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.
Staff changes at the top of the BCNDP
July 25, 2009 - 10:31am
Below are some important changes in top level NDP staff since the election. Carole James shows every intention of staying on.
At Provincial Office:
President - Jeff Fox
Director of Organization - Nikki Hill (going to Prov Exec ?)
Secretary - Laura Nichols (will resign after Convention)
Communications Director - David Bieber
Within Caucus staff:
Communications Director - Glenn Sanford resigned
Chief of Staff - Ian Reid "taking leave"
http://www.publiceyeonline.com/archives/004063.html
The Provincial BCNDP executive will also be elected at the upcoming November convention. Should be an indication of the direction the party plans to take in the next 4 years.
Sav Dhaliwal was elected the new BCNDP President at the June provincial council meeting. Public Eye is a bit behind times it seems.
I believe this is a temporary arrangement. Prov Council was acting to elect an interim president. A new pres will be elected at Convention, along with the usual slate of candidates to fill the other key positions.
Hmm. Seems to be some accountability happening at the top for the failure of the party's electoral strategy. About time. There's more to come I'm sure. In terms of directions of the party, with due respect to the crop of people calling for change (Tim Louis, Mike Palachek and others on the far left side of the spectrum) there already exists a party for you, its called the Communist Party of Canada. This past election wasn't a failure of a moderate fair balanced platform, it was a failure to adequately COMMUNICATE that platform to the electorate, primarily through mixed up messaging, confusion and counter acting communications. In actuality, no one actually talked about the BCNDP platform this past election. The focus was on the economy and clearly Campbell BS'd everyone. But as the saying goes, I DID NOT VOTE FOR THE BASTARD!
Funny listening to Campbell's supposed base, small business / entrepreneurs, squealing and whining over the HST. Climb in bed with the goof, you get fleas, or something communicable. Having said that, its my sincerest hope that the BCNDP gets back on track, and comes up with appealing alternatives to Campbell's lies mistruths and distortions. And for someone who's been as critical of the direction of the BCNDP and the people setting that direction as I have been, let me say that seeing the changes at the top and the coming continuing changes, are a breath of fresh air.
I would say that these changes demonstrate some accountability for a poor campaign and they indicate a potential for constructive changes occurring at the highest levels. We'll have to see who the new people are before we can answer that. These changes could also be a final desperate attempt by Carole James to remake herself as leader. We may just get more of the same as the last 4 years.
The most spectacular failure of the campaign was the focus on the Carbon Tax, which essentially wasted the first week in the ensuing uproar, and put the Party on the back foot. I don't think there was any mixed messaging on that. The other fundamental problem was the failure to credibly address the economy, but that is really the failure of 2 decades of NDP reluctance to address this core issue. The timing of the economic crisis was a gift to the Liberals.
A gift to allow them to lie through their teeth. The communication strategy from the central campaign was a total failure. And the economy as well. You're right Havana, the lack of a coherent economic policy and direction, or even the willingness to sit down and formulate something, is a major achilles heel of the BCNDP. But thats what happens when you try to be all things to all people. We're the environmentally friendly party, which of course at times causes major clashes with one of the more influencial supporters of the party, labour. We're the party of labour, which scares off small to medium sized businesses, those people taking a kicking from Campbell. We're this, we're that... and at the end of the day, once again, we're the opposition. The timing of the economic crisis is another point.
Had the party had some economic foresight, they could have seen what major economists saw coming for up to a year and a half before the election, and jumped it. What else is funny, is that the reason these deficits provincial and federal are so damn high, is being pointed to the fact that revenues from Corporate taxes and federally, the GST, are signficantly down. So much so, you could say that the governments cut their own damn throat appeasing big business. And now, we're all going to pay for years on end.
The biggest problem in Canada as well as BC is getting people over the thinking that massive corporate tax cuts are good for the economy. The timing of people like Iggy, Harper and Campbell is so far off. They cut taxes in good times significantly than compound the problem by hiking them in bad. In actuality, they should have left the corporate tax rates alone in the good times, then perhaps cut them when the crap hit the fan. That way there would be a major buffer or cushion, without any long term lasting effects (deficit wise). Instead, they act like kids in the cookie jar, can't wait to pay off their buddies and friends in the good times, then hammer the shit out of the average Canadian in the bad times.
Didn't work for Bush in the states, and certainly won't work up here.
Good analysis, I am in agreement on all of your major points. Your point about taxation, "cuts in the good times, and increases in the bad times", only underscores the stupidity of the NDP trying to show themselves as born again tax cutters on the Carbon Tax thing. Nobody will ever believe this, at this point in time. On the other hand, addressing the whole question of neo-con tax cuts the way "Corporate Welfare Bums" David Lewis did, does have the potential to resonate with voters and to be believable coming from the mouths of the NDP.
Post fast ferry, it is going to be a long term project for the NDP to establish any credibility as economic managers (despite the fact that the cost overuns on the Convention Centre are already higher, and despite the fact that when in power in the 90's we created a strongly supportive taxation environment for small and medium sized business).
In the short term, we have 4 years to rebuild our image as a credible government in waiting that can demonstrate to voters the inherent unfairness of the current tax system, and an alternative model. I don't expect the economy to be any less of a problem in 2013 than it is today. The only difference will be that rather than being a new unknown, it will be seen as a more or less permanent state of affairs.
As a leader, uninspiring, and inarticulate Carole James is completely unsuited to rebuilding credibility on economic issues. As Norman Spector (of all people!) pointed out during the 2009 campaign, some of the reason for this is outright sexism. Unfair though it may be, we have the wrong leader for the times we are in. A leader who can speak with lot's of righteous indignation, but without a credible alternative vision. In my opinion, she needs to go sooner rather than later.
Pffft
I don't really like the phrase "corporate welfare bums". It kind of stigmatizes actual welfare recipients - something that the media and openly right-wing parties don't need any help doing.
And yeah, caving to sexism isn't really a good reason to replace a leader. Although from what I hear, there are a lot better reasons.
Havana:
I would disagree that Carole James is uninspiring or inarticulate. When she is allowed to be herself, and speak as the leader of the BCNDP, such as during the televised debates, she can kick the crap out of Campbell or any other Fiberal they put near her. The problem that exists is that I don't think that the party has ever actually let her lead. You have a cabal of people in the background, who since 2003 have controlled the party. These are the people responsible for NOT talking about the economy during the last 2 conventions, who brought you the great strategy of Ax the Tax, and now the flip flops on that, the MLA pay increases, and a few other things that currently skip my mind. For the first time, though, many of those same people are being frog marched out of provincial office, or are leaving on their own accord. I do think that there are more changes coming, at convention and beyond.
What's befuddled me for 6 years now is how come the BCNDP can't follow the models of the NDP in Saskatchewan and Manitoba? Oh I'm sure I'll get torn apart by people from the far left that those 2 parties sold out the left wing of the party. But guess what? They were in and are still in power, while the BCNDP is still on the outside looking in at the Leg in Victoria? Could Doer and Calvert be wrong in their approaches? Maybe, but then again, they were and are still in power. When Carole won the leadership race in 2003, to me it signaled a new beginning for the BCNDP. A different direction than the one that led to the infighting and near obliteration in 2001.
But despite the delegates wishes, despite the rank and file sending delegates supporting Carole to convention to win the race, the real power of the BCNDP decided that it was time for status quo. When it came time to find candidates for the 2005 election, alot of the names from the past re surfaced. Some had good reputations like Mike Farnworth and Corky Evans. And some had reputations that weren't so stellar such as Harry Lali and Sue Hammell. A leader is only as good as the resources she's given and the latitude presented to lead. Carole, I think, was given a short leash on how far she could go. She tried the change from within but I think was unsuccessful. That and she had to compete with Jim Sinclair and the BCFED for control of the party. That's what makes the so called grassroots movement led by Tim Louis to move the party further to the left so ridiculous. He claims that Labour needs a stronger voice in the party. Well from where I sit, as a trade unionist, the BCFED through various means calls alot of shots and has a lot of pull in the BCNDP, more than I'm comfortable with. Why not just run Jim Sinclair for leader and seal the deal completely?
This party needs new people at the top. It shouldn't matter whether you come from a union, or small business background. Whether your a Douglas New Democrat or a Roosevelt like New Democrat. This party needs to build to win in 2013. Not just to finish as the opposition. So to do that, its going to have to do things in policy that might rankle some feathers in various sectors of traditional support. Because through 2 elections, the old ways didn't work. So lets look at what works and worked in Saskatchewan and Manitoba. Let's build a solid platform that reaches out to people, and shows an understanding of the economy and how things work. Not only should we attack campbell and his hypocrisy vociferously, let's come up with alternatives to his neo con way of looking at things. And to be blunt, if Carole isn't capable of presenting that and moving that agenda, then it is time for a change at the very top. (I personally think she is, she just needs a good solid team around her.)
But let's leave the boutique policies of the past, such as the equity mandate, behind us. We should be bringing people together, inspiring them to take on these right wing assholes, and go into the legislature with bared teeth and snarling, looking for blood. And go into the 2013 campaign the same way.
GenStrike:
I don't think Corporate Welfare Bums stigmatizes those on welfare. Rather it points to the ridiculous polcies of cutting corporate taxes while the rest of the citzenry pay for it for years to come.
By using "welfare bum" as an insult?
Just like how using "fag" as an insult isn't offensive and hurtful towards the LGBT community?
Is there a welfare "community." Are "welfare-Canadians" protected by the Charter?
Wow, how classist. Yes, people on social assistance do exist. And classes do exist. But I guess since the charter doesn't include class, it's okay to say "fuck poor people"?
Also, the Charter didn't include sexual orientation until it was read in in a court case in 1995. I suppose gay-bashing was okay in 1994, after all, it wasn't in the Charter then? And the Charter didn't even exist before 1982. So that means that it was perfectly fine to be a racist, sexist, ageist ableist in 1981? And the Charter doesn't include weight either, so maybe the next soundbite should be "Harper is a fatass"
There is nothing wrong with a leftwing party running against a regressive useless tax brought by a rabidly rightwing government. Bcak in the late 80s Margaret Thatcher tried to bring in this ridiculously regressive "poll tax" and it was actually the most leftwing elements in the Labour Party that tried to get mass civil disobedience campaigns going against it with people wearing t-shirts all over the UK that read "Bollocks to the Poll Tax" and "I'll No Pay!". The protests were actually intrumental in forcing Thatcher to resign. i don't recall anyone waving their finger at the Labour Party that they should not oppose the poll tax because the only people who are against a tax are rightwing people who will always vote Tory no matter what.
I guess what we have now learned is that if only Thatcher had simply named her tax "Carbon Tax" rather than "Poll Tax" - she would have been seen as the poster-girl of environmentalism by all these pathetic gullible pseudo-environmentalists from the "tally ho, let's go whale watching with Prince Philip" crowd!
Actually, it would be a much better slogan than "We need a new kind of strong..."
This Vison BC thingy looks like it may well spend the end of James as leader. And all those above staff changes just look like a shuffling of the chairs on the Titanic. It's about time the BC NDP had a major shake-up. The Arctic ice is rapidly melting, and the BC NDP comes across as running against the environment. Combine that with the BC NDP total lack of leadership on the PR issue. You can't get much dumber than that.
In terms of the whole Corporate Welfare Bum comment; you have to take the whole comment, not just the welfare bum component of it. Sorry, but anyone who knows me, even on here (right Stockholm and Remind) know that I'm not exactly the most politically correct person on here. When I use the term Corporate Welfare Bum, there is absolutely no slight meant to those on social assistance. But I scarcely use the term. I would rather call them "pigs at the trough wearing lipstick." But can't do that either. (mischevious grin). So we'll just call them Campbell's Concubines. Or Harper's Hookers. Whatever the case, the entire neo con philosophy of giving to the rich and ripping it from the poor is entirely wrong.
Sorry, but had to respond to the second part of GenStrike's comments: about the "f" word in the community. I've heard LGBT people call each other fags and other derogatory comments. Doesn't mean that I myself use those terms in and around them. But at the same time, if its offensive for a straight person to call a gay person a "fag" how come there are those in that community that can get away with it? Its not just the LGBT community that this happens in. The South Asian community as well. And others. If a caucasian uses the term, we're prejudice, sexist, racist or homophobic. Yet when those within those communities use the same slang terms, its perfectly fine.
I hate political correctness.
I couldn't have said it better myself. And for that matter let's bring in Dexter and the Nova Scotia NDP. It's the difference between winning or sitting powerless on the opposition benches in perpetuity.
Yep. I agree. Time for a sensible NDP that can win government. Political parties are, after all, about winning elections, aren't they? Or are they just meeting places for social activists to pass resolutions?
Youre all just assuming that your own rather conservative views represent the majority and that most peoples views remain static. Thats one belief I noticed the centre-right shares with the militant left. We are what we believe at the moment. That cannot be true if you look at voting patterns and popular issues even over the last generation. And no, politics isn't all about winning. The means is not the ends.
Whew, good thing. I thought that the idea was to get into power to do some positive things. But apparently it's ok to languish in opposition almost indefinitely, as long as you don't rock the good ship NDP or challenge the ideas of the party activists.
Hey, that'd make a hell of a fundraising pitch: "Hey, old person on a pension, hey laid-off construction guy, hey university student, could ya spare a dime for an old buccaneer down at the BC NDP. It's not like we're going to win or anything, that's not the point anyway. But with your donation, staffers can get paid, party activists can be feted, and we can complain about (none of) the problems that you are facing. How much can we put ya down for?"
"What's befuddled me for 6 years now is how come the BCNDP can't follow the models of the NDP in Saskatchewan and Manitoba?"
Actually, I think that the BC NDP strategy in the last election was an attempt to follow the Saskatchewan, Manitoba, NS model - the fact that it was not very well executed is another issue. The vast majority of the criticism that I keep reading of the BC NDP was that it was too centrist and had too watered down a platform etc... That being said, what works in Manitoba isn't the same as what works in BC either. Gary Doer incidentally lost THREE elections before finally winning and Darrell Dexter lost twice before finally winning.
BC is not Manitoba, nor Nova Scotia, nor Saskatchewan.
In fact, I blame all the right wing east coasters, and others moving to BC, for Gordo's wins in northern ridings. ;)
If rightwingers are moving into northern BC and tipping the political equilibrium to the right (and I'm not sure that is even the case) - I suspect that Albertans are more likely to be the culprits than emigres from Atlantic Canada!
You from BC now stock?
Mackenzie, Ft St John, Ft Nelson, PG and points in between are/were (in some cases) full of east coasters.
The Albertans go further south andf VIsland.
That's why I said "I suspect", thanks for the information. But its worth noting that interior northern BC has been a relatively rightwing stronghold since the second world war. If you look at election results all thorugh the 50s, 60s, 70s and 80s you will note that while the NDP would typically win the coastal areas that are in the federal riding of Skeena - places like Prince George, the Cariboo and the Peace River area were always considered bedrock Social Credit country and federally they were bedrock Tory/Reform Party country. In fact, the CCF/NDP has NEVER ever won a seat at any level in the Peace River region. If the BC NDP won a 2001 style landslide in reverse and took all but two seats in BC - the two they would NOT win would probably be Peace River North and Peace River South. I defer to the local experts to explain why interior northern BC is so rightwing.
The peace region believes they are part of AB
I guess we will just forget about Simpson, Brian Mills, Louis Boone, and Paul Nettleton
Paul Nettleton was a BC Liberal-turned Independent. I never said that the NDp can't win anywhere in northern BC - but in fact, they are doing better in that region now - than they have in most of the postwar political history of the province. Right now the NDP has one of two seats in Cariboo and lost the others by 20 votes. In 1972 when Barrett won his gigantic landslide - Cariboo was one of just 10 seats that stayed Socred.