Text of the agreement signed by Peter MacKay and David Orchard forming the basis for Orchard's final-ballot support for MacKay at the PC Party Leadership Convention, May 31, 2003.
The agreement was published in the Globe and Mail, June 5, 2003 under the heading "Tory leadership deal. Peter MacKay won David Orchard's support at the Tory leadership convention based on a deal hastily scrawled on a piece of paper."
1) No merger, joint candidates w[ith] the Alliance. Maintain 301.
2) Review of FTA/NAFTA -- blue ribbon commission with David Orchard w[ith] choice of chair w[ith] PM agreement. Rest of members to be jointly agreed upon.
3) Clean up of head office including change of national director w[ith] consultation (timing w[ithin] reasonable period in future, pre-election) and some of DO's people working at head office.
4) Commitment to make environmental protection front and centre and sustainable agriculture, forestry, reducing pollution through rail.
[Signed by Peter MacKay and David Orchard]
the views of other PC party members on the Leadership Race,
check out the independent ToryDraft.com Web site!
here to read what's being said about David in the
PRESS CONFERENCE IN OTTAWA, JANUARY 21, 2003
David Orchard declaring his candidacy for the leadership of the
Progressive Conservative Party of Canada
I’m here today to put forward my name as a candidate in the
Progressive Conservative Party leadership race.
I’m in this race because I’m concerned about the direction
of our country, and its future as a sovereign nation.
We have a wonderful country. It is one which, in my view, must
be conserved. My vision of Conservatism has a strong emphasis on
the word “conserve.” In that I base myself on the Father
of modern conservatism, Benjamin Disraeli. Over a century ago, Disraeli
set out his guiding principles for Toryism quite simply. First,
to elevate the condition of the people, and second, to maintain
the institutions of the country. Both of these directives are particularly
relevant in our country today, as the standard of living of Canadians
has been falling steadily over the past dozen years. At the same
time the Liberals are dismantling the institutions which were built
to serve Canadians over the decades; from cuts to a world class
health system, to the diminishment of our military, to the dismantling
of a once cutting-edge agricultural research capacity, to mention
just a few. Across the west, where I come from, a whole way of life
is disappearing as railroad tracks are being ripped up, grain elevators
torn down and entire communities are disappearing.
Disraeli’s most famous quote was, “Power has only one
duty; to secure the social welfare of the people.” I believe,
with Disraeli, that exercising power in this manner, for the general
good, is the only way of creating a stable, self-sustaining society
in the long run. And this is my goal for the Progressive Conservative
Party of Canada.
Here in Canada it was John A. Macdonald and George Etienne Cartier
who created the Conservative party, and then, in the face of a powerful
annexation movement from south of the border, they created a nation.
They flung a railway across the new country to hold it together.
Accepted opinion said it couldn’t be done. How could a small
country of 4 million build the world’s longest railway? The
Liberals called the idea of an all-Canadian transcontinental railway
an example of “the criminal absurdity of nationalism.”
But Cartier, Macdonald and the Conservative Party persevered and
achieved their goal. They had a vision of Canada as a great nation,
never as a satellite power.
Who in our national government has that vision for Canada today?
The Liberals came to power in 1993 promising to reassert and defend
Canada's independence. Campaigning against the FTA, NAFTA, and the
GST, they have since reversed themselves on all three, and now praise
the very things they fought against. They are advocating deeper
and deeper integration into our powerful neighbour, talking about
removing the border altogether in economic and even military terms.
The next step, we are informed, may be for Canada to adopt the US
dollar as the common currency for the North American free trade
zone. For Canada to give up its currency would mean the end of our
monetary and fiscal independence. This is not what I want for the
future of Canada.
Some people have argued that I am not a real Conservative. That
brings to mind the accusation hurled against the great prairie Conservative
leader, John Diefenbaker. When Diefenbaker won the reins of the
Conservative Party, some powerful individuals in Canada accused
him of “not being a real conservative.” They called
him a “prairie Bolshevik.” They said he was “too
left-wing” to lead the Progressive Conservative Party. Here
is what Mr. Diefenbaker said in reply: “To those who label
me as some kind of party maverick and have claimed that I have been
untrue to the great principles of the Conservative party, I can
only reply that they have forgotten the traditions of Disraeli and
Shaftesbury in England, and Macdonald in Canada.”
These are my sentiments as well.
I want first and foremost to conserve our environment, to guarantee
clean air and safe food and drinking water for all Canadians. This
is another principle of my Conservatism. This principle led 27 years
ago to my brothers and I converting our Saskatchewan farm to an
organic operation. All the grains on my farm are grown without harmful
pesticides, herbicides or chemicals.
The population of the planet has doubled in the last fifty years.
At the same time we are consuming on an individual basis much more
of the worlds resources. This situation is not sustainable. This
is one of the reasons I am a supporter of the Kyoto Accord.
I want to also conserve our economy.
I have been accused of being against trade, against the very idea
of free trade. This charge reminds me of the story of Mahatma Gandhi
visiting England where he was asked what he thought of western civilization.
His reply was that he thought it would be a good idea. Likewise,
I think free trade would be a good idea, if we actually had it.
I would be in favour of free trade - free trade which preserves
Canada’s power and independence. However, there are clauses
in the Canada U.S. trade agreements that in my view are not related
to free trade and which are jeopardizing our sovereignty, our prosperity
and our future well being. I have asked my party to consider a review
of the impact of these agreements on our nation.
From the founding of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade
(GATT) in 1947, until 1988, Canada traded with the US and the rest
of the world, on a multilateral basis - and very successfully. By
the 1980s, our trade with the US was largely free (80% of our industrial
exports entered the US duty free ? and the tariff was low and declining
on most of the rest). Then in 1988, we dramatically changed our
direction. In signing the Canada-US free trade agreement, we removed
the rules governing our export of goods to the US from the rule
of international trade law under GATT, and placed ourselves under
American trade law, which the US is free to change unilaterally
as it sees fit.
The results, in my view, have not been positive. Our trade with
the US today is less free than it was before we signed the so-called
free trade agreements, and our standard of living has declined ever
since. Let’s look at lumber - one of our major exports. From
1947 to the late 1980s when we traded under the GATT multilateral
framework, the US was never able to level a countervailing duty
or tariff against our lumber exports. Today, we have a 27% tariff
on our softwood exports, and tens of millions of dollars has been
expended in legal fees to Washington lawyers by Canada’s tax
payers and our timber industry. Our southern neighbours now want
to dictate how our forest industry should be run by dismantling
our system of publicly owned forests and turning our crown lands
over to private ownership, which may well mean foreign ownership.
Let’s examine another major Canadian export - agriculture
products. From 1947 to 1988 the US never attempted in the GATT to
challenge the existence of our major grain exporter, the Canadian
Wheat Board. Yet since placing ourselves under the free trade agreement,
the Americans have not once, nor twice, but 10 times launched challenges
against the Canadian Wheat Board and we have seen quotas placed
on our exports of grain to the US, while the US continues to heavily
subsidize its own grain exports. The latest US action against the
Canadian Wheat Board alone will cost prairie farmers from 7 to 8
million dollars to defend.
Even more troubling in my view, we conceded under chapter 11 of
NAFTA, for the first time in history, the right of private American
companies to sue the Canadian government directly for any law or
regulation in Canada which in their opinion causes them “loss
or harm” and which they feel contravenes the terms of NAFTA.
Over a dozen of these NAFTA law suits have been mounted against
Canada. In a move that adversely affects the health of Canadians,
we reversed our ban on the toxic gasoline additive MMT under the
pressure of a chapter 11 law suit and paid out some 20 million of
tax payers’ dollars in compensation to the company that sued
Canada. Even though this additive is banned in California and not
allowed in Europe, it is once again coming out of the exhaust pipes
of Canadian cars. An American company is now suing to dismantle
the courier side of our postal service. A California company is
suing Canada for 10.5 billion dollars to overturn British Columbia’s
ban on the bulk export of water.
In terms of energy, we have agreed to never charge the Americans
more for any energy good than we charge Canadians, and even if we
face a shortage of any energy good in Canada, we will continue to
send the same proportion of that good south as we did before the
shortage, even if we don’t have enough for Canada’s
Under the national treatment sections of the FTA and NAFTA we agreed
to never restrict American investment in Canada. Since the FTA was
passed, over 13,000 Canadian companies have been taken over, mostly
by American corporations - everything from our giant forest, grain
and energy companies, to the Montreal Canadiens and Quebec Nordiques.
There are now fewer than a dozen major, widely held Canadian companies
left listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange. Soon we are going to
turn around and say what have we got left?
To me these kind of provisions have nothing to do with free trade.
They amount to an unacceptable infringement of our sovereignty.
Not only did we not achieve free trade, we have ended up curtailing
our freedom to such an extent that every government in Canada now
crafts any proposed legislation to make sure it won’t become
the target of a NAFTA law suit. This is no way for Canada to govern
itself. We can trade freely and productively around the world and
keep our ability to pass laws in our own interest at the same time.
I am all in favour of freer trade, operating through the multilateral
forum of the World Trade Organization, but not bilaterally where
we give up our leverage as a nation, and are completely exposed
to US power. There are problems in the WTO, but these can be solved
by Canada taking a more active and independent approach in defense
of our self interest.
But there is more to my conservatism than conserving. The founders
of the Conservative Party had a vision of Canada as a great and
independent country that would stand on its own feet, trade profitably
around the globe, and take a proud position on the world stage.
That is my position as well.
I believe that we should move away from the export of raw materials
to a more value added economy. We have innovative companies in Canada
capable of producing a virtually pollution-free automobile, for
example. We are a trading nation with the longest coastline in the
world, yet our ship yards stand underutilized. We should and could
have a vibrant Canadian ship building industry. I am a western farmer
yet I can no longer buy a major piece of Canadian farm machinery.
We have all the resources and skills necessary to build these industries,
but we are lacking political will and national policies to make
Edmond Burke’s classic definition of conservatism was “a
disposition to preserve, and an ability to improve.” I propose
we improve the functioning of our electoral system, including reforms
to how we finance our political parties. Today political parties
must seek corporate and union donations in order to function. It
seems to me only individual voters should finance our political
parties if we are to avoid a distortion of democracy.
Some 75 countries around the world use a system of proportional
representation to give a more accurate reflection of voters wishes
in their parliament. I believe Canada must look seriously at the
declining voter turnout and increased disengagement of the population
from the political process. A more representative method of electing
our parliamentarians would be an important first step.
In my view we must rebuild the Canadian military. The ongoing dismantling
of our military capacity is an absolute disgrace. The military is
the key tool any nation uses to defend and maintain its sovereignty.
We can no longer even rescue our people lost at sea or patrol our
borders in an effective way.
At the same time the Liberal government is taking steps to merge
what is left of our military under US command.
My position is that our military must be rebuilt and maintained
under Canadian command. Its focus should be the maintenance of our
territorial integrity, and it should not be used to launch attacks
on smaller countries across the globe.
The Canadian military must be used to protect our country and to
keep the peace. I am strongly opposed, for example, to an attack
on Iraq. Such an attack would be a blatant violation of international
law. Canada must at all times take a position in defense of international
I do not wish to see Canada lose its independence in the world,
economically, culturally, or militarily. Under my leadership our
party will take concrete steps to both protect our environment and
enhance the prosperity and standard of living for all Canadians.
The Progressive Conservative Party has a method of selecting its
leader in which everyone who takes a $10 membership can vote for
the leader. If you are aged 14 to 25, it only costs $5. It is not
necessary to be a citizen, if you are a landed immigrant, you can
join the party and vote for the leader. It doesn’t matter
if you have voted for another party in the past, or if you have
never voted at all. You are welcome in my campaign. It makes no
difference if you are 14 years old, or 94, if you are a new Canadian,
or one whose roots have been here for generations. You are welcome
in my campaign. If you are concerned about the direction of our
country, I urge you to bring your ideas into the political process.
To join is simple. Just call me at 1- 877 WE STAND, as in we stand
on guard for thee (1-877-937-8263). Or check my web site at www.davidorchard.com.
Do let your family, your friends, and any networks that you have,
know that there is something simple and concrete they can do to
improve the situation of our country. I believe we need a credible
opposition to the existing government. With your participation the
Progressive Conservative party can once again be that viable national
In order to once again become the choice of Canadian voters, I
believe the Progressive Conservative Party must have a Big Idea.
I believe the defense of the sovereignty of our nation is the Big
Idea which can both bring the party back into touch with the majority
of voters and protect our nation and its future. For over a hundred
years it was the Conservative Party which stood for Canada’s
sovereignty against the liberal idea of merging our country with
our southern neighbour. I advocate the Conservative Party reconnecting
with those deep and honourable roots. They can be the key to our
victory and to Canada’s survival. I ask all Canadians for
your help to make these ideas a reality for our nation.
Thank you. I will be pleased to answer your questions.
Tel: (306) 652-7095