babble-intro-img
babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.

Senior BC Caucus Member Jenny Kwan Issues Statement

Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

Other MLAs are also supporting Jenny's statement for Carole to step down. So what happens now? Does Carole kick them all out of caucus or does Carole resign? This is bad timing and shitty.

 

http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/005556.html


Comments

ghoris
Offline
Joined: May 29 2003

In a previous thread, I posted this:

Quote:
Assuming those MLAs listed (plus Bob Simpson) oppose Carole James' continued leadership, this morning's vote doesn't really resolve much.  Carole and her supporters will point to the ringing endorsement she received from Provincial Council, the governing body of the party between conventions. Her detractors will point to the fact that at least 40% of the caucus has lost confidence in her leadership, which makes her position untenable. My own personal view is that the leader derives her mandate from the party membership as a whole, not from the caucus.  If Carole has the support of the rank-and-file membership, then the caucus should fall into line and respect the views of the members.  The problem is I'm not sure that a provincial council vote is tantamount to an endorsement by the membership or carries the same kind of weight.  Unfortunately, I don't think this situation will be resolved with anything less than a leadership review vote (preferably OMOV). Carole may find herself in the unfortunate position (a la Joe Clark in 1983) of having to call for a leadership contest (or at least a review) in order to quell dissent.
Carole's options are starting to become more limited.

wage zombie
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2004

I have been in BC for just over two years now and have not really commented on the Carole James threads because I didn't really know the history.

Kwan's statement seems very reasonable to me and matches what I observe.  I don't see the BC NDP taking bold stands on the issues that I care about, and I don't see my peers having much desire to engage with the current BC NDP.

If the party really is united behind James (her claim) then a leadership contest should be a shoo-in for her as well as allowing her to showcase her strengths.

With Kwan's statement, I think it should be clear to all that something needs to be done.  It is not an option to spend the next 3 years spinning this dissent as a few malcontents and opportunists.  Perhaps James can pull a rabbit out of her hat and put forth a bold, detailed, progressive vision in the next couple weeks.  Or whatever, there is perhaps some big step that she could take that could actually resolve this problem.  Based on what I've seen, I think it's unlikely that she is prepared to do anything like that.  Denying that there is any problem is not going to solve things.

I think it is time for a leadership contest.  And I think Carole James supporters would be well advised to switch from "Support the Leader" to "Here's why James is our best candidate for Leader."


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

Centrist wrote:

 So what happens now?

 

http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/005556.html

 

What happens now is you get a segment of the party screaming that the NDP is controlled by mysoginist, racsist men. Secondly we will see some far away easterners trying to tell us what is best for BCers. Both groups obviuosly unwilling to look at the problems that caused this disaster.

 

This is Carole's doing.  The buck stops with her.  She has no option but to resign!!  We are handing the Liberals another victory. 

For those that spend time following the media in BC, a number of things have shifted in the last two weeks.  The hst anger has been difused by the referendum that will happen in June.  The recall of Ida Chong is being met with alot of negativity because the resignation of Campbel is what the people really wanted.  With the election of a new Liberal leader in Feb and the possibilty of that leader calling an election to "allow the public to have their say" on who should be Premier, could be called at any time.  I am betting that if the polls look good then an election tied in with the June referendum would seem logical to the voting public.  James has to go NOW!!!

 

 


Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

Jonathon Ross was the first to report about this earlier today. Here's what Jonathon Ross (a New Democrat/Vision Vancouver insider with mayor Gregor Robertson) is now reporting:

Quote:

UPDATE: Not who I expected to open up the floodgates - because the ones that were gleeful are still itching for their spotlight - but this is clearly a dare to Carole James to remove her from Caucus.

Jenny Kwan is playing chicken with the leader, and is hoping that she gets kicked out so that the entire party will revolt (Kwan was of course 1 of 2 MLAs with Joy MacPhail who held down the fort after the 2001 BC Liberal landslide victory, and thus carries a hallowed status amongst many factions within the party).

There are more waiting to make a string of announcements that are similar to Kwan's, and instead of coming out as a group as I was first informed, they are going to stagger this process so that the bleeding never ends in the media and in the public for James.

What a mess this is turning into...I have to say that the BC Liberals have all the momentum right now, precisely because of this shortsighted and selfish politicking.

* * * * *

I am hearing that a bunch are going to go independent en masse, but that has yet to be confirmed. Whatever the message is going to be, the people ready to deliver it seem elated.

Developing...

http://civicscene.ca/bc-ndp-dissidents-to-make-major-announcement-in-the...

 


West Coast Greeny
Offline
Joined: Sep 14 2004

I get the feeling this is the last chance Carole has of keeping her caucus from completely disintegrating. 

There's only two ways the NDP goes forward at this point: Either they hold a leadership convention, or they fracture in two. There is no rabbit out of a hat, there is no magic tricks that can be pulled off here. You can not force a caucus to be unified.


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

I just love all the comments by some people here, see above, some of whom are not even members of the NDP, and who would like nothing better than to see the NDP crushed.

Carole James has now been leader for 7 years without a leadership review. It's now time for that to take place, and sooner rather than later. I think it was Bill Tieleman who suggested having the leadership review in early March right after the Liberal leadership race is over. Works for me. 


scott
Offline
Joined: May 20 2001

Just in case there is a misconception that this is purely a caucus revolt, without the support of the membership, AFAIK most of the caucus, both for and against James, have the support of thier ridings.

from the Trail Daily Times (Kootenay-West)

Quote:
The executive of the Kootenay West NDP association had unanimously called for a leadership convention to be held, a position endorsed by the local membership at their annual general meeting earlier this month.

But the provincial council rejected a motion calling for a leadership convention, with 84 per cent opposed.

"I think it is time to find someone else to take a crack at it," said Steelworker 9705 president Rick Georgetti, a member of the local NDP executive and long-time party stalwart.

 


wage zombie
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2004

I hadn't really considered that they could fracture in two, ie., two political parties.  Is that really a possibility?  That might not be so bad if they could work out an electoral coalition.


West Coast Greeny
Offline
Joined: Sep 14 2004

Suppose Carole really is stubborn as a mule and all 13 dissidents are  are ejected from caucus. The new legislature now has:

47 Liberals

21 New Democrats and

17(!) Independents

17 Independents, who, I might add, are going to be next to impossible for the NDP to remove.  

 

Suppose these people don't come back. Even if this sizable group decides not to form a third party (and with the huge political vacuum in BC, there's going to be a temptation to do that) James and the NDP are still probably going to have to make gains on two fronts to win a majority next election, unless they can reduce the Liberals (and any other political party that might be running) to under 25 seats. 


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

March for a leadership review would be a further disaster.  March for a leadership race would be great!  If it is just a review do you want the media to pick away at the leadership "scab" for four long months??  Who's supporting James and who isn't?  Is Moe's job on the line if Carole loses?  There are a million questions, rumours, specualtions etc. that will be posed now that this rift is out in the open. The bell has been rung!!


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

wage zombie wrote:

I hadn't really considered that they could fracture in two, ie., two political parties.  Is that really a possibility?  That might not be so bad if they could work out an electoral coalition.

 

 

Wow!! let's split the left vote shall we.  Ask the Socreds and Liberals how that worked out for them.


wage zombie
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2004

What part of ELECTORAL COALITION do you not understand?


jrootham
Offline
Joined: Jun 14 2001

The part where it actually succeeds.

Please cite a successful electoral coalition.

 


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

wage zombie wrote:

What part of ELECTORAL COALITION do you not understand?

 

I understand All of it!! You are suggesting that a coaltion just for electral puposes be formed. Who would the leader be?  Carole James?  LOL  People in BC vote for a party and a premier (as much as I may have just hurt many MLAs feelings) But I guess you are right. Having two parties on the left won't split the vote!! Those two parties will manage to scoop up all the swing voters they need to form what? A coaltion party?  Yes that's a well thought out plan!


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

West Coast Greeny wrote:

Suppose Carole really is stubborn as a mule and all 13 dissidents are  are ejected from caucus. The new legislature now has:

47 Liberals

21 New Democrats and

17(!) Independents

17 Independents, who, I might add, are going to be next to impossible for the NDP to remove.  

 

 

 

And here is where the real danger lies.  This is where the Party is standing at the edge of a very big cliff.

We know where the 13 stand on CJ.  BUT we do nor know where all the other 21 stand on CJ!!  How many of the other 21 are pondering their careers, incomes, and desires (to do good) and wondering whether they should Join the 13.  If its 3, the Ndp could be removed from Opposition.

An Independent Party, Loosely tied together by a single noble cause such as Electoral Reform could then request that the Liberal recognize them as the Official Opposition. Won't happen?  Of courses not!! We would never go down to 2 seats!!  Mulroney couldn't wipe out the PC party!  Socreds are  an institution, nothing could bring them down!


wage zombie
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2004

I think there should be a leadership race, and have said so.  I don't want to derail the discussion about Kwan's statement by talking about electoral coalitions around the world.  I don't know of any that have been successful--but then I don't know of any that have been unsuccessful either, other than Elizabeth May's attempt to get a seat.

What I'm saying is that if MLA's and ridings across the board either strongly support or strongly oppose James' leadership, and she refuses a leadership race, and there is a fracture, then it might not be so bad if they could work out an electoral coalition.

By this, I mean, not run against each other.  And for Liberal seats, it would mean the local riding association choosing which party to support.  It would mean the party recognises that there are 2 discrete factions, and that differences cannot be reconciled.  And then putting a process in place for local ridings to decide.

The odds of this happening are slim.  Seeing as how the BC NDP leadership has been a) unable to come up with new solutions and b) relinquish control, it's hard to imagine a novel strategy like this getting much support.

But, there would be quite a few advantages to a scenario like this.  It allows for just as many seats or more because there wouldn't be vote splitting.  It allows either party to advocate for regional interests.  It allows for two progressive party leaders getting speaking time in the media.  It would bring more people on board for proportional representation.  And it allows for Carole James to not have her leadership repeatedly questioned, if she's refusing to have a leadership race.

I'm just thinking about any possible options, and "what leadership problem?" doesn't really seem like one of them.  I just suggested it as something to think about because this electoral coalition would be novel in that it would be one party splitting into two, which I think is rare.  And, the split would be for tactical reasons rather than ideological differences.


West Coast Greeny
Offline
Joined: Sep 14 2004

Well, if 4 New Democrat MPs join the 13, they could just remove James as caucus leader. That would be a little more direct.


Cueball
Offline
Joined: Dec 23 2003

I am betting that this thread hits 100 by noon tomorrow!


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

wage zombie wrote:

I think there should be a leadership race, and have said so.  I don't want to derail the discussion about Kwan's statement by talking about electoral coalitions around the world.  I don't know of any that have been successful--but then I don't know of any that have been unsuccessful either, other than Elizabeth May's attempt to get a seat.

What I'm saying is that if MLA's and ridings across the board either strongly support or strongly oppose James' leadership, and she refuses a leadership race, and there is a fracture, then it might not be so bad if they could work out an electoral coalition.

By this, I mean, not run against each other.  And for Liberal seats, it would mean the local riding association choosing which party to support.  It would mean the party recognises that there are 2 discrete factions, and that differences cannot be reconciled.  And then putting a process in place for local ridings to decide.

The odds of this happening are slim.  Seeing as how the BC NDP leadership has been a) unable to come up with new solutions and b) relinquish control, it's hard to imagine a novel strategy like this getting much support.

But, there would be quite a few advantages to a scenario like this.  It allows for just as many seats or more because there wouldn't be vote splitting.  It allows either party to advocate for regional interests.  It allows for two progressive party leaders getting speaking time in the media.  It would bring more people on board for proportional representation.  And it allows for Carole James to not have her leadership repeatedly questioned, if she's refusing to have a leadership race.

I'm just thinking about any possible options, and "what leadership problem?" doesn't really seem like one of them.  I just suggested it as something to think about because this electoral coalition would be novel in that it would be one party splitting into two, which I think is rare.  And, the split would be for tactical reasons rather than ideological differences.

 

Unless you put forth a "leader" then you are accepting that the liberals will win.


Cueball
Offline
Joined: Dec 23 2003

Ok. I'll do it! If I must. How does one become "leader"?


wage zombie
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2004

puppet-13 wrote:

Unless you put forth a "leader" then you are accepting that the liberals will win.

I can't tell if that's an ultimatum or a threat.


Cueball
Offline
Joined: Dec 23 2003

First order of business will be not hiring my nephew to do the image makeover for the party... I will do that myself.


puppet-13
Offline
Joined: Oct 9 2010

wage zombie wrote:

puppet-13 wrote:

Unless you put forth a "leader" then you are accepting that the liberals will win.

I can't tell if that's an ultimatum or a threat.

 

It's reality.


wage zombie
Offline
Joined: Dec 8 2004

If it's a statement about what will happen in the future, then it's not reality.  Sorry buddy.


Catchfire
Offline
Joined: Apr 16 2003

puppet-13: Hi friend. I'd say your posts so far on this board--which you seem to know an awful lot about--could be characterized as aggressive, incendiary and not particularly constructive. This thread is a perfect example of that, starting with the first paragraph of post #3. Please dial down your hostile rhetoric and try to enter this discussion in good faith. Otherwise, you'll be asked not to participate. Consider this a warning. Thanks.


kropotkin1951
Online
Joined: Jun 6 2002

It seems to me that the people who are paying Moe's salary should ask him to resign for the good of the party.  Cool


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

The BC Liberals will definiely be crying in their beer tonite - Keith Baldrey basically confirmed it with his analysis.  Laughing


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Here is Jenny's, the person who actually nominated Carole 7 years ago, actual press release, instead of all the usual absurd comments that are constantly being made in the media

 

 

http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/bc-101201-kwan-james-release.pdf


NorthReport
Offline
Joined: Jul 6 2008

Centrist thanks for starting this thread, and I agree with Cueball about ther number of posts we will see here.

I actually like the timing aspect, as it is essential this matter be brought to a head, and that we do have a leadership review in March at the latest. And to do that, someone had to act now. 7 long years in the wilderness with no leadership review is too much. Jenny has shown courage here and is doing the right on behalf of the entire BC NDP.


Centrist
Offline
Joined: Apr 7 2004

While I agree that Carole should leave, I have previously stated that we should wait and see until at least who the Libs select as leader first. Jenny's move today was completely wrong and it has the potential to vaporize the political capital the NDP now has with the public.

Even Baldrey on Global News tonight stated that all the Libs have to do now is point out the fact that if the NDP isn't seen as a cohesive party, how can the NDP then be seen as a gov't in waiting? The optics on that Global news story were terrible.

And long time party stalwart David Schreck now chimes in:

 

Quote:
December 1, 2010

Kwan Blows Up NDP

Who gave Jenny Kwan the right to blow up the NDP? It is Jenny and the unlucky 13 that have eroded democratic principles by ignoring the 84% vote of support James got at the party's November 20th provincial council meeting by continuing to call for her leader's head.

She claims that under James there "has been a steady erosion of our democratic principles". Let's take a closer look at that claim. It is Jenny and the unlucky 13 who ignore the party's constitution which calls for a mandatory leadership review at the 2011 convention. They act as if they can't beat James in that vote and want to force her out through scorched earth tactics that will leave a party no sensible person would want to lead.

In her media release Kwan wrote: "The BC NDP needs to have a leadership race in order to revitalize itself and to unify the party." Most New Democrats believe James has revitalized the party, going from 2 to 35 MLAs and taking the party to the record highs in the polls. Irreparable damage has been done to the NDP by Kwan and her sidekicks. Donations will dry up and memberships will lapse as members sink into despair over the destruction of their party when they thought they were on the eve of seeing James elected premier. New Democrats are known for harbouring bitterness for decades after leadership battles; some still haven't gotten over the Barrett-Berger fight let alone the damage done in the aftermath of Glen Clark.

The BC Liberals must not believe their luck; just when all seemed lost, 13 NDP MLAs have virtually guaranteed another decade of power for whoever wins the BC Liberal leadership vote on February 26th. The next election will see a dramatically reduced and ineffective NDP, unable to finance the kind of campaign a reinvigorated government party will mount. If a third party were to find the kind of campaign-leader that Gordon Wilson proved to be in 1991, the political landscape could fundamentally change. Of course, a successful change requires more than a campaigner; it takes a leader and party that can work together and appeal to voters across the province. It would take a miracle for the NDP to reinvent itself and fill the political vacuum created by its gang of 13.

http://www.strategicthoughts.com/

 


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Login or register to post comments