Preston Manning's vow to step down as Reform Leader if his party kills his plan to build a new political party has pushed a back-bench MP closer to announcing his candidacy for the leadership, a move some party members say could galvanize opponents to the united alternative.
Dick Harris, an MP from British Columbia, said in an interview yesterday that the events of the past two days have convinced him to move up his thinking about whether to run for the top job.
He said yesterday he intends to make an announcement either tomorrow or Wednesday about his future, and that Mr. Manning's statement, which appears in a letter to be sent to party members over the next few days, gives him a better shot at the job than he would have had otherwise.
"I am really infuriated by not only the contents in the letter, but also the remarks of the UA leaders," Mr. Harris said. He said the recent remarks remind him of a scorched-earth plan to leave nothing behind should the proposal to build a new political party founder.
In the letter, Mr. Manning said he will almost certainly resign as Reform Leader if the party votes against the united alternative. A party-wide referendum on the issue is planned for early next spring. Mr. Manning says in the letter that if a vote against the UA appears to be a rejection of his effort to reach out to other Canadians and broaden Reform policy, he will call for a leadership convention and not be a candidate.
The move has been widely seen as Mr. Manning's last major effort to convince Reformers of the wisdom of going ahead with the plan, which would see Reform fold itself into a new, more Ontario-friendly party. Some also see the letter as taking away the momentum of a group of Reformers who want to see Mr. Manning's leadership challenged at the party's biennial convention at the end of the month.
Reform MP Ian McClelland said Mr. Manning's move is politically astute in that he is warning party members that they may lose their best asset if the party votes against the united alternative.
But Mr. McClelland also said that voters may opt against Mr. Manning and his idea if they are confident that there are potential successors for the Reform leadership.
Others said the letter weakens the Reform Party. Mr. Harris said he is offended by contents of the letter that suggest Reformers are unwilling to reach out to other Canadians. "When did they lose the Reform fires that were burning in their bellies?" he asked.
Another grassroots Reform member said it is too late to stop Reformers from voting for a review, and that Mr. Manning's remarks may end up offending party members.
"It will blow up in his face," said Ian Brodie, president of Reform's London North Centre riding association. "He's trying to browbeat people into voting for it [the united alternative]"
Mr. Brodie said most Reformers believe their party is bigger than the views of one man.
However, at least one former opponent of the UA now appears to be willing to support the initiative.
"I just think we're past the point of no return," Jay Hill of British Columbia told The Canadian Press.
"The negative side of the membership rejecting this initiative at this late stage is so catastrophic for the party and for the country that I think we have to put all the cards on the table."
A political expert from Alberta said Mr. Manning is simply putting in writing what everyone in the party knew from the start.
Political scientist Roger Gibbins added that, should Mr. Manning succeed, it may well enhance his stature among voters generally because he is putting his job on the line for something he believes in.
"This is less a threat and more an issue of reality of what the party is facing," Prof. Gibbins said. "My guess is this will be seen as an act of leadership and an indication of someone staking his career on something he believes in."
Mr. Manning's senior adviser, Rick Anderson, said those who believe Mr. Manning is using pressure tactics would be impossible to please and happen to be the same individuals clamouring for a leadership review.
"Be careful what you ask for," Mr. Anderson said. "Because you just might get it."
Myron Thompson, an opponent of the UA, said yesterday that it is unjust for Mr. Manning to link his leadership with the united alternative. Voters should have the right to make an informed choice on both matters.
"I think these are two different issues and they should not be mixed together," Mr. Thompson said in an interview from his constituency in Airdrie, Alta.
MP Dave Chatters, also a previous opponent of the united alternative, said he is now willing to back the initiative. However, he too expressed concern about linking the leadership with the new party so explicitly, and said such a choice will be difficult for Mr. Thompson and other MPs who support Mr. Manning, but not the UA.
The UA vote is expected to take place this March. Approval of two-thirds of the party members and two-thirds of the provinces is required before it can go ahead. However, party members could wound the initiative if they vote in large numbers against Mr. Manning's leadership at the January convention.
"If his support drops to 50 per cent or even 60 per cent, it could be a terrible embarrassment for him," said Christine Whitaker of Saskatchewan. "We have had enough. We are going to Ottawa to take our party back and we are going to do it."