The Year of Living Dangerously - the great 1982 movie starring Mel Gibson & Sigourney Weaver directed by Peter Weir
Expect serious casualties as Libs and New Dems deal with internal fights
Bill Tieleman's 24 hours/TheTyee column
Tuesday November 23, 2010
By Bill Tieleman
"We vote with our actions."
- Benjamin Shield, author
Welcome to British Columbia's year of living politically dangerously.
Over the next 12 months there will be serious electoral casualties coming in as both the BC Liberals and New Democrats deal with significant internal battles.
Those struggles were in full public view last week, with ex-cabinet minister Bill Bennett laying out a totally devastating portrait of Premier Gordon Campbell as an abusive bully who gets literally spitting mad at any questioning of his supreme authority as leader.
And the BC NDP engaged in full conflict over Carole James' leadership at the party's provincial council meeting last weekend, with James supporters unsurprisingly defeating a motion calling for a full leadership convention next November.
But James failed to convince nearly 40 per cent of her caucus to publicly endorse her when questioned by media.
That followed the sudden resignation of NDP caucus whip Katrine Conroy on Friday, a news conference with NDP MLAs Jenny Kwan, Lana Popham and Claire Trevena all in attendance to give Conroy support and decline to voice the same for James.
At the root of both the BC Liberal and NDP problems are strikingly similar issues -- is there any room for democracy and dissent within political parties?
And do leaders have the right to demand absolute loyalty of individual MLAs who are elected by voters -- not the party?
Elites and anti-elites
The challenges now faced in both parties are not unique to British Columbia at all -- neither is the province simply a wacky place for politics.
Central to both is the concept of elite domination of politics versus direct democracy.
In Toronto, anti-elite candidate Rob Ford simply devastated elite politician George Smitherman -- a former Ontario Liberal deputy premier -- in the election for mayor.
In the United States, the Tea Party movement has gained huge traction even as it clearly has no coherent policy prescription for the country other than anger at existing politicians.
And right now, that's enough.
Here in B.C. we've seen the incredible public response to the direct democracy citizens' initiative campaign of Fight HST -- which I am involved with -- against the hated Harmonized Sales Tax.
And we'll soon see if the Fight HST-organized recall campaign against BC Liberal cabinet minister Ida Chong in her Oak Bay-Gordon Head riding to add pressure to end the HST gets traction when it begins this week.
Grassroots anger at the HST has already driven Campbell to resign and his party to nosedive in popularity.
Even without an initiative process available in Ontario, Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty -- who also introduced an HST there at the same time as in B.C. -- appears headed for a disastrous defeat in the next election.
The consequence of anti-elite anger at the leadership of both the governing and opposition parties in B.C. is clear: the controversial Campbell could be forced from office by his caucus prior to his planned departure when a new leader is chosen by the BC Liberals on Feb. 26, 2011.
And James could see her party fracture both at the caucus and membership level even before a Nov. 2011 NDP convention holds a scheduled yes or no review vote on her continued leadership.
Papering over torn feelings
This week saw transparent efforts to paper over significant splits in both parties.
Campbell loyalists, especially women, have been trotted out to say the premier may have been "very, very tough man to work for" -- as former deputy premier Christy Clark put it -- but no, they all say, he never abused me.
Bennett's alleged mistreatment and his former BC Liberal colleagues' response to it are eerily reminiscent of the old Monty Python television show skit about gangster Dinsdale Piranha and how he terrorized his thugs but fear forced them to deny it.
Presenter: Another man who had his head nailed to the floor was Stig O' Tracy.
Interviewer: I've been told Dinsdale Piranha nailed your head to the floor.
Stig: No. Never. He was a smashing bloke. He used to buy his mother flowers and that. He was like a brother to me.
Interviewer: But the police have film of Dinsdale actually nailing your head to the floor.
Stig: (pause) Oh yeah, he did that.
Interviewer: Why?
Stig: Well he had to, didn't he? I mean there was nothing else he could do, be fair. I had transgressed the unwritten law.
Interviewer: What had you done?
Stig: Er... well he didn't tell me that, but he gave me his word that it was the case, and that's good enough for me with old Dinsy. I mean, he didn't want to nail my head to the floor. I had to insist. He wanted to let me off. He'd do anything for you, Dinsdale would.
Interviewer: And you don't bear him a grudge?
Stig: A grudge! Old Dinsy? He was a real darling.
Whatever the truth of Campbell's intimidating behaviour, his 15 per cent income tax cut announced on television Oct. 27 disappeared faster than Bennett's photo on the party website.
Even traumatized BC Liberal MLAs realized that their new leader would get no credit for the tax reduction but they would be left with an annual $600 million hole in the budget, something likely to force unpopular public service cuts.
Yellow banner
In the NDP's case, James' supporters at provincial council made a show of giving out yellow scarves with a large embossed letter C, indicating support for the leader.
There were also buttons with "Doer. Dexter. James." -- a reference to former Manitoba NDP premier Gary Doer, who lost three elections before winning government for 10 years and current Nova Scotia NDP Premier Darrell Dexter, who had two election losses before becoming premier in 2009.
But the strategy backfired when sharp-eyed media were immediately able to identify 13 caucus members pointedly not wearing the yellow scarves -- and not responding to James' angry speech calling for party unity.
Those familiar with the provincial council also know it is traditionally dominated by supporters of the leader and has never voted to break ranks with any of them in the past -- even when NDP premiers Mike Harcourt, Glen Clark and Ujjal Dosanjh were in the direst of straits with the public.
So James still faces a challenge to restore unity to the fractious caucus -- and calling MLAs who disagree with her "selfish" prior to the vote wasn't wise.
Downward indicators
Despite that provincial council vote against a full leadership convention next year, the NDP remains in serious financial difficulty with a shrinking membership and falling polling results.
A Mustel Group poll released Friday showed the BC Liberals rebounding after Campbell's resignation announcement to 37 per cent, just five per cent behind the NDP's 42 per cent -- which is the same level of support it achieved in the 2009 election.
And Mustel said James' personal approval has dropped nine per cent since September to 33 per cent, putting her just a point above Campbell's 32 per cent.
(Those numbers differ with the last Angus Reid Public Opinion Poll before Campbell quit, showing the NDP at 47 per cent versus 26 per cent for the BC Liberals but with James having just 25 per cent personal approval to Campbell's 12 per cent.)
Move up the convention
Ultimately, the only resolution of the NDP's leadership question can come from the general membership of the party -- not the provincial council.
The solution offered here last week is even more salient now. The provincial council should move the scheduled party convention and its planned leadership review vote on James from Nov. 2011 to early March.
The constitution allows it, the circumstances demand it.
It may be painful to deal with contentious delegate selection meetings where James' leadership is the primary issue in all 85 B.C. ridings.
But if not, it will be absolutely excruciating trying to deal with a split in the caucus and party if the BC Liberals cleverly call a provincial election after their new leader is chosen next Feb. 26 -- and before the November NDP convention.
.
48 comments:
"We vote with our actions."
- Benjamin Shield, author.
I believe the actions of many folks is to vote with their feet, and reduce donations to a party. In the case of the NDP it's much harder than for the Liberals who collect most of their funds from businesses.
James simply must understand with that many MLA's not doing the yellow scarf thing( reminds me of Gordo and his made in China regalia). Those MLA's sitting on their hands did so knowing that she would try to punish them. It wasn't a un though out first move. What, besides changing their critic jobs, chucking them out of the caucus or just ignoring them ,could she do and look like someone who runs things. An old expression comes to mind" Lead, follow, or get out of the way. What do you plan to do now Ms.James after upsetting so many of your caucus and who knows how many members, and last but not least, the BC voters. And of course if push comes to shove and she is removed, hell, the pension is pretty sweet for such a small number of years on the job.
Bill continues to stump for the Rockefeller backed Hollyhockers that delivered the "axe the tax" nightmare in replacement of Sustainable BC coupled with the ABC campaign.
It's the Vancouver old boys club and there shiny new House of Solomon that delivered Gordo's threepeat and will destroy any other chance of anyone outside the old boy circle from grasping the brass ring.
It is destructive old boy politics that have brought us to this place in time. Do we need more of the same? Only this time packaged as charitable funds with a green "social" agenda! You know the 'business first' socialism? The "Made in BC" Fabian agenda?
The Hollyhockers must have their way or we get the neo-liberal, hard core global sell out that has brought Iceland, Greece, Spain and now Ireland to its knees...
The BC Bilderbergs have had their way with us for decades. Now, Bill speaks of Direct Democracy. Is that the next Buzz word the "RINGO's" (Rockefeller inspired NGO's) are going to manifest under the all seeing eye of the Greenfather in Vancouver's new House of Solomon in fulfilling their Hollyhocker juggernaut?
The yellow scarf thing was a sham. If there was any sense in unity, the yellow scarves would haven't been used.
As for the pension, agree. And wasn't it the NDP that was saying they wouldn't take it when the pension reform came out in the first place?
People who want to scuttle Carole keep claiming the membership is down, but I have yet to see any proof of that assertion. The fact is, membership levels go up when there are leadership or nomination races due to mass sign-ups by candidates, then go down, then level off. So the fact that membership rates may or may not be higher than 2005 means nothing. Add to that the fact that many constituency associations, including my own and others I have heard of anecdotally, haven't held membership drives for years, and you'd see that falling memberships (if that is indeed what is happening) are not a fair or accurate indication about Carole's leadership. I'm really tired of people using this argument without proof or context.
Another signal to the soldiers to keep the orchestrated, step by step rebellion games going. It's the classic saboteur's advantage. The defender has to win every time, the saboteur only has to win once.
THE PROVINCE Editorial, NOVEMBER 23, 2010
"NDP leader Carole James's declaration of an end to infighting within her party rings as hollow as that of the former Iraqi information minister who famously declared on TV in 2003 there were no U.S. tanks in Baghdad -- when they could clearly be seen in the background."
Province Editorial
MICHAEL SMYTH, THE PROVINCE NOVEMBER 23, 2010
One thing's for sure: The Libs are delighted that NDP leader Carole James is sticking around, at least for now.
After beating her twice already, the Liberals hope she survives an NDP caucus revolt, and stays exactly where she is.
Michael Smith Column
Most of this is from your column, Bill, with some extra points of fact from The Vancouver Sun including quoting Carole James. (My comments and conclusion are in parentheses)
Those familiar with the provincial council know it is dominated by supporters of the leader
Provincial council voted against a full leadership convention next year, 97-18, but the NDP remains in difficulty
And James could see her party fracture both at the caucus and membership level even before a Nov. 2011 NDP convention holds a scheduled yes or no review vote on her continued leadership.
"A vote by the party’s provincial council should be seen as an unqualified endorsement of her leadership", but while the NDP provincial council lined up firmly behind James, media were able to identify 13 caucus members not wearing the yellow scarves (in support of Carole James)
So James still faces a challenge to restore unity to the fractious caucus
Ultimately, the only resolution of the NDP's leadership question can come from the general membership of the party -- not the provincial council.
(Note: 74% of the provincial council are constituency association delegates selected by the general membership)
The solution offered here last week is even more salient now. The provincial council should move the scheduled party convention and its planned leadership review vote on James from Nov. 2011 to early March.
(So the provincial council which is dominated by Carole James supporters should move the leadership review that they just agreed is unnecessary until Nov 2011 to an earlier date, that could not possibly advance their preferred representative because she is already the leader, when NDP funds could be put to better use getting ready for an uncertain election date because . . . ? You said so?)
The constitution allows it, the circumstances demand it.
(Kind of sounds to me like you're doing the demanding. You said you will support whoever the NDP leader is at election time and Carole James is the resounding leader now and will be for the next election so make your decision already. Do you like the NDP or not? Because this is the way the NDP works.)
(You don't like it, do something about it instead of expecting that your written word can change anything in the political arena. And by do something about it I mean go find a party that acts the way you think a party should treat voters. Take all the time in the world, because you'll need it. Such a party doesn't exist.)
"The consequence of anti-elite anger at the leadership of both the governing and opposition parties in B.C. is clear: "
Uh, yeah. More people stay away from the polls than vote for either party. And a significant percentage vote for whatever phlegm represents the remainder of our political spectrum rather than the vomit that inhabits the Legislature.
DPL, the first move was Bob four weeks ago, the second was Norm, the third was Conroy, Kwan, Popham and Trevena on Friday. That's intimidation and it didn't work.
Two year olds are intimidated by scarves and if they were that troubled they could have put them on and still organized the no mike down in the southeast corner of the room. Nobody was fooled by what was going on and who was orchestrating it.
The reason for their failure wasn't the scarves. It was the pathetic nature of their arguments. The idea that a knife fight will rejuvanate the NDP is absurd. And the idea that Carole isn't up to the job was blown away by her performance Friday and Saturday. She stood up to the bullies.
What I find ironic is that the argument that Carole isn't up to the job is being made by a group of people who didn't organize for the meeting and pissed delegates off with an attack on the leader the same day people were honoring Dave Barrett.
They say Carole can't win. But they are the ones who were humiliated by a pathetic loss after they predicted 30% on the floor. The evidence is that the dissidents are the ones who couldn't punch their way out of a paper bag. And I note that the group of 13 doesn't exactly include any stellar performers.
How is putting them in charge going to help the NDP?
"And do leaders have the right to demand absolute loyalty of individual MLAs who are elected by voters -- not the party?"
Excuse me? Have you not been paying attention, Bill? Most ridings tend to lean one way or the other, the results generally being dependent on the popularity of the leader. The eventually elected representative is more often than not decided before the general election (involving voters) at the nomination vote (party members only).
But to answer your question, regardless of how you think they got there, absolutely. And the MLAs have the right to tell the leader where to go. The fact they almost never do perfectly illustrates how unfit they are to be an elected representative.
Bill, the "bottom line" internally is that a "crisis of confidence" exists in Carole's leadership and in head office (read Moe). And by that I mean the so-called "bakers dozen".
That's why most MLAs are refusing to speak to the media as they know if that explicitly came out publicly it will further impact party fortunes.
This "serious" problem is unfortunately "unsolvable" AFAIK.
@ 8:32 PM PST
People who are against Carole James are not bullies. Their weakness on the weekend was lack of organization and resultant blabber-mouthing.
Putting on yellow scarves and therefore making people with alternative views stick out like sore thumbs is a form of bullying.
Carole James did not "stand up to bullies." Carole James was intimidating people with less power than her. James was the bully, not them. This is weak leadership, to put it mildly.
Bill has pointed out on Tyee that he works for no one but himself and despite being baited by posters who worked to align him with various aspects of the current dissonance of the party he forwards the notions of a sped up leadership review solely in a bid to avoid destruction and he is not doing the bidding of any one candidate who seeks leadership.
Based on these words I must revoke my earlier comments on this page as I have done over at the Tyee as I have long respected Bill and take him at his word.
I have included my response as posted at the Tyee as well for clarity.
Response to Bill Reponds
Thank you Bill for being up front on the matter.
I will clarify my comments. As I am one who dropped a line with what has now been clarified as the wrong bait.
I must admit it was an assumption that you continued to work in the House of Solomon for the Greenfather (Joel Solomon) and his front man and current Mayor Gregor Robertson as part of the ever growing Hollynaut (Hollyhock Juggernaut).
You have in the past and your work to forward the axe the tax campaign seemed to dove tail nicely with their agenda of growing Gregor into the job.
You can see where people might have thought this given the track record of Mayors to evolve into the job and your proximity to the processes involved in that evolution.
Many New Democrats are still feeling the sting of the abandonment of an adopted election platform on the NDP convention floor that included significant policy work including carbon pricing for the crude "axe the tax" campaign that became pivotal to the success of Gordo's Threepeat.
Memories are short in the press and maybe even amongst some of the general public but BC's political circles have them like elephants.
I agree with your position on moving up the date of the review. It would have been a wise strategy decision and certainly superior to forcing out the caucus dissidents than announcing an end to dissonance.
The question that remains is how do we best improve democratic process within the NDP with said dissonance? The answer might well transfer to the rest of BC......
To anon re NDP membership numbers, it's public knowledge and readily evident to NDP members that numbers ARE down seriously, and finances are still weak too but improving.
The 97-18 vote result omitted that about 20 people abstained, and anyway the real depth of the divide is evident from the caucus split that the James gang unwittingly exposed with their yellow scarves stunt.
The real truth is that the dissidents are motivated mainly by genuine fears that the NDP could blow the next election again unless the leader quickly makes some major improvements in her own performance, which she has promised to do but so far hasn't done.
The cause is not hopeless and there is still time for James to boost her approval ratings, but almost everyone recognizes that if Carole fails to exhibit a stronger grasp on business and finance and economic matters, and unless she adopts a better style of leadership, then the NDP will lose the next election and the people of B.C. will be doomed to four more years of corrupt Liberal mismanagement.
To Anon 11:31 p.m. - thanks for your comments and clarification here and at the Tyee.
I have and continue to support Mayor Gregor Robertson - but I don't work for him. [Actually, as a Vancouver taxpayer, he works for me!]
But Gregor and I don't always agree. For example, I parted company on the carbon tax way back when it was introduced and I continue to oppose it as unfair as well as ineffectual at its intended purpose.
I also don't agree with your supposition that opposing the carbon tax blocked the NDP winning the 2009 election - see my column quoting carbon tax backer Mark Jaccard as saying it helped the NDP almost win that election rather than caused the loss.
But on the NDP - I've been on the inside as an executive member and part of the premier's staff as well as being on the outside - and outs - now. The fixation on obedience is at a new high - I remember vigorous debates on Clayquot Sound, Six Mile Ranch and no fault insurance at both provincial council meetings and conventions under both Mike Harcourt and Glen Clark.
Yes, no question the powers that be of the day wanted and tried to influence the debate and decisions but what happened last weekend was a whole different ballgame.
I just hope that confidence in one's position on whatever issue would allow a more open and honest debate.
Sort of like what happens here with different postings - not always to my liking but sometimes - like with your comments now - people may actually change their opinion and come to new conclusions.
"Central to (the challenges now faced in both parties) is the concept of elite domination of politics versus direct democracy. Here in B.C. we've seen the incredible public response to the direct democracy citizens' initiative campaign of Fight HST . . . "
You're kidding, right? Not only can this pointless protest campaign not be called direct democracy, but there is no competition for elite domination, just elite pit bull fights to see who the dominating top dog will be. You see any of the elite clamoring for direct democracy? You can wait to find out what that is before you answer if you like.
Excellent analysis Bill and an amusingly accurate choice of title.
"So James still faces a challenge to restore unity to the fractious caucus -- and calling MLAs who disagree with her "selfish" prior to the vote wasn't wise."
Everytime I saw the clip of Carole describing her critics as "selfish,"
all I could think is that she appeared to be the selfish one. I agree with Ke Dongshan if any bullying was going on, it was coming from the yellow scarf faction.
Bill,
On behalf of 9% Gordo and the rest of the BC Liberals, I would like to thank you for making sure that we are re-elected in 2011!
The difference between Gordo and Carole is?
Carole wears the skirt.
Nothing wrong with the yellow scarves...in fact I quite like the upbeat yellow colour. It's just that Carole used the scarves at the inappropriate time and place.
It seems to me that buttons, banners and scarves are used at very public conventions; rival races to convince people of your energy and political smarts(in a competitive way-not a collaborative way)! So Carole, March 2011 would have been the appropriate competitive spot to strut your stuff.
I believe there is an old Chinese saying that "If you can help an opponent save face then you have made a friend" or something like that.Forcing your publicly elected colleagues to make a very public embarrassing choice so that the MSM can lick their lips was not a best way to deal with convincing them ( as it should have been behind REALLY closed doors)or even listening to their legitimate concerns about general public perception of the present leader.
As a long time NDP activist I gotta say something about all this.
Provincial Council always has an element of dissident behavior and demands to do things better. Usually I think about a third. No matter who the leader. Going back to the Barrett era even, it has been a certainty.
The same applies to the NDP caucus. Usually about a third are dissidents and want to do everything their way (except when there were only 2 and Carole had just taken over).
I am sure this applies to all political parties btw. It is guaranteed by human nature I believe.
Nothing is new here and certainly not startling.
The only difference between the parties in this case is that the NDP is more vulnerable to outside forces with agendas playing up such internal debate and strife because the MSM can decide to run stories on it whenever it suits them.
The dissidents go public to get more effect with their dissention when the media will take note.
Simpson has been crying the blues for many years and undermining Carole from time to time in the process. Not always doing it publically but often hooking up with other dissenters to apply internal pressures and get their way on various things.
The Libs really really wanted to distract public attention away from themselves of late. They do not allow any public dissention at all (and it only happens when things get really bad in the polls) and everyone knows of the NDP vulnerability so the MSM got on their band wagon as usual.
There is nothing more to it than that folks.
If dissidents prove points of decay in leadership, then all past and future NDP leaders are in jeopardy. I think they prove nothing. In the NDP, leaders are wise to listen to them and weigh knowledge of their agendas and personal ambitions against whether they are saying something valid.
In the Liberal Party, leaders will rarely hear from dissidents and they will govern in an imaginary fanasyland like Gordo surrounded by yes men and women.(like the Emperor's New clothes the naked truth will emerge at some point).
I happen to agree with Bill on one point and that is there is nothing to be gained by sidling up to the nonsupporter business community although Harcourt did a lot of that to some effect and Campbell has been betraying them (small business especially) with the HST and over the top .05 and they kidnap your car laws.
Time would be better spent encouraging minimum wage earners to get out and vote for a wage increase.
As a long time NDP activist I gotta say something about all this.
Provincial Council always has an element of dissident behavior and demands to do things better. Usually I think about a third. No matter who the leader. Going back to the Barrett era even, it has been a certainty.
The same applies to the NDP caucus. Usually about a third are dissidents and want to do everything their way (except when there were only 2 and Carole had just taken over).
I am sure this applies to all political parties btw. It is guaranteed by human nature I believe.
Nothing is new here and certainly not startling.
The only difference between the parties in this case is that the NDP is more vulnerable to outside forces with agendas playing up such internal debate and strife because the MSM can decide to run stories on it whenever it suits them.
The dissidents go public to get more effect with their dissention when the media will take note.
Simpson has been crying the blues for many years and undermining Carole from time to time in the process. Not always doing it publically but often hooking up with other dissenters to apply internal pressures and get their way on various things.
The Libs really really wanted to distract public attention away from themselves of late. They do not allow any public dissention at all (and it only happens when things get really bad in the polls) and everyone knows of the NDP vulnerability so the MSM got on their band wagon as usual.
There is nothing more to it than that folks.
If the existence of dissidents prove points of decay in leadership, then all past and future NDP leaders are and were in jeopardy, not!. I think they prove nothing. In the NDP, leaders are wise to listen to them and weigh knowledge of their agendas and personal ambitions against whether they are saying something valid.
In the Liberal Party, leaders will rarely hear from dissidents and they will govern in an imaginary fanasyland like Gordo surrounded by yes men and women.(like the Emperor's New clothes the naked truth will emerge at some point).
I happen to agree with Bill on one point and that is there is nothing to be gained by sidling up to the nonsupporter business community although Harcourt did a lot of that to some effect and Campbell has been betraying them (small business especially) with the HST and over the top .05 and they kidnap your car laws.
Time would be better spent encouraging minimum wage earners to get out and vote for a wage increase
Don't know if "Dave McPherson" and "solocanoe" are one and the same person but the same message is in each.
Just a reminder to all posters - this is a moderated blog that requires me to see and approve all comments.
That sometimes means there is a short or occasionally long lag between when you submit your post and when it actually appears here.
The nature of this blog is such that I cannot allow unmoderated posting, as some blogs do, with immediate publication of comments.
So - if your comment doesn't appear in a reasonably timely fashion you can either email me or you can make another post with a clear question to me at the top asking if your other post is just held up.
That way I can either post the original or let you know if it somehow went missing in the blogosphere or ever worse - I had to reject it.
Thanks as always for your comments that make this a lively - and very popular - website.
thanks for letting me repeat myself Bill
Campbell sure doesn't mind, helping himself to tax payers money, out and out theft. De Jong's blatant cover up, regarding Campbell's corrupt sale of the BCR. Campbell and Hansen's election lie, the HST wasn't on their radar. Hansen finally admitted the HST papers, were sitting on his desk, before the election. Campbell's election lie, the BCR wasn't for sale. That's how Campbell got, 6 years of being Premier, by lies, deceit and cheating to win. BC is the most corrupt province in Canada. The BC Liberals are the worst politicians, we have ever known. Campbell controls by threat. Anyone opposing him, loses their job. There is no more Constitution. Our Civil rights and Liberties, have been taken away from the people. Democracy and Freedom, where in the hell is that? We live in a, fascist dictatorship, so evil, it turns my stomach. The BC Liberal party, should be obliterated, never to be seen again.
Six times during this column you drew a picture of the parallel worlds of NDP and Liberal. Does this mean you finally admit that the differences between the two parties are not significant?
A lot of us are activists and many of us are simply not accepting James as a person who can lead a caucus well enough to have not only party members, but voters outside the party actually vote NDP.
I was listening to a local radio guy today, in Victoria. He said that when James was the school board person he interviewed her,more than a few times, she was on topic,seemed qualified in the topic, sharp, and sounded committed. But since becoming NDP leader she sounds hesitant, not sharp, evasive, and shrill. Not my words , his. He gets listened to by a lot more people than those who read anyone's blog.And he has a name. So lets not complain too much about Tieleman and the number of caucus members who feel she is not the one to actually win an election. Then decide just what we plan to do about it. My view which doesn't mean a whole lot, is that if she is still around, the election will be lost one more time.Take the pension and disappear Ms.James, for the good of the party, and the voters.
Oh NeoDude - give it up. Both parties are in internal battles - that doesn't make them the same ideologically, it's simply an interesting parallel.
But you know, I should have included the federal Green Party as a third example with the dissent around Elizabeth May's leadership. Would that make you happier?
Well, I just received my LAST e-mail from the BC NDP Newswire.
Subject: REALITY CHECK
QUOTE:
"The Carole James New Democrats are advocating for open and transparent governance and a vibrant democracy that fosters discussion and debate with British Columbians ..." etc
It looks like the new name for the BC NDP is The Carole James New Democrats.
Go to the BC NDP website.
HOME PAGE TITLE = "Carole James and the NDP ..."
Carole James refers to us all as "British Columbians"
Gordon Campbell refers to us all as "British Columbians"
Bill Vander Zalm always refers to us as "The People"
The federal NDP does the same thing with their news releases. Its always Jack Layton and the NDP this, Jack Layton and the NDP that. Big freaking deal. I fail to see your point enitrely, Paul.
"At the root of both the BC Liberal and NDP problems are strikingly similar issues -- is there any room for democracy and dissent within political parties?"
Two questions in response. Remember in medieval times when monarchies and other dictatorships kept people in line by imprisoning and killing their opponents? What does democracy have to do with our political parties? At least we're treated with civilized oppression now.
@Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms Anonymous - 4:43 PM PST - Big freaking deal?
This article is about the BC Liberals and the BC NDP both being at risk.
Jack Layton is NOT a BC politician or even a BC citizen.
Jack Layton didn't lose twice in a row to Gordon "Pinocchio" Campbell.
Go to the BC NDP party website.
TITLE = "Carole James and the NDP ..."
Look at the picture of Carole James at the top of the page.
Picture logo = "Carole James - Leadership for everyone"
Click on the "Carole James" drop-down button below her picture.
Click on your choice of:
[1] "Carole's Bio"
[2] "Carole Speaks Out"
[3] "Carole's Tour Videos"
QUESTION: Is the BC NDP promoting a political party or a pop singer?
Is the NDP the name of her her backup band?
BTW, I just went to the federal NDP website.
TITLE = "NDP"
Then you and I must have gone to entirely different websites because when I go to the federal ndp website the first thing I see is "Jack Layton, NDP" and a picture of his head, bold as brass in the top left corner. He even has the cheek to put his name above the party's name. Above! How dare he!!! At the bottom is a row of flickr pictures, all featuring Jack, and there's a Youtube video of Jack in the right hand side - boy the nerve of this fella. The top right hand corner features Jack's Twitter feed. The bastard! It's like he thinks he's better than his caucus or something, and he's pretty delusional if he thinks that. I mean, he's been leader since 2003 and look how many elections he's lost in that time! What a loser.
I wish Tieleman screened these comments for stupidity as well as libel.
Hi Bill,
You have worked to clarify your position with respect to your working relationship with the House of Solomon, the Greenfather (Joel Solomon) and Mayor Robertson.
For the sake of brevity, I am concerned about how you are playing the semantics Bill.
This long standing corner of internal NDP dissonance has crippled our ability to win with Carole at the helm because they simply prefer Gregor. I know you have supported them in the past and you claim your continued support, now. This is an issue Bill.
I will disregard your play on words with respect to who works for whom, but I will say this.
There is far to much riding on who makes up government for this level of selfishness to be justified.
I understand that Gregor and the Hollynaut (the House of (Joel) Solomon's Hollyhock juggernaut) forwarded the notion that there lack of support was simply due to Caroles position on the Carbon Tax but there is more to it than that and everyone knows it. People will recall that Gregor and the fellow travellers who make up the hollynaut used the Carbon Tax to essentially endorse Gordo and cinch up the threepeat for him. Virtually everyone who spoke favourably of Mr Campbell in that campaign was connected to the now defunct Hollyhock Leadership Institute including but not limited to Judith Sayers, Tzpeorah Berman and of course Gregor.
You on the other hand were very much responsible for the "axe the tax" campaign and your pointing to Jaccards drivel in supoort of your axe the tax campaign is really, really thin gruel.
I dont think I even have to point that out to you Bill, cuz deep down you know what I am talking about. Jaccard is a cool pointy headed analyst but a political animal he is not. His analysis on the issue of the Carbon tax was piss poor and his take that Carole's position benefited her campaign and the party was completely off base and he stood alone in that observation.
The first round of the campaign against the Carbon tax was AWESOME! No doubt about that, but when we abandoned the adopted platform of Sustainable BC which included Carbon Pricing for a repeat of the axe tax stuff during the actual election campaign we "stepped on our own dick" to put it mildly. (Sorry Carole I said that because I don't think it was your call).
Instead we should have left the Axe the tax stuff on the drawing board at the time of the campaign and started shining the light on our alternative policies in Sustainable BC and the Carbon pricing formulas. This would have been an awesome one-two punch and a succesful continuation of the original anti carbon tax campaign.
Anyhow regardless of what we should have or could have done. The lesson we need to learn is this.
It is not wise to leave governing to the likes of Campbell and his liberal crooks because our own house is divided. I dont think people will forgive Mr Robertson and his role in securing the threepeat for Mr Campbell and their unoffical succesorship planning. Which means it will be difficult for folks to forgive you for your part in that.
In the end its about priorities and if folks consider their self ahead of whats best for British Columbia they are not fit to govern.
Its that simple Bill.
It is amazing that 11:01 pm could write ALL of that and overlook the fact that the whole reason why the NDP is divided is entirely because Carole James is not a leader who can unify the party, but rather an ineffectual liability that will only cause the party further harm. Pretty much exactly what Bill has been saying all along.
I am exceedingly tolerant here in allowing divergent, contrary and even downright insulting views to be posted - but Anonymous 11:01 p.m. should be warned that to tone down the rhetorical overdrive if they really want to be considered seriously.
First, you are no New Democrat - your language is all wrong. NDPers who don't like what I have to say still don't talk like you.
Second, you can't bridge the obvious logical chasm in your own words. If I'm working for Gregor and Tzeporah Berman - check the rest of my blog for what I've said about her! - then why did I lead opposition to the carbon tax?
Third, Gregor made clear with the Province today - online edition - that he has no intention or interest in doing anything but running for re-election as mayor. And yes, I support him on that.
So - try a little harder if you really want to grow up to be a spin doctor or otherwise go somewhere else and practice where no one will notice.
Thanks Bill,
But I have been a New Democrat all my life.
And no nobody talks like me.
The only comment I made about Tzeporah is she is connected to the House of Solomon via the hollyhock leadership institute as are many others.
She was very public in her attack on Carole and endorsement of Gordo in the last election as was Gregor and many others also linked through the Hollyhock leadership Institute.
In fact I said that all the favourable endorsements Campbell received were people with links to the hollyhock leadership institute an organization clearly underwritten by Joel Solomon who also underwrites Mayor Robertson.
I did not link you to their Carbon Tax position which they meekly used to stump for Campbell while dissing Carole and the NDP.
I maligned you for supporting the house of Solomon in the past and your continued claim of support. I then went on to compliment you for the first part of the anti carbon tax campaign. From there I stated the obvious, which was the fact that the axe the tax campaign (which you were instrumental in) was detrimental to Carole and the NDP and a contributing factor, if not a pivotal one, to our losing that election.
I have repeatedly treated you with respect here Bill and while you may have misread my comments they certainly did not warrant such an attack from you.
I stick to the comments despite your baseless reprisal.
I never linked you to the Tzeporah Berman pro carbon tax position only to supporting Robertson. It is obvious that you were on the other side of that issue with your execution of the axe the tax campaign.
In my view both campaigns ( the ABC campaign against Carole based on the tax and your part 2 of the Axe the Tax stuff -which obviously eclipsed the execution of Sustainable BC) were detrimental to Carole and the party at the time of the election.
I hope that clears things up for you.
Sure is hard to engage in discussion with people who will not sign a name but rather, choose to remain anonymous. C'mon people. Stand behind your comments and put down a name.
By the way, I had not seen the Province newspaper mention of Gregor not wanting to kick Carole out of her seat.
I dont often read the province although i do subject myself to Smitty's stuff when and where necessary.
Robertson claims he is responding to the chatter when dismissing interest in the job. And I take him at his word.
I obviously made my comments on his historic positioning and I wrote them without the knowledge of this online chat he had with Province readers.
It was also noted in that online story that many of the so called "dissidents" were previous allies of his when he was in caucus. So I am not the only New Democrat talking this way as obviously many share the same consideration given his need to respond and for the issue of his alignment with dissonance voters to be the focus. Which only further validates my comments while dispelling your attempt to dismiss them.
I am pleased to learn however that he has absolutely nothing to do with the current round of dissonance and is not interested in the job.......
Unless of course he happens to be available after a Liberal fourth term as a result of internal NDP dissonance stemming from his former allies......
:)
The spin is enough to make you dizzy
The whistle blowers in this world get the bum’s rush so is it any wonder that people sign as anonymous. While we may espouse to be living in a free society with free speech there are many here who know otherwise. Were the new democrats and liberals who voiced their opinions recently warmly received? People can lose a lot for using their names, those who do and can well great those who don’t great as well at least we are participating.
Hey anon 9:15, speaking of spin!!!
If you are NDP you arn't really getting much traction.
And as you read the Vancouver papers now and again, I suggest to check the cartoon about the speakers comments( speakers riffs) and then drop over to the Times Colonist in the little town of Victoria to see Reaside's latest on Carole James chances of ever being premier of BC. Raeside has been pretty good to James for a long time. If you are a NDP member, why not talk to some of the NDP MLA's who have concerns with a women they meet with in caucus and seem to have found her wanting Just tell them you are known as Anon, I'm sure they will understand
Hey DPL,
I am not sure the relevance of political cartoons attacking Carole.
It is obvious she has been mortally wounded. That much was obivous when public party figures like Gregor bailed on her and the party in favour of the Campbell threepeat during the last election.
In fact I am not sure how she has survived this long without a single review of her leadership.
The fact is the membership of the party has so long been abandoned there has not been a party leader or policy largely supported by them since the early Harcourt days and even then you will all recall how pleased Mike was with the NDP. How did he put it again.... oh yeah "the NDP can be a real pain in the ass."
I would argue that the party last resembled a democratic party under Barrett and that was a mistake as he was not even supposed to become premier.
Oddly that same character ( and this is where I prove I am a New Democrat) stood up at Provincial Council meeting during the run up to "electing" Carole as leader and said " I think we should change the name of the party because there is nothing New or Democratic about it anymore."
You take my criticism of those who undermined Carole in the last election and continue to do so today as support for the leader. Which it is not.
Then you go on, like Bill, to discredit my comments by cat calling and saying I am not a new democrat.
I find that odd. Its not me who played all angles of the carbon tax to undermine our party and lose the last election.
Its not me currently taking pot shots from the sidelines and organizing press conferences that say nothing but serve only to embarass the entire party and deliver body blows to the leader while killing our chances of coming together to form a government in waiting.
As a new democract I would not do such things no matter who leads the party.
I am interested in restoring Democracy in the party. Not because I am an altruistic idealist but because I think doing so will help get us elected. Or at least, as Bill says, avoid our total destruction.
I’m not a party member anywhere but I vote and like a lot of people around here where I live have not been inspired by Carole James or the last election campaign run by the dippers. Good grief you guys can’t get any meaningful traction with the electorate despite your opponents being loathed. Maybe you should think about that fact long and hard. For crying out loud ‘right’ and ‘left’ voters don’t shift that much. You have a base you can count on so put some of that cheer leading energy in to a different demographic. GET THE YOUTH VOTE OUT FOR CRYING OUT LOUD whoever figures out how to do that will win successive elections. You have a base you can count on already put more energy in to the untapped youth vote. Your election runs are boring old school out of touch and easy to dismiss as background noise. Utilise social media and music to the max get some endorsements from popular youth with a ‘following’. Get some candidates that resonate with youth (not Ross Rebagliati types...(real hip progressives don’be scared take a chance) youth with followings) create a ministry not of silly walks but of something the kids can get down with. When the MSM attacks this strategy and the candidates tell them that when they figure out how to get the youth vote out that you’ll take notes but in the mean time they don’t so...Also tell those nasty MSM types that people are paying less attention to the MSM especially youth (because like politicians youth do not trust the MSM) and are getting the news elsewhere and while you are at it tell the MSM that you don’t blame them.
Hi again anon, you must understand that political cartoonists have some brains and see the way things are going. Politicians don't like being made fun of. I recall one politician who took a cartoonist to court way back when. Yes it is relevant, because people laughing at you can and often do damage to credibility and for that matter, folks who write about issues, if they really feel strong about their posts, they actually call themselves something besides anon. The politician with the fly problems was Bill VanderZam, a fellow who has now forced, with the help of 725 thousand voters, to basically drive Gordo from power,( mind you he isn't exactly rushing to the door, unlike Danny Williams who announced today and will,be gone in a week)) which gives the NDP the chance of regaining power in BC. But with a rather weak leader of the NDP,( a caucus leader that has over a dozen MLA's sitting on their hands doesn't look like a skillful leader who folks really want to follow) it's likely that the party will simply not make it, for the third time with Ms.Dithers.
Sorry to be long winded Bill, but like many I feel James has stayed beyond her shelf life. Time will prove me right or wrong.
Yes, Bill as a matter of fact it would have. The closer you get to the truth, the happier I am. What other examples do you have? I don't recall seeing the Clone Party registered yet so is there a political party where members speak freely and are in total agreement as to what is best for everybody?
I also disagree with you about your ideology comment. I think what you mean to say is that they have policy differences (because their supporters are different). In the end though, they both are nothing but power hungry scam artists. They have different strategies to make this happen, one tugs at the hearts of the compassionate, the other tempts the greedy and uncaring. But in the final verdict, both are tossed from power by voters who see them as liars and thieves. It all makes me quite sad, much like your column.
DPL said... 3:27 PM PST
folks who write about issues, if they really feel strong about their posts, they actually call themselves something besides anon.
-----------------------------------
I concur, how bloody lazy or unimaginative are people who won't come up with a simple title for themselves? Sh!t even a number will suffices if need be.
Not sure if you are aware of this development Bill but I think you should take a boo.
http://tinyurl.com/2apfros
Second, you can't bridge the obvious logical chasm in your own words. If I'm working for Gregor and Tzeporah Berman - check the rest of my blog for what I've said about her! - then why did I lead opposition to the carbon tax?
That should throw them off.
Post a Comment