conducted an energetic and detail-laden argument throughout, emerged as her closest rival. And it is hard to imagine what Mr. Jean would have to do to retrieve his former position..Anything could happen before the vote, of course. For one thing, there remains in Alberta a sub-culture of voters who once worshipped the ground upon which Ms. Smith trod, yet for whom the error of judgment she committed in abandoning the Wildrose Party to join Jim Prentice’s government remains unforgivable. For these, former finance minister Travis Toews had a few words: The Notley years were Ms. Smith’s fault. .For Ms. Smith, it is a handicap. But no reasonable witness to last night’s proceedings could say other than Ms. Smith was calm, focussed on her key message — confront Ottawa — and word perfect in her delivery. An armed opponent, then: Other candidates had lots to say about her, but nobody had much to say to her. .Hers was an impressive performance..So too however was that of Mr. Toews. Indeed, if one could have known that the main event of the entire debate would take place at the one-hour 35 minute mark, when Mr. Toews and Ms. Smith talked energy and the issue of the moment, how best to push back against Ottawa, one could have watched the rest with one eye closed..To be sure, it devolved for a while into the two of them thrusting sections of the constitution at each other: One pictures superannuated professors of the Calgary School leaning forward eagerly in their chairs, but perhaps not everybody else..Nevertheless, it was here the issue came out. Whatever the NDP wishes to make the next election about, the thing on the minds of people living in Alberta right now is the federal Liberal government’s plans to put the energy industry out of business..Ms. Smith would use the Sovereignty Act to force a conversation with Ottawa, one that would go much beyond energy..Mr. Toews is no less anxious to engage a federal government he describes as “completely blind to the realities globally right now.” But in talking about “bringing (US) Senator Joe Manchin to demonstrate the value of this province and this industry to North American energy security," he was in the weeds. There’s little reason to think the present US administration is any readier to listen to Albertans pitching energy security (or to Senator Manchin recommending Albertans) than this Canadian Liberal government is to listen to the grievances of Western Canadians..Mr. Toews had to say something. It just didn’t sound like much when he said it..Ms. Smith played to the anti-vax constituency; there would be no mask mandates on her watch, no lockdowns, no forced vaccination, either. Heavy applause..Mr. Toews also hit a home run when he told the crowd when it came to schooling, his first principle was “parents are the individuals primarily responsible for their children's education.” This was very much the right thing to say. That’s partly because it IS the right thing to say, but the audience had been primed by both Leela Aheer and Rajan Sawhney. There was code-speak going on that suggested they both had an expanded view of the role of the ATA in public education..When directly questioned, for example, Ms. Aheer said she was “all for school choice,” then quickly added she “strongly supported the public system.” One doesn’t have to be a genius to guess what choice she would recommend, especially after giving teachers, administrators, and organizers a shout out..Likewise when Ms. Sawhney said she was committed to “curriculum review” and the “need to get teachers onboard,” it did sound like Morse Code for subbing out the curriculum to the Alberta Teachers’ Association..And although they think it’s a terrible thing to ‘balance the budget on the backs of our children,’ it has to be asked: Isn’t it also a terrible thing to borrow money now for our children to pay back in 20 years time? Perhaps the balanced budget thingy isn’t such a bad idea?.For this audience, this was off-message. No surprise, then, that Mr. Toews got his ovation..There is no perfect leadership debate and with only two-hours, seven candidates and a host determined to preserve a deep veneer of civilized unity, this one was never going to be it. Indeed, moderator Jeff Davison spent almost as much time rebuking the audience for clapping out of sequence, as they did in clapping..Then add in the puff ball questions — ‘Mr. Loewen, what would you do to defend our agricultural sector from yet another harmful policy from Ottawa government?’ — and you knew there would be time to get up and go to the fridge. For the record, Todd Loewen contributed one of the evening’s original ideas, a ‘Right to Farm Act,’ protecting the right of farmers to “do their business and do their business way they feel is right,” and “say no to Ottawa.”.However, nobody fights about farm policy..Rebecca Schultz, the likeable MLA for Calgary Shaw, is one to watch. Not this time perhaps, but maybe next?.Which leaves Brian Jean. He does still have a significant following. He stayed on his message, made sensible commitments — yes, inflation is a big deal and ending royalties on gasoline for domestic use would be worth 15 cents/litre, and yes, we’ll take that. Yet, at the end of the night, Mr. Jean had not knocked the stool out from under Mr. Toews’s feet. .As for Ms. Smith, according to the relentlessly inquisitive polling companies that interrupt supper nightly, many Albertans already claimed her for their own. After tonight, they would have had no reason to change their minds..Ballots go into the mail on September 2nd.
