Question #1 Who will the proposed merger between The Canadian Alliance Party and The Conservative Party benefit most?

Ottawa		51 %
Western Canada		33 %
Undecided		16 %

Question #2 Do you approve of a condition in the proposed merger, which will see The Canadian Alliance Party pay down the debt of The Progressive Conservative Party of $3,000,000?

Yes		25 %
No		65 %
Undecided		10 %

Question #3 Recently, both Canadian Alliance Leader Stephen Harper and Progressive Conservative Leader Peter McKay said they are both ‘together against the Liberals’. Yet, in a letter to Canadian Alliance Members, dated October 1, 2003, and mailed out October 16, 2003, Mr. Harper indicates that “The Canadian Alliance lost the vote (on same-sex marriages) but won the day”. He also states that “The Canadian Alliance will (sic) not stand (sic) idly by while the Liberals play around with the essential institutions of marriage”. However, four Progressive Conservative MP’s voted against The Canadian Alliance Motion to retain “marriage as between a man and a woman only”. Had these PC’s voted with the CA Motion it would have “won the day”.In his letter to CA members, Mr. Harper makes no mention of the PC’s responsibility for the Motion’s failure. In your opinion, which federal political Party do you most blame for the failure of the Canadian Alliance Motion protecting marriage, voted on September 16, 2003?

Progressive Conservative		23 %
Federal Liberals		46 %
Both PC’s and Liberals		31 %
Both PC’s and Liberals		31 %

Question #4 In any type of merger, there are compromises to be made. Are you willing as a supporter of The Canadian Alliance Party, to accept the compromise of paying down the Progressive Conservative debt?

Absolutely No		27 %
Absolutely Yes		22 %
Reluctantly Yes		51 %

Question #5 Do you agree or disagree with the following statement I would agree with just about anything if it gets rid of The Liberal Party.

Agree		67 %
Disagree		27 %

Commentary

Unless I missed something, the whole CA/PC merger particularly as it relates to The September 16, 2003 CA Motion on marriage, looks either sloppy or contrived. In my discussions with CA MP Maurice Vellacott in September, right after the failed Motion, I told him that I felt the look of the CA/PC vote was suspicious. (We already know that The Chretien Liberals are exclusively motivated by politics).

Consider this picture, if ones lines up the CA and PC Members of Parliament as at September 16, 2003, and considers them as one party at that time, than this New Intrinsic Conservative Party would not appear so ‘right-wing’.

Only six per cent of the aggregate MP’s in the September 16,‘merged’ CA/PC ‘picture’, would have supported ‘same-sex’ marriages. That dilutes the ‘hard right’ appearance of The Canadian Alliance Party even though most of the public may have agreed with The Canadian Alliance position. It is accepted by most pundits that even if sixty-five per cent of the public agreed with The Canadian Alliance Party, they will likely not receive more than thirty per cent of the popular national vote in an election, because Ontario and Quebec’s mutual self-interest always trumps the good of the country and ethical politics.

If one considers public opinion, the Progressive Conservative Party has approximately fourty-two per cent (42%) of the popular vote of both CA and PC combined nation wide (which currently totals fourty-five per cent (45%)). This conforms to public opinion for retaining marriage to be between a man and a woman, which ‘without spin’ is approximately 60-40 to 65-35 for The CA position.

Although nearly one-fourth of PC’s voted down the CA Motion (25% x 40%+10) in actuality, the appearance that one-quarter of the PC’s were willing to be Progressive, bodes well for the optics of a New ‘merged’ Conservative Party as being one-quarter tolerant of same-sex marriages.

If we combine this first CA/PC optic, with the young age, and voting on September 16, 2003, of CA MP James Moore (insofar as voting is concerned) he could easily be construed as the ‘link’ between the senior’s oriented CA,PC and the more youth oriented PC’s. (There are very few young people that I know, who would possibly identify with James Moore if they met him).

Had all of the PC’s voted for the CA motion, than the CA Motion would have passed and the New Conservative Party would have been nothing more than the CA party with a name change. In other words, a political merger would not have been necessary. The Canadian Alliance had to take a dive, in order to create the political spectacle that a merger was necessary, and manifest the voters collective desire to kick out the hypocritical Liberals.

If the September 16, 2003 vote was concocted for political purposes rather than natural happenstance, neither Mr. Harper nor Mr. McKay should consider running for the leadership, as they would be part of the countries political problem, not part of the solution.

This ‘vote-spin’ if that is what it was, appears to have been successful. This survey reveals that Canadian Alliance ‘voters’, want to get rid of the Liberals so badly now they are willing to overlook the ‘shotgun’ wedding of the CA and PC Parties and some of the less desirable aspects of the merger provisions (including the merger itself), in order to get rid of The Liberals.

In many respects, the desperation and ‘high drama’ of the merger of The CA and PC’s has begun to spill over into Canadian Alliance voter’s consciousness, making them increasingly eager to take on The Liberals. To win in politics one needs a common enemy. Prime Minister Jean Chretien has become a lightning rod for this CA/PC discontent, which will in the short and middle term sufficiently distract bitter British Columbians, particularly CA voters who are sick of being kicked around like dogs by Ontario and Quebec.

Little do they know it may be their own Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative political representatives who are indirectly sponsoring political beatings from Central Canada in the future.