Category Archives: liberal party

Nomination Crashers III & IV

liberal party, ndp, toronto

As I write this, I’m aware that third and fourth sequels rarely do justice to the original. (Police Academy and Jaws, I’m looking at you.) Nomination Crashers and Nomination Crashers II were good enough, I probably shouldn’t push it. But, alas, here we are.

This edition of Nomination Crashers is a double-header, because, yes, last Thursday I attended two (very different) Toronto Centre nomination meetings on the same night. The first was the nomination meeting for the provincial Liberals, though I’m told it was actually promoted to Liberals as the “George Smitherman Nomination Meeting.” Hundreds of people filled the Wellesley Community Centre gym to enjoy free catered food (samosas, sausage rolls, pizza, apples, and finally ice cream came around on trays carried by a uniformed wait staff) and watch dancers and other entertainment. I felt a little guilty eating the food, but only a little. No one would want it to go to waste…

As the meeting’s official name suggests, there was (almost) no attempt to pretend this was anything but a coronation. Even the signs behind the stage had George’s face on them, and nominations were declared open just long enough for Bob Rae (why does that name sound familiar?) to nominate George before they were immediately closed again. He then took the stage and, strangely, feigned surprise and speechlessness. His speech didn’t speak to me, so I won’t comment on it further. Though, to be fair, I may have been too distracted by the ice cream.

From there, I biked down the street to the 519 Community Centre where the provincial NDP were having their nomination meeting. Hard to compare the two. On the one hand, the NDP didn’t have any free food, and the juice was being served in extremely tiny paper cups I’ve only ever seen before at dentist offices. On the other hand, it was actually a real nomination meeting. So, you know, hard to compare. There were three women seeking the nomination, including Sandra Gonzalez who was ultimately victorious. She’d previously run against El-Farouk Khaki for the federal nomination, and will make a good candidate. The most entertaining moment of this meeting happened during one of the other contestants’ speeches, when one of their supporters started yelling scripted responses in planned breaks, like “yes sister!” and “preach it!” and “testify!” In case there was any doubt that those passionate outbursts were planned, I later looked over to see that person subtly mouthing the words of the speech along with the contestant.

Again, I met people at both meetings who recognized me and let me know they’d voted for me in the last election, which is interesting.

The nominations of George and Sandra follow the Conservative nomination of Pamela Taylor and the Green Party of Ontario’s nomination of Mike McLean, whose blog is here. The Ontario Provincial election happens on October 10th 2007, concurrent with the referendum on MMP.

The Triple E Crisis, Plus

climate crisis, conservative party, democracy and good government, economy, energy, green party, liberal party, ndp

Last Friday the NDP sent out their fifth e-mail newsletter in a row (update: sixth, seventh) complaining about gas prices, saying that Canadians are “victims,” getting “gouged” and “cheated” at the pumps. The implication, of course, is that if the NDP were in power they would make sure gas prices were lower. That might be a good way to get votes, but it’s completely irreconcilable with their claim to have a strong environmental platform. (I was going to let it slide after the first and second email, and I forgot about it after the third and fourth, but now that the fifth one has reminded me, I thought it was worth opening up the discussion.)

There’s a triple-E crisis at work here. Our Environmental crisis is, in fact, an Energy crisis that will become an Economic one if we don’t take the right kind of action. The problem, simply put, is that we’re using up too much stored solar energy (fossil fuels) too quickly. And it doesn’t take a doctorate in economics to understand that when something is cheaper, people use more of it less efficiently. When we use more fossil fuels less efficiently, we exacerbate the climate crisis while simultaneously using up what has been the source of almost all economic growth and prosperity in the past two hundred years.

Instead of acknowledging that reality, too many politicians focus on playing to the cameras. There’s a reason so many people have come to believe that politicians will say almost anything to get elected; it’s true. (In the last federal election, I used the fact that Greens recognize the need to end artificially low energy prices as an example of how we were an exception to that rule.) This is what Joe Trippi calls “transactional politics,” the process by which politicians offer promises (lower gas prices, lower taxes, more police) in exchange for your vote. It’s also what has led Mark Kingwell to declare that “politicians have become brokers of interest rather than leaders, and citizens reduce themselves to consumers of goods and services enjoyed in return for regular obedience to the tax code.”

The problem is that transactional politics exist in direct opposition to transformational politics–the kind of leadership that Kingwell (and, I suspect, most Canadians) pine for, and that we so desperately need in this time of crisis. That’s why the biggest threat to our quality of life (best case) and collective survival (worst case) is not the Triple E Crisis itself, but the lack of attention most citizens are paying to the complex political issues that confront us. Here, we add a fourth E, the Electorate. Democracy requires that we all take some responsibility for the direction of our government, yet many Canadians feel no such responsibility. We’re all too busy with too many other important things to be bothered by the mud-slinging PR exercise that politics has become. And that, I would argue, is what makes us more susceptible to things like Jack Layton’s claim that we pay too much for gas (never mind the fact that we pay way less than most other counties), Stephen Harper’s claim that there’s a foreign stripper epidemic that needs to be addressed (never mind the fact that only ten strippers immigrated to Canada last year), or Stéphane Dion’s claim that somehow there are “mega-bucks” to be made by taking action on Kyoto (acting is cheaper than not acting, but that doesn’t mean we’re all going to somehow magically get rich).

That’s why I take democracy itself so seriously. An engaged, informed electorate is the only way we’re going to solve the problems facing us. I have no doubt that the Canadian public is intelligent enough; we only need the will, and to direct our energies and attention to the right places.

Of course, there’s hope. The attempts of the status-quo parties to buy votes aren’t proving effective, to the point where the only party telling you what you don’t want to hear is the only one that’s up in the polls since the last election. It’s just like we were told in high school: just be yourself, the other kids will learn to like you for who you are soon enough.

Changing The Face Of Canadian Politics

democracy and good government, green party, liberal party

Remember the good old days when us Greens couldn’t get the attention of the media if our lives depended on it?

The story all of the news outlets (and for that matter, the blogosphere and listseves) are buzzing about today is that Elizabeth May and Stephane Dion have announced that, out of mutual respect, a tradition of allowing new leaders to run unopposed, and a recognition of the need for cooperation, they will not run candidates against each other in the next federal election.

Not surprisingly, some people have strong feelings about this development, and it’s clear that the move has both advantages and disadvantages. However, overall I believe Canadians will see this for what it is: a positive sign for Canadian politics.

Let’s review the context of this announcement. It put principal above partisanship at a time when Canadians are crying out for positive politics. It advances the cause of action on climate change as time itself is running out. Above all, it confirms what the Green Party has always said: that winning looks different to us, and that getting our ideas enacted is more important than the success of the party itself.

That being said, it does not, in any way, endorse the Liberal platform or negate the strong need for Canadians to vote Green in the next election. All Elizabeth has said is that she thinks Stéphane Dion would make a better PM than Stephen Harper, and that her and Dion can agree on the urgency to act. Greens and Liberals do not agree on a wide range of other issues, and without Green MPs in the House we will not see the right kind of action, or enough of it.

I also want to take a moment to refute the somewhat strange argument that this non-partisan cooperation somehow subverts democracy. It is, in fact, our current electoral system that subverts the will of the electorate when only 1/3 of Canadians can elect a Prime Minister who then presumes to have an unquestioned mandate, while over a million Green Party voters in the last two elections have not had their votes counted towards electing an MP.

A recent poll found that the majority of Canadians think that, based on our electoral results to date, Greens deserve representation in the House. This “principal before partisanship” cooperation could help achieve that democratic will, despite an archaic and unfair electoral system that most Parliamentary democracies have already abandoned.

To conclude, here are some (admittedly selected) initial reaction comments taken from theglobeandmail.com. I suspect these sentiments will prove to be representative of the majority.

Douglas Campbell from writes: The Green Party of Canada has a wide ranging, economically rational platform which is neither left nor right wing. Check their website – you may be surprised to find that on many issues their policies are considerably more fiscally responsible than the Conservatives.

b g from Canada writes: The Liberals, NDP, and Green should come together in the interest of the environment. A Harper Conservative majority would be THE worst outcome for the environment.

John Baird Is Nothing But A Loud-Mouth from Edmonton, Canada writes: I thought before that May might have a chance in the next election, but if this agreement is true, I do believe she would win Central Nova if an election were called today. It’s not my riding, but I know I for one would like to see the Greens have a more pivotal role in government, and I think the voters of Central Nova might like the notion of being the first federal riding to elect a Green to parliament! On a similar note, I would love to see Ms. May stir things up in a national election debate. Not only would she eat the others for lunch on environmental issues, it would be good for the country to hear her defend her party’s platform regarding other governmental portfolios. I’ve never voted Green myself, but I may well do so in the future.

A Mahadeen from Toronto, Canada writes: Brilliant move!
Good on them – now maybe we will get rid of that embarassing MacKay!! I am very impressed that these two parties can work together like this and see it as a positive sign.

Peter Kells from Ottawa, Canada writes: Elizabeth May is a dynamo and would be a welcome voice in the Parliament of Canada. I applaud any move that would bring her into the House of Commons. I do not for a moment veiw this as some kind of sellout or backroom deal. She has always struck me as a person who speaks her mind and kow tows to no one. She may even come to be Mr. Dion’s worst nightmare if he ever strays from the environmental path. I am sure that the CPC do not see the Greens as a threat but I am sure that they view Elzabeth May as a threat.

G. Veneta from Calgary, Canada writes: BRAVO! It’s time the center united where it counts. United is the only way to move Canada forward and to stop the Con sellout of Canada and complete impotence on the environment with no overall plan but crumbs to pacify the masses in their minds. Hard to see how any con policies speak to the future health and productivity of the country. Who do they work for? Canadians I think not!

Go Ms. May and Go Mr. Dion!!

Tom W from Vancouver, Canada writes: As a NDP supporter I like this move ! Dippers like to claim the moral authority over the environment, whereas I think having a Green Party perspective represented would do wonders for both sides of the green vote by broadening its appeal as the central public policy issue (not as a peripherial singular issue) of the day.

As far as I’m concerned the GPC should be the party representing fiscal conservatism in this country (the Conservatives being utterly incompetent in this regard, as made evident with their blatent waste with one of the largest surplus in Canadian history). We are utterly wasting the financial opportunity to invest in a sustainable economy with the riches obtained by resource royalites. That’s fiscal irresponsbility in my book.

The addition of a 4th Federalist party would be great for this country, as would electoral reform that would bring in some additional porportionality into the house of commons.

Having May and Layton in the house during question period is a win-win. Ditto for former Green supporter turned Liberal candidate Briony Penn, who is running in Sannich-Gulf Islands.

CG fr Toronto from Canada writes:
Elizabeth May is a lovely compliment to Stephane Dion… intelligence with a human touch.

Nomination Crashers

liberal party, toronto

Claire and I crashed the Toronto Centre Liberal nomination meeting tonight. (How amused was I to see at least four or five other people at the meeting who I know are supporting my campaign? We exchanged knowing glances and Sting-style nose-taps. I guess it was just the place to be.) As of right now neither the blogosphere nor Google News are reporting the results of the vote between Bob Rae and Meredith Cartwright.

In conversation with Rob Oliphant and Mathieu Chantelois (a former nomination contestant and once rumoured nomination contestant, respectively) I heard a funny story. First though, some background.

A few weeks back I was sitting outside of Starbucks on Church Street with some friends, people watching. One man walked by wearing a Michael Ignatieff scarf. “Hey look,” we said. “That guy’s wearing a Michael Ignatieff scarf.” Then, two minutes later, Bob Rae walked by. “Hey look,” we said. “There’s Bob Rae.” So I got up and introduced myself as the Green candidate, we chatted for a bit, and then he continued on his walk.

Now, back to the nomination meeting. When Rob introduced me to Mathieu as the nominated Green candidate, Mathieu said, “oh, so you work at Starbucks.” Not having the above story fresh in my mind, I thought he was making some strange joke. (“Because the Starbucks sign is green?,” I thought.) But yes, as it turns out there’s a story going around in the Rae campaign (Mathieu hadn’t heard this directly from Bob) that Bob met me when I sold him a coffee.

No? Ok, well, it was funny to me.