Erin Weir saga #3

90 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering

josh wrote:

Weir is not running.  But shows a lot more class than the NDP insiders who trashed him and denied him due process.

https://www.erinweir.com/election2019

 

He got due process and was being readmitted to caucus. 

Misfit Misfit's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

radiorahim wrote:
I agree with Erin Weir being turfed from the caucus.   And the union repesenting the staff of caucus members does too.

Weir's riding association is free to nominate their candidate, as long as that candidate isn't Erin Weir.

The NDP doesn't "appoint" candidates as a general rule.   That only happens if the EDA has not picked a candidate.

I've been involved in a nomination campaign and the nomination rules are not part of the constitution per se.

Are you that strong in  your agreement that you are prepared to sacrifice not only that seat, but also possibly every other NDP seat in Saskatchewan to the point that the Conservatives prevail, possibly to the point of rendering the federal NDP unelectable in Saskatchewan for decades?

That is a bit dramatic. He would split the NDP vote in his own riding and nothing more.

Unionist

josh wrote:

Weir is not running.  But shows a lot more class than the NDP insiders who trashed him and denied him due process.

https://www.erinweir.com/election2019

Awesome statement. That's the Erin Weir I know and admire.

The NDP sadly doesn't deserve people of such integrity. My concern now is how long others will last who have a habit of speaking their mind and standing on principle (Svend Robinson, Niki Ashton, ...).

 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Pondering wrote:

josh wrote:

Weir is not running.  But shows a lot more class than the NDP insiders who trashed him and denied him due process.

https://www.erinweir.com/election2019

He got due process and was being readmitted to caucus. 

Arm chair quarterbacks who don't have to worry about the finer points of actually electing an MP to advocate for change. I agree he has resigned with class.

I wish Regina New Democrats, and whoever the federal leader may approve as an NDP candidate, well in the upcoming campaign. I hope that local activists will again succeed in electing a progressive MP and am proud to be leaving our constituency association in a strong position to do so.

Since I was first nominated in 2014, our membership and credit union account have more than doubled. Today, with 2,500 members and $100,000, the Regina–Lewvan NDP is among the largest and best funded NDP riding associations in Canada. Whoever runs here will start with advantages available to few other federal NDP candidates.

https://www.erinweir.com/election2019

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

I respect Weir for making the choice he had to make here.

 

Debater

Jagmeet Singh says ‘there’s no future’ for Erin Weir with NDP

Saskatoon / 650 CKOM

May 23, 2019

https://www.ckom.com/2019/05/23/jagmeet-singh-says-theres-no-future-for-erin-weir-with-ndp/

robbie_dee

These veiled allusions by Jagmeet to "safety" (much like his previous references to "survivors" ) are wildly exaggerated and completely inappropriate given what we actually know about the investigator's findings. I think it's borderline defamatory. Very disappointed in Jagmeet's "leadership" . I look forward to his departure from his position after the coming debacle this fall.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Debater wrote:

Jagmeet Singh says ‘there’s no future’ for Erin Weir with NDP

Saskatoon / 650 CKOM

May 23, 2019

https://www.ckom.com/2019/05/23/jagmeet-singh-says-theres-no-future-for-erin-weir-with-ndp/

Why did he even HAVE to say that?  It's not as though there's any chance Weir would even consider trying a comeback.

Debater

Erin Weir used the term defamatory to respond to Singh's comment about safety:

’s comment is completely baseless and defamatory. Even after his office solicited anonymous complaints from 250 staff, no one claimed I threatened their safety.

https://twitter.com/Erin_Weir/status/1131699044554891265

josh

Ken Burch wrote:

Debater wrote:

Jagmeet Singh says ‘there’s no future’ for Erin Weir with NDP

Saskatoon / 650 CKOM

May 23, 2019

https://www.ckom.com/2019/05/23/jagmeet-singh-says-theres-no-future-for-erin-weir-with-ndp/

Why did he even HAVE to say that?  

Because he's a classless asshole?

Pondering

You realize he has the support of Guy Caron and Charlie Angus and Nikki Ashton in his explusion of Weir? Apparently he still has a lot of support in Saskatchewan so he should run provincially. 

Debater
josh

Good column.  And Singh will probably have a lot of time to rue it after the upcoming election debacle.

Pondering

Good for you Thomas Walkom is such a progressive pundit. 

Pondering

Ken Burch wrote:

I respect Weir for making the choice he had to make here.

 

I don't. His letter is self-serving. 

Sixty-eight former federal MPs and provincial MLAs have written asking the federal NDP leader to reconsider arbitrarily expelling me from caucus. Thousands of Saskatchewan people have signed a petition calling for an appeal of his unusual investigation of me. The Regina–Lewvan NDP’s 2019 annual meeting passed a motion to allow me to run in a democratic nomination. Rather than taking a second look at a deeply flawed process or letting party members decide, the federal NDP leader seems willing to hand our constituency to the Conservatives.  

The entire NDP federal caucus agrees with Singh that Weir had to go. Weir should go ahead and run as an independent or join another party instead of backstabbing the NDP with his continuous whining. 

R.E.Wood

Very good column. I look forward to Singh's resignation after the coming election disaster, and I hope Erin Weir will come back to run for the NDP again in the subsequent election.

swallow swallow's picture

Sad to see people rally around the Sask NDP establishment and reject the words of young activists alienated by that establishment. 

wage zombie

swallow wrote:

Sad to see people rally around the Sask NDP establishment and reject the words of young activists alienated by that establishment. 

Yep

Unionist

josh wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Debater wrote:

Jagmeet Singh says ‘there’s no future’ for Erin Weir with NDP

Saskatoon / 650 CKOM

May 23, 2019

https://www.ckom.com/2019/05/23/jagmeet-singh-says-theres-no-future-for-erin-weir-with-ndp/

Why did he even HAVE to say that?  

Because he's a classless asshole?

Spot on.

I might add: Coward. If a POS like Christine Moore can intimidate Singh into submission, what happens if he ever (heaven forbid) heads up a government and has to face real challenges?

I don't agree with all of Erin Weir's positions on various issues, but so what. He is a victim of the same cowardice which has essentially destroyed the NDP as a force for progress. And he doesn't take shit from cowards. Either the NDP revisits its foundational principles, or it should just declare defeat and fold up its tent.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Unionist wrote:

josh wrote:

Ken Burch wrote:

Debater wrote:

Jagmeet Singh says ‘there’s no future’ for Erin Weir with NDP

Saskatoon / 650 CKOM

May 23, 2019

https://www.ckom.com/2019/05/23/jagmeet-singh-says-theres-no-future-for-erin-weir-with-ndp/

Why did he even HAVE to say that?  

Because he's a classless asshole?

Spot on.

I might add: Coward. If a POS like Christine Moore can intimidate Singh into submission, what happens if he ever (heaven forbid) heads up a government and has to face real challenges?

I don't agree with all of Erin Weir's positions on various issues, but so what. He is a victim of the same cowardice which has essentially destroyed the NDP as a force for progress. And he doesn't take shit from cowards. Either the NDP revisits its foundational principles, or it should just declare defeat and fold up its tent.

It's now clear that the "we HAVE to go with Singh" canard the party establishment created during the leadership campaign was designed mainly to prevent any EFFECTIVE leader who supported a break with Mulcair's approach from getting into the leadership until the party had too few seats for that leader ever to have a chance to be politically effective.  It was all about making sure no independent thinker, no one with a vision of a different path for the party and the country, no one who could bring in everyone Mulcair drove away, would get their shot until the party was reduced to a post-1993 size caucus.

 

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
You realize he has the support of Guy Caron and Charlie Angus and Nikki Ashton in his explusion of Weir? Apparently he still has a lot of support in Saskatchewan so he should run provincially.

As far as Niki Ashton is concerned, you made this up. I just did a quick Google search with her name and Weir, and not one of the articles I came across mentioned her as supporting Weir's explusion for the party. Even if she was in agreement with the decision, she seems to at least have the intelligence and the professionalism to not say anything and to just let the issue move on.

Aristotleded24

swallow wrote:
Sad to see people rally around the Sask NDP establishment and reject the words of young activists alienated by that establishment.

Who's rallying around the establishment? The only thing we are aware of is that maybe Weir stood too closely to people and raised his voice with someone. If that's the bar for sexual harassment, then almost everyone is guilty of that. If something more serious than that happened, then providing more specific information would clear this up. Or is Pat Atkinson part of that establishment? As far as I understood, she was on the left of the NDP in Saskatchewan. She's been around Saskatchewan politics for a long time. Do you think she of all people would have no understanding of issues regarding sexual harassment?

Pondering

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Pondering wrote:
You realize he has the support of Guy Caron and Charlie Angus and Nikki Ashton in his explusion of Weir? Apparently he still has a lot of support in Saskatchewan so he should run provincially.

As far as Niki Ashton is concerned, you made this up. I just did a quick Google search with her name and Weir, and not one of the articles I came across mentioned her as supporting Weir's explusion for the party. Even if she was in agreement with the decision, she seems to at least have the intelligence and the professionalism to not say anything and to just let the issue move on.

Caucus has broken with Singh over another MP. They have stood with Singh on Weir. Weir was accepted back into caucus. It is his subsequent comments that caused his expulsion. 

wage zombie

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Who's rallying around the establishment? The only thing we are aware of is that maybe Weir stood too closely to people and raised his voice with someone.

Then maybe you should try to become more aware of more.

Aristotleded24

wage zombie wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Who's rallying around the establishment? The only thing we are aware of is that maybe Weir stood too closely to people and raised his voice with someone.

Then maybe you should try to become more aware of more.

What more is there for me to be aware of? All we've heard are complaints that maybe Weir stood too close to people while talking to them, raised his voice during an argument with someone, and that there is a generalized culture of sexism in politics. On that last point, I don't think anybody here would challenge that point. But more specifically, how does this relate to Weir, and what was going on? Vague generalizations like "toxic culture of sexism" doesn't really tell anybody what happened. We also haven't seen the report so we don't know what happened beyond that.

To give a few specific examples, how did this manifest itself? Were there pornographic pictures posted in people's offices? Were people repeatedly pressured into going on dates or performing sexual acts? Were young female staffers hit on and propositioned repeatedly by men old enough to be their fathers? Were there initiation rituals that involved playing humiliating sexual games? I have just given more examples of problematic behaviours than what the anti-Weir crowd has. Even getting more specific, Stan Struthers in Manitoba was found to repeatedly tickle women over the years, to the point that he actually earned the nickname "Minister Tickles." Of course anybody accused of harassment will publicy deny or downplay any wrong doing on their part. But in this case, we know what he did, and all he could do was offer an apology and then drop back out of sight. And aside from expressing shock, Struthers doesn't really have anyone in his corner defending him.

So yeah, I'd like to be more aware. If there are specific things that I've missed, I'd love to know.

Unionist

Aristotleded24 wrote:

So yeah, I'd like to be more aware. If there are specific things that I've missed, I'd love to know.

You've missed nothing, A24. You got it all. Singh presided over a star chamber phoney "investigation", where Weir wasn't even allowed to know the names of his accusers. Singh should humbly apologize and beg Weir to return to caucus. Or he should leave, and try again another day. This whole episode doesn't get less disgusting with the passage of time.

Pondering

The specifics are confidential but did not result in his expulsion. Based on the reports it was decided he could remain in caucus and would take some anti-harassment training which he did and apparently passed with flying colours. 

Ignoring what he was actually expelled for is pointless. 

robbie_dee

Pondering wrote:

The specifics are confidential but did not result in his expulsion. Based on the reports it was decided he could remain in caucus and would take some anti-harassment training which he did and apparently passed with flying colours. 

Ignoring what he was actually expelled for is pointless. 

The problem is Jagmeet's defenders (not you, but others speaking officially or unofficially) keep shifting the justification. At the time, Jagmeet said the expulsion was because Weir made public comments that could potentially identify a (non-sexual) harassment complainant. But when it is pointed out that the complainant went to the media first, after Jagmeet ragged the puck for several weeks on implementing the reinstatement agreement, and Weir was simply defending himself from a public attack, then Jagmeet's defenders shift to comments about staff "safety" and vague allusions to that Weir's conduct was somehow more serious in ways they can't describe (and which appear to have no basis in fact).

What really happened is that Jagmeet is a weak leader and (with a fair bit of help from others pursuing their own agendas) botched a personnel matter into a full blown party-splitting crisis that continues to haunt him.

nicky

Perhaps Erin can run provincially

swallow swallow's picture

He could but it will not help Ryan Meili.

Notice that current Sask MLAs are not rallying around Weir. It’s former MPs and MLAs. This is a party split to the seams, much of it younger generation against an old guard. Weir is not old guard, but that is the base of his defenders. 

Aristotleded24

swallow wrote:
He could but it will not help Ryan Meili.

Notice that current Sask MLAs are not rallying around Weir. It’s former MPs and MLAs. This is a party split to the seams, much of it younger generation against an old guard. Weir is not old guard, but that is the base of his defenders.

Normally I would side with a younger generation against an old guard, however in this case the younger generation has only given vague generalizations that are really hard to go on.

The other thing about the idea of attacking an "old guard" that bothers me is that Pat Atkinson is part of this old guard. Do you really think she, of all people, has a vested interest in covering up sexual harassment?

Aristotleded24

robbie_dee wrote:
What really happened is that Jagmeet is a weak leader and (with a fair bit of help from others pursuing their own agendas) botched a personnel matter into a full blown party-splitting crisis that continues to haunt him.

I think what happened is that with the allegations of harassment in the wake of the #MeToo scandal, Singh wanted to capitalize on this and gain good publicty for himself off a sexual harassment scandal. Unfortunately, there is no such thing as good publicity when it comes to sexual harassment. Once a sexual harassment complaint is made, the odds of somebody not being angry after a decision is made on that complaint are close to 0%. He thought he would look good by expelling Weir and painting himself as a leader who has no tolerance for sexual harassment, and that backfired on him.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

The other thing about the idea of attacking an "old guard" that bothers me is that Pat Atkinson is part of this old guard. Do you really think she, of all people, has a vested interest in covering up sexual harassment?

I think Pat is speaking from her heart. I fondly remember the party at her house in Nutuana on October 21, 1991 after having worked on Janice's campaign. It went til people had to go to whatever morning responsibility they had. I must admit that many of us showed a certain disdain for Canada's drug and alcohol laws in our partying.

swallow swallow's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

swallow wrote:
He could but it will not help Ryan Meili.

Notice that current Sask MLAs are not rallying around Weir. It’s former MPs and MLAs. This is a party split to the seams, much of it younger generation against an old guard. Weir is not old guard, but that is the base of his defenders.

Normally I would side with a younger generation against an old guard, however in this case the younger generation has only given vague generalizations that are really hard to go on.

The other thing about the idea of attacking an "old guard" that bothers me is that Pat Atkinson is part of this old guard. Do you really think she, of all people, has a vested interest in covering up sexual harassment?

No, not at all. I like her and wish she had run against the awful Darwin Lingenfelter, a right-winger who pretty much destroyed the provincial party.

I just think she is on one side of a (partly generational) divide in the provincial party. She backed Trent Wotherspoon over Ryan Meili for leader, for instance, in a context in which the old guard has been trying to keep Meili out for years, preferring careerism to activism. Meili’s backers include a lot of young lefties including some around Briarpatch - which ran Jacq Brasseur’s piece about the generational divide and linked it to the Weir case (article linked at least twice already). 

It’s even possible that some people hear Erin Weir and think about Lorne Nystrom, one of his major defenders with his own history in the Regina party. 

Pat Atkinson’s letter has no support from current MLAs. 2 out of 3 Sask NDP MPs accept Singh’s stance (that’s Sheri Benson and Georgina Jolibois). 

Pondering

The generational divide about priorities and attitudes. Bernie Sanders is on the young side of the divide even if he is old. People can straddle the two. 

If Weir had just kept his mouth shut he would be sitting in caucus. I understand why he felt compelled to defend himself but the manner in which he did so identified one of the women and suggested the whole thing was a witch hunt and that any man would have complaints against him. That isn't true. Not all men would have complaints against them. Not even most men. I've worked with a lot of men and the grand majority have treated me normally and never made me feel awkward. Sure, some got out of line, but it is not every man who would have complaints against him. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/4184251/erin-weir-expelled-from-ndp-caucus-after-investigation-into-harassment-complaints/

On May 1, Weir spoke with CBC News in a report detailing the findings of the investigation and the new complaints levelled against him since he was initially suspended.

He countered the findings and suggested the complaints against him were political payback for trying to raise discussion about carbon pricing within the party.

“It’s certainly the case that if you solicit complaints from hundreds of staff people, you will get some complaints. Particularly in a political context where there are disagreements, there are rivalries, there are axes to grind,” Weir said.

I should think men would be insulted by his suggestion that under the same circumstances any man would have complaints against him. He suggested the woman had ulterior motives as though the complaints had no merit at all. 

That is why he was ejected from caucus, not the original complaints. 

swallow swallow's picture

Pondering wrote:

The generational divide about priorities and attitudes. Bernie Sanders is on the young side of the divide even if he is old. People can straddle the two. 

For sure.

Aristotleded24

swallow wrote:

Aristotleded24 wrote:

swallow wrote:
He could but it will not help Ryan Meili.

Notice that current Sask MLAs are not rallying around Weir. It’s former MPs and MLAs. This is a party split to the seams, much of it younger generation against an old guard. Weir is not old guard, but that is the base of his defenders.

Normally I would side with a younger generation against an old guard, however in this case the younger generation has only given vague generalizations that are really hard to go on.

The other thing about the idea of attacking an "old guard" that bothers me is that Pat Atkinson is part of this old guard. Do you really think she, of all people, has a vested interest in covering up sexual harassment?

No, not at all. I like her and wish she had run against the awful Darwin Lingenfelter, a right-winger who pretty much destroyed the provincial party.

I just think she is on one side of a (partly generational) divide in the provincial party. She backed Trent Wotherspoon over Ryan Meili for leader, for instance, in a context in which the old guard has been trying to keep Meili out for years, preferring careerism to activism. Meili’s backers include a lot of young lefties including some around Briarpatch - which ran Jacq Brasseur’s piece about the generational divide and linked it to the Weir case (article linked at least twice already).

So now we know what the dispute is really about. It's about a clash of opinions within the NDP and which direction we should take. It seems that Weir was drawn into it, and that issues around him or his conduct are only secondary.

swallow wrote:
Pat Atkinson’s letter has no support from current MLAs. 2 out of 3 Sask NDP MPs accept Singh’s stance (that’s Sheri Benson and Georgina Jolibois).

They are certainly entitled to their opinions. Having obviously been closer to Weir than anyone of us, they would certainly know more about what happened than anyone else would. That does not obligate anyone else to agree with them, and someone else with the exact same insider knowledge of what happened as they have may come to a different conclusion.

Even so, they seem to have been far more professional in the expression of their opinions than Singh. He's made wild allegations of "survivors" and "safety" over something that many people are guilty of in social interactions, and there has been no further information provided. Does anybody wonder what drives the MRA phenomenon? It's the idea that sexual harassment is really a witch-hunt against men, and the case of Erin Weir is one such story they can use to make their point. It gave them ammunition when it was completely unnecessary.

By the way, I've read the Briarpatch piece, and my view is that this piece also makes vague generalizations without providing enough specifics to come to an accurate conclusion.

Pondering

How about being safe from this sort of accusation:

He countered the findings and suggested the complaints against him were political payback for trying to raise discussion about carbon pricing within the party.

“It’s certainly the case that if you solicit complaints from hundreds of staff people, you will get some complaints. Particularly in a political context where there are disagreements, there are rivalries, there are axes to grind,” Weir said.

Aristotleded24

Pondering wrote:
How about being safe from this sort of accusation:

He countered the findings and suggested the complaints against him were political payback for trying to raise discussion about carbon pricing within the party.

“It’s certainly the case that if you solicit complaints from hundreds of staff people, you will get some complaints. Particularly in a political context where there are disagreements, there are rivalries, there are axes to grind,” Weir said.

Weir is absolutely correct. You dig far enough into anyone's history and you will find complaints about (s)he interacted with others in the past. This is especially true in politics, where people have all sorts of agendas and axes to grind.

When I think of "safety," I think of things like unwanted touching, inappropriate jokes, bullying, emotional abuse, manipulation, and all sorts of behaviours designed to exert control over people. Someone questioning your motives? That's politics. If you can't handle that you're in the wrong line of work.

Pages