Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

A push to resurrect the PC name has exploded into threats, lawsuits and a fight over who owns Alberta’s political past (Troy Media)

“What’s in a name?” 13-year-old Juliet Capulet memorably says in Act II, Scene II of William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet. “That which we call a rose,” she continues, “by any other name would smell as sweet.”

This brilliant adage has been written and spoken on innumerable occasions since the Bard’s play first premiered in 1597. I’m certainly guilty of having used it in a column or two.

Well, that number just reached three.

It’s almost impossible not to think of this proverb while watching the party name change battle in Alberta play itself out. This political tug-of-war started during the summer and may be finally heading into its final act.

The story begins with Peter Guthrie and Scott Sinclair. Both of them were United Conservative Party (UCP) MLAs up until this year. Sinclair, who was first elected in 2023, was kicked out of the UCP caucus in March when he refused to support Premier Danielle Smith’s budget. Guthrie, who served as minister of energy and minister of infrastructure under Smith, was tossed out of caucus in April after calling out his party and its handling of allegations of corruption related to health contracts.

The two Independent MLAs announced on July 2 that they would be working together to form a new political party called the Progressive Conservatives. Guthrie and Sinclair immediately received pushback from UCP officials for infringing on what they viewed as the party’s intellectual property rights. The two men switched gears, joined the small, centrist Alberta Party on July 23 and led a campaign to rename that party as the PCs.

The Alberta Party voted 94 per cent in favour of the proposed name change during an Aug. 27 general meeting. The request was then sent to Elections Alberta, but no decision has been announced to date.

That’s not where this political tale ends.

The UCP announced on Nov. 17 that it had launched a lawsuit against Guthrie and Sinclair. The United Conservative Association, which is the UCP’s operational vehicle, argued that its 2017 unification with the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta (PCAA) means it has ownership of the now-defunct latter party’s “names, political party registration, brand, trademarks and goodwill.”

Moreover, the statement of claim filed Nov. 7 in the Court of King’s Bench of Alberta noted that the Alberta Party’s efforts “constitute passing-off and are plainly intended to capitalize on and usurp the goodwill and reputation that the PCAA and, in turn, the United Conservative Association have nurtured with Albertans for decades and continues to nurture today.”

While there’s a slight difference with the Alberta Party’s suggested name change due to the use of “Party” as opposed to “Association,” the UCP and United Conservative Association have made a very strong case. Various names, trademarks and terms, including “Progressive Conservatives,” were surely part of the unification discussion and process when the two Alberta parties merged. That’s always been the case when two or more parties have merged and formed one cohesive unit.

There’s also an important historical precedent that weakens the Alberta Party’s request to change its name.

When the Canadian Alliance and federal Progressive Conservatives merged in December 2003, there was a small amount of dissent within the latter group. Former Progressive Conservative MPs Joe Hueglin and Sinclair Stevens, along with a few others, attempted to start up a new PC Party under the previous party name they had belonged to. “Elections Canada wouldn’t allow Hueglin’s group to register under the old name,” CBC News wrote on March 29, 2004, so it launched as the Progressive Canadian Party. The article also pointed out that “Hueglin said he’s not apologetic that some voters might find it confusing to have PC party candidates on the ballot.”

The Progressive Canadian Party was a massive failure. It ran small slates of candidates in federal elections between 2004 and 2019. Most finished with less than two per cent of the vote. Voters didn’t pay attention. Media coverage was next to nil. A 2005 lawsuit, Honourable Sinclair Stevens v. Conservative Party of Canada, was unsuccessful in rescinding the Canadian Alliance-PC merger. The party was dissolved on Nov. 30, 2019.

The only thing this minor party accomplished? It failed to register with Elections Canada under a party name that clearly wasn’t available for use, which set a precedent that merger agreements should cover all previous and current names, brands, registrations and trademarks unless the merged party decides to waive those rights, which would be unusual.

Elections Alberta should do the same thing with the Alberta Party’s request to change its name and reject it. The political rose smells more sour than sweet, after all.

Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights.

The views, opinions, and positions expressed by our columnists and contributors are solely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of our publication.

© Troy Media

 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BC’s Forestry Decline Is a Policy Failure, Not a Market Reality -- Forestry Critic Calls for Accountability and Urgent Policy Reset

Conservative Party of BC Forestry Critic, and Kamloops - North Thompson MLA,  Ward Stamer As the Truck Loggers Association convention begins today, BC Conservative Forestry Critic Ward Stamer says British Columbia’s forestry crisis is the result of government mismanagement, not market forces, and that an urgent policy reset is needed to restore certainty, sustainability, and accountability. “For generations, forestry supported families and communities across BC,” said Stamer.  “Today, mills are closing, contractors are parking equipment, and families are being forced to leave home, not because the resource is gone, but because policy has failed.” Government data shows timber shipment values dropped by more than half a billion dollars in the past year, with harvest levels falling by roughly 50 per cent in just four years. At the same time, prolonged permitting timelines, unreliable fibre access, outdated forest inventories, and rising costs have made long-term planning impossib...
Post a Comment
Read more

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...
Post a Comment
Read more

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more