B.C. Liberal Party’s name might not be definitive but it’s hard to argue with success

MONDAY MORNING EDITORIAL — The B.C. Liberals, it seems, are still celebrating their surprise election win of a year ago. The party convention in Kelowna on the weekend was, by all reports, a time for basking in the never-ending glow of still being in power.

So pleased are they that the much anticipated debate over changing the party’s name was quickly dismissed. Of the many resolutions that were to be debated, the name change idea was the sexiest to the media, who talked about a “strong movement” within the party to rebrand.

But that ship sailed on election night. When things aren’t going well, political parties get anxious, and go looking for answers in the wrong places. When the crisis passes, the need for change seems less urgent.

British Columbians know provincial Liberals and federal Liberals aren’t the same thing. They know the Liberals are a coalition of liberal and conservative interests just as the old Socreds were in the 1950s, ‘60s and early ‘70s. They know it sits a little right of centre.

If the proposal to rename the party had gained the approval of the convention this weekend, finding an appropriate moniker would have been no small public relations challenge since the Liberals aren’t driven by any particularly strong ideological conviction other than being free-enterprisers.

That, however, doesn’t go very far in defining a party, which must shepherd a wide range of portfolios such as environment, social services and transportation in addition to the economy.

“Free Enterprise Party” would’t suit any more than “Liberals” does. Neither would “Conservatives” and, besides, it’s already taken. In all likelihood, the name would have been changed to something like the ”British Columbia Party,” which wouldn’t have meant much either.

The Liberal label, imperfect as it might be, was good enough to get them elected; it’s hard to argue with success.