When Liberal leadership candidates Bob Rae and Dominic Leblanc withdrew from the race last year, Conservatives denounced the ascendency of Michael Ignatieff as a coronation that was unbecoming in a democracy.
Hopefully everyone in the Ontario PC Party limbered up, because they might have to tie themselves into a pretzel to explain away the potential coronation of Tim Hudak.
Operatives around Mr. Hudak are attempting to stampede the party behind their candidate, citing the looming election (31 months away!) and the need to quickly get a leader in the Legislature. Emulating Mr. Ignatieff's message that now is no time for an internal battle, the Hudakites hope to keep other candidates from running by virtue of their perceived front-runner status.
Mr. Hudak enjoys a longstanding leadership organization of Mike Harris-era operatives, thanks to his wife, Deb Hutton, formerly Premier Harris' executive assistant and director of issues management. (Ms. Hutton's power and influence in the party occasionally earns her husband the epithet "Mr. Hutton.")
Tim Hudak's biography and temperament will force him to stand for readopting the hard-edged neo-conservative positioning of the Harris era. Were he to win, the ballot question would likely be "do you want a return to the days of Mike Harris." While the answer may seem obvious to hard-core PC supporters, the rest of Ontario remains highly skeptical of Mr. Harris' legacy, especially Walkerton.
So why the rush? There must be concern among his brain trust that Mr. Hudak's ceaseless advocacy for private religious school funding will prove an albatross in a long leadership debate, and that a multi-candidate race is too uncertain and risky. There is also a grave fear of being held hostage by the same religious school supporters and other single-issue voters who forced their policy on the agenda in 2002 and 2004.
However, there are a number of potential candidates who could credibly choose to challenge Mr. Hudak for the leadership, as I wrote in a recent piece.
Randy Hillier in particular must be livid about the attempt by Hudak and Hutton to stampede the convention.
Mr. Hillier is unlikely to emerge victorious from any leadership contest, by virtue of his divisive agenda and radical views, but he will prove to be a potent power broker on the floor. He will likely control a significant block of votes and can use those votes to give himself a veto over policy or a leading position in any future PC government.
It is entirely possible Mr. Hillier could consider taking his ball and going home if he does not get a chance to play power broker. After all, as I wrote yesterday, it was touch and go whether the radical Landowners Association would join the PC Party or run its own candidates in the last election. It was only due to concessions by John Tory that Hillier chose to make common cause with a party he had tormented before 2003.
A coronation is the worst thing the PC Party could undertake.
As an increasingly internally incoherent amalgam of noblisse oblige Rosedale Red Tories, religious and social conservatives, anti-government libertarians and rural quasi-anarchists, the PC Party is in terrible need of a bloodletting.
Bob Rae, Michael Ignatieff and Dominic Leblanc have different visions of how the Liberal Party should operate and minor fiscal policy disagreements. But all three are Charter advocates who want a strong central government and an independent foreign policy.
Compare that to Randy Hillier, Frank Klees, Tim Hudak and John Tory. Their respective political philosophies have as much in common as a banana and a fog horn.
One strain of Ontario PC conservatism must emerge decisively victorious from a hard-fought leadership, or the internal conflicts and incoherence that plagued John Tory will just as surely defeat their next leader.