The Current Newsroom – Chad Dashly

The Current Newsroom – Chad Dashly

British Columbia’s conservative movement has arrived at a defining moment. With nine candidates seeking the leadership of the Conservative Party of British Columbia, this contest is about far more than personality, campaign organization, or internal party math. It is, at its core, a debate over what modern conservatism should look like in British Columbia and what kind of coalition is capable of turning opposition energy into a credible governing project.

The field is broad and varied: Bruce Banman, Harman Bhangu, Iain Black, Caroline Elliott, Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Yuri Fulmer, Warren Hamm, Darrell Jones, and Peter Milobar each offer a different route forward. Some present themselves as pragmatic economic managers. Others are speaking directly to the party’s activist base. A few are trying to bridge both worlds. Taken together, the candidates reflect a party that is still defining its ideology, tone, and purpose.

Key Takeaways

• The BC Conservative leadership race is ultimately a debate about the future identity of the party.
• Some candidates represent a pragmatic, business-first approach similar to Doug Ford’s governing style in Ontario.
• Others are appealing more directly to grassroots conservatives who want stronger ideological clarity.
• Wab Kinew offers a contrasting lesson in coalition-building, message discipline, and voter connection.
• There is no clear runaway front-runner, making the race highly fluid and politically significant.
• The outcome could determine whether the party remains a protest vehicle or evolves into a serious contender for government.

The Deep Dive

One of the clearest frameworks for understanding the BC Conservative leadership race is to compare it against two major provincial political models in Canada today: Doug Ford in Ontario and Wab Kinew in Manitoba. These are very different leaders with very different governing coalitions, but both offer valuable lessons for a party trying to move from insurgency to viability.

The Ford model is rooted in pragmatism, affordability politics, and broad-based electoral appeal. Ford has succeeded by focusing on jobs, growth, infrastructure, and kitchen-table concerns while avoiding the kinds of ideological battles that can scare off swing voters. His brand of conservatism is populist in tone but practical in delivery. It speaks to suburban families, private-sector workers, and voters who may not identify as deeply ideological but want government to feel more competent and more attentive to everyday pressures.

Several candidates in British Columbia fit naturally within that lane. Darrell Jones and Yuri Fulmer both reflect the business-oriented case for conservative leadership. Their appeal rests on the argument that political leadership should be grounded in executive competence, economic confidence, and a clearer focus on investment and growth. Iain Black also sits comfortably in this category, bringing a more policy-driven and institutional version of the same worldview. Peter Milobar, meanwhile, offers a more experienced political variation of the Ford model: practical, measured, and credible to those who believe the party needs an operator rather than a crusader.

These candidates make the case that British Columbia conservatives can only win if they look ready to govern. Their instinct is to broaden the coalition, reassure business, appeal to moderates, and present conservatism as a stable alternative to the NDP rather than a vehicle for protest alone. In strategic terms, that may be the shortest route to suburban ridings and mainstream legitimacy.

But leadership races are not won only in the centre. They are often decided by the members who sign up, volunteer, organize, and demand sharper conviction from their candidates. That is where the party’s ideological wing becomes especially important. Bruce Banman has built his appeal around unapologetic conservatism and a willingness to take direct aim at the governing NDP. Kerry-Lynne Findlay brings experience and credibility with voters who want the party rooted in traditional conservative principles. Harman Bhangu and Warren Hamm also speak to activists who believe the movement should be bolder, clearer, and less concerned with establishment approval.

This wing of the party reflects the emotional energy behind the conservative rise in British Columbia. It draws strength from public frustration over affordability, crime, bureaucracy, and cultural fatigue with the governing class. Its strength is intensity. Its risk is reach. A message that energizes members may not always persuade the broader electorate, especially in a province where elections are often decided by voters who are less ideological and more situational.

That is where the Wab Kinew contrast becomes especially useful. Kinew is not a conservative model in ideological terms, but he is a highly relevant model in political terms. His success has come from building a coalition larger than his base, telling a disciplined story about change, and connecting with voters on both policy and identity. He has shown that modern provincial politics rewards leaders who can combine narrative, relatability, and practical governance. He does not rely solely on ideological agreement. He relies on emotional credibility and coalition expansion.

For BC Conservatives, that matters. Even if they reject Kinew’s policy direction, they cannot ignore the strategic lesson. A party that wants to govern must build beyond its own comfort zone. It must speak not only to the faithful, but to uncertain voters who want reassurance that change will be constructive rather than chaotic.

What makes this leadership race so consequential is that the Conservative Party of British Columbia still feels politically young. It has momentum, visibility, and a growing pool of talent, but it is not yet ideologically settled. The candidates are effectively auditioning different versions of the same movement. The business-first conservatives want credibility. The establishment conservatives want structure and discipline. The grassroots populists want conviction and clarity. Caroline Elliott, in many respects, represents an attempt to blend activist energy with broader public appeal.

And that is why there is no obvious front-runner. The race remains open because the party itself remains open-ended. Members are not simply choosing a leader. They are choosing a theory of victory.

Why It Matters

The BC Conservative leadership race matters because it will shape more than the internal future of one party. It will help determine whether British Columbia’s conservative movement can mature into a serious governing alternative or remain defined by opposition politics alone. That choice has implications for the entire provincial political landscape.

If the party selects a leader who can combine economic credibility with broad public appeal, it may be able to consolidate support among voters looking for an alternative to the NDP without alarming moderates. If it chooses a leader more focused on ideological confrontation, it may deepen its loyalty among activists while risking a narrower path in a general election. Neither route is inherently doomed, but each comes with clear trade-offs.

In the end, the most important question is not simply who wins in May. It is what kind of conservative party emerges afterward. Will it follow a pragmatic, growth-focused model that resembles Doug Ford’s electoral strategy? Will it embrace a sharper grassroots identity? Or can it do what the strongest provincial parties do and merge discipline, conviction, and coalition-building into a durable political force?

That is the real contest now underway in British Columbia. The leader who answers it best will not just win a race. They may define the province’s next political era.

By Chad Dashly | *The Current*

Right now, there isn’t a clear runaway favourite in the 2026 Conservative Party of British Columbia leadership race. But based on early polling, endorsements, and political positioning, three realistic front-runners are beginning to emerge. The party officially approved nine candidates to run in the contest: Bruce Banman, Harman Bhangu, Iain Black, Caroline Elliott, Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Yuri Fulmer, Warren Hamm, Darrell Jones, and Peter Milobar.

The leadership vote is expected to take place on May 30, 2026, following the spring legislative session. With such a large field, the race remains fluid. Leadership contests often evolve quickly, especially as candidates begin signing new members and building campaign organizations across the province. But even in these early stages, a few contenders appear to be separating themselves from the pack. Darrell Jones has emerged as one of the most talked-about candidates in the race.

As the former president of Save-On-Foods, Jones brings a strong private-sector background and has framed his campaign around the idea of executive leadership and fiscal discipline. His pitch is simple: British Columbia needs the kind of management and accountability that successful businesses require. That message may resonate with voters frustrated by government spending and bureaucracy. Early polling suggests Jones has the highest vote consideration among the candidates, hovering around 25 percent. His business credentials could also help him attract donors and support from the province’s business community. But Jones also faces a challenge common to outsider candidates. He lacks legislative experience and must build a strong grassroots organization quickly if he hopes to translate interest into actual votes. Peter Milobar represents a very different path to leadership. The Kamloops MLA and former mayor offers experience inside the political system and has built strong relationships within the Conservative caucus.

Several MLAs have already endorsed him, giving his campaign credibility within the party establishment. Milobar’s supporters argue that governing requires not just ideas but an understanding of how government actually works. That experience could appeal to members looking for stability and discipline. At the same time, his more moderate profile may not generate the same enthusiasm among activist members who are looking for a more confrontational conservative voice. Then there is Kerry-Lynne Findlay, whose candidacy introduces a national dimension to the race. A former federal cabinet minister, Findlay brings deep connections to Canada’s broader conservative movement and significant experience in national politics. Her relationships within federal Conservative circles could translate into strong fundraising and campaign infrastructure. However, not currently holding a seat in the provincial legislature may make it harder for her to build momentum within the party’s grassroots base. Beyond the leading trio, several candidates could still influence the outcome of the race. Caroline Elliott has developed support among ideological conservatives, while Bruce Banman appeals to a more populist wing of the party. Meanwhile, Iain Black and Yuri Fulmer bring business experience that could resonate with members looking for economic credibility. Leadership contests often produce surprises, particularly when voting systems involve ranked ballots or multiple rounds of counting. In those scenarios,

the candidate who is the most broadly acceptable to members can sometimes win even without leading in first-choice support. If the leadership vote were held today, Peter Milobar might have a slight edge due to his caucus support and organizational strength. But Darrell Jones may have the most upside if his campaign gains momentum and successfully mobilizes members seeking an outsider. In truth, the race is still wide open. Over the next several weeks, the candidate who signs the most members and builds the strongest grassroots network will likely determine who ultimately leads the Conservative Party of British Columbia into its next political chapter.

Opinion News Room Chad Dashly

BC Conservatives narrow the leadership field to nine — and the real contest is about discipline

Opinion

VANCOUVER — The Conservative Party of B.C.’s Leadership Election Organizing Committee (LEOC) has closed its application window and approved nine contestants to move to the next phase of the leadership race: Bruce Banman, Harman Bhangu, Iain Black, Caroline Elliott, Kerry-Lynne Findlay, Yuri Fulmer, Warren Hamm, Darrell Jones, and Peter Milobar.

On paper, it’s just a list. In practice, it’s a stress test for a party that grew quickly, became the Official Opposition, then watched its leader resign after internal turmoil — and now has to prove it can behave like a government-in-waiting, not a protest movement with a bigger microphone.

A nine-person field usually signals energy. Here, it also signals a problem to solve.

Leadership races are supposed to be about ideas and direction. This one is also about whether the B.C. Conservatives can enforce basic internal standards without triggering another civil war.

The application requirements reported publicly — including a $5,000 entry fee and at least 250 member signatures from across the province — were designed to separate serious contenders from momentary internet fame. That’s not glamorous. It is, however, what grown-up parties do when they’ve learned that “anyone can run” eventually turns into “everyone can embarrass us.”

Two previously declared MLA candidates — Sheldon Clare and Steve Kooner — withdrew in the days leading up to the LEOC announcement, underscoring how much procedural gatekeeping and campaign organization now matter in a party that is trying to professionalize at speed.

Three lanes are emerging — and each comes with a risk

The approved slate naturally breaks into three broad lanes.

• The caucus lane: Banman, Bhangu, and Milobar bring elected credibility and day-to-day experience as the Official Opposition. The upside is obvious: they can plausibly argue they know what it takes to hold government to account and present as a premier-in-waiting. The downside is equally obvious: caucus politics can look like inside baseball to members who joined because they wanted something that didn’t feel like Victoria-as-usual.
• The established political lane: Iain Black and Kerry-Lynne Findlay bring recognizable résumés from past political eras. That can reassure donors and institutional conservatives who want competence over chaos. But it also invites the party’s internal critique that it could become “a rebrand” of an older coalition — the very charge some activists have levelled at conservative projects in B.C. for decades.
• The outsider lane: Elliott, Fulmer, Hamm, and Jones (from the public descriptions available so far) will likely frame themselves as builders, not lifers — and as the antidote to a political class that many voters distrust. Outsiders can win leadership races. They can also struggle to pivot from slogans to systems when they inherit a caucus, a budget, and a news cycle that punishes improvisation.

None of these lanes is “wrong.” The larger question is whether the party’s membership wants movement energy or governing readiness — and whether it can find a leader who credibly offers both.

The John Rustad hangover is real — and it will shape every ballot

It’s impossible to read this candidate list without the recent history hovering over it. Former leader John Rustad resigned on Dec. 4, 2025, after divisions over policy and personnel roiled the party, according to reporting at the time.

That matters because leadership elections aren’t held in a vacuum. They are a referendum on what members think went wrong — and a pre-emptive argument about what must never happen again.

If the membership believes Rustad’s departure was driven by a lack of internal discipline and process, they will lean toward candidates promising tighter message control, better candidate vetting, and fewer self-inflicted crises. If they believe the party’s internal fights were about “true conservatism” versus “electability,” the race becomes an ideological sorting exercise — one that could reward sharper rhetoric over steadier management.

May 30 is not the finish line — it’s the credibility deadline

The party says it will announce its new leader on May 30, 2026, at a leadership convention. Between now and then, the campaign will revolve around membership rules, voter eligibility, and organizational capacity — the unsexy mechanics that decide races long before convention day.

There’s also a strategic reality: as the Official Opposition, the B.C. Conservatives don’t have the luxury of treating this like an internal club election. The leader-in-waiting has to perform in public, under daily scrutiny, with a caucus that needs coherence and a province that expects seriousness.

Voters who don’t follow party mechanics will judge the outcome in simpler terms: does the new leader look like someone who could run a cabinet, manage a crisis, and keep a team together?

What should British Columbians watch for next?

Here are three tells that will matter more than bumper-sticker ideology:

• Who can unify without erasing differences: A leader who “wins” by humiliating other factions may inherit a party that never stops relitigating the race.
• Who can talk about B.C. problems with B.C. answers: Housing, cost of living, health care access, and public safety are where elections are won or lost — not on imported culture-war scripts.
• Who can pass the competence test: Policy depth, staffing judgment, and a willingness to say “no” to bad ideas are not optional for an opposition trying to look ready to govern.

The LEOC has done its part: close the application process, publish a clear slate, move the party forward. Now comes the harder work — proving that a fast-growing political operation can mature quickly enough to hold together, and credible enough to convince British Columbians it deserves the keys to government.