ONDP Leadership IV

madmax wrote:

And McGuinty was no superstar, but the LPC and PC have some deeper rank and file depth.

They're quite deep - 22 percent deep. Bay Street money doesnt buy a decent phony majority like it used to.

It's better than good. It's clear and succinct.  I would trust that person with my life after delivering up that magnaminimus opus on the ONDP. He obviously knows what he's talking about. I'm impressed.

Membership ends on Jan. 5th...right?

That it does. 5pm sharp.

I'm not tremendously inspired by any of them, unfortunately.

Another important deadline is fast approaching. Only those
individuals who are members of the Ontario NDP by Monday, January 5,
2009 at 5:00 pm EST will be eligibile to take part in the leadership
vote.

voting procedure posted on ondp website

 

For the first time, every Ontario New Democrat can vote for the new leader.
You must be a member by January 5 to cast your vote.
Four ways to vote:

• by phone or internet before the March convention
• by phone or internet on March 7
• by regular mail before the convention
• at the convention on March 7 (for delegates and alternates)

Normal
0

Hello, my name is Jamie Masse. While I have only been a
member of the party for 3 years, I have done my absolute best to make a
positive impact by speaking openly about youth involvement and party
development for the future.

Over the next few months New Democrats from across the
province are going to be deciding who should be their next leader. I am
supporting Peter Tabuns to be that leader because I believe that Peter is the best
person for the job. Here is why:

I first met Peter when he visited Kingston just over a year
ago, having come to our city to discuss the ‘New Energy Economy’. I have
never seen so many new faces so engaged at a New Democrat meeting in Kingston.
Everyone was eager to share their ideas and solutions on the growing threat
posed by climate change - and the economic benefits of an Ontario-made
solution.

It was nothing short of inspiring. The excitement seen in
that room at that meeting certainly has been a major motivator within our
riding association, and I have no doubt that Peter’s ground-breaking work
across the province has affected a number of ridings in this fashion.

We in Kingston have continued to rally together to develop
the party and I believe that Peter's direct involvement was one of the starting
points for our growing activity. We have been busy staging and planning events
like OrangeCamp, hosting a party leadership debate and working to host an
Eastern Area Council in Kingston - scheduled for April 2009.

I am supporting Peter Tabuns because he has helped to lift
up our riding association - but more than that, I am supporting Peter because I
believe in his vision for the future of Ontario. I believe that the New Energy
Economy provides the best platform for rebuilding Ontario's economy for the 21st
Century.

We have some fundamental problems in Ontario; but they are
problems that we are very capable of solving if the political will is in place.
Having been born and raised in Windsor, I have witnessed first-hand what this
recession has done to that community. 
Poverty and crime have risen, unemployment rates are among the highest
in North America, and the population of Windsor has been slowly withdrawing.
People are leaving Ontario and moving to find desperately-needed work.

As New Democrats, we need to be willing to bring the hard
issues of climate change and economic stimulus to the forefront of the debate
in Ontario. Serious action needs to be taken now.

In order to rebuild our crumbling manufacturing sector, we
need to invest in a new kind of economic stimulus - energy. Building new power
generation alternatives and revamping transmission infrastructure will be just
the beginning to kick-start our economy. And the ripple effect of that stimulus
increases tenfold when we invest into the production of renewable resources.

I recently had the opportunity to read an article that
mentioned that German engineers and wind farm developers want to move to the
vast market of Ontario. We have the steel, we have the transport
infrastructure, and we have the wind potential. Most importantly, we also have
a corps of motivated, skilled workers who are looking to contribute to Ontario's
future.

The ‘New Energy Economy’ is about reviving jobs in
the manufacturing sector and creating jobs in the skilled trades. Not only will
we bring work back to the blue-collar jobs in Ontario through the manufacturing
and construction sectors, but this plan will provide a direction for
white-collar work as well. Research and development industries in Ontario will
be empowered to enhance and create solutions for the 21st century.

This is the way to renew prosperity in our own house.
Ontario must take these advantages and put good hard-working people back to
work. Ontario must have a political leader with a cutting edge vision for our
future.

Peter Tabuns can and will be that leader.

 

Thank you,

Jamie Masse

ONDY Fundraising Coordinator

Kingston and the Islands NDP Membership Coordinator

Well in reality he has been talking about a plan for a long time, and now all the leadership candidates are starting to sound like him with the same exact words.

If you have been to debate, you will notice that everyone sounds exactly the same. Thats not scheer coincidence that has to do with that fact that the others are playing catchup to his policies. Peter has proved that he has a plan with regards to the economy. Not just throwing money at a problem without a solution. Energy is that solution.

Cutting Edge really talks about being the first to do it, and Peter wrote the policy for both the Federal and Provincial Wings of the party.

Yes Peter does have the support of the NDP Chinese Action Committee.

The website www.chinesendp.ca can't load on my browser, so I'm not sure if the site still exists.

Everything I've read says it's a national committee. 

There's a story here about the action committee:  http://www.chineseinvancouver.ca/2006/09/ndp-to-set-up-chinese-action-co...

In that blog there's a reference to an unnamed Toronto committee that's existed for 20 years, which I've never heard of. I'm rather surprised to hear about its existence now. I figure I'd have heard about it long ago. Most of the links in the blog are to non-helpful places, btw. 

I read a facebook wall post on an event that passed (not sure how to access the page again...).  It was from a co-chair of the committee and he said there was an unanimous decision to support Tabuns.  Anyone know how many people that would represent?

There's only been one post in the past year, and it's kind of a sad one.

So when will we hear the new membership numbers? How many members are each of the campaigns claiming?

Somehow I have a hard time believing that the party obtained 3000 memberships by themselves, I would say a the number probably is reversed.

JMasse wrote:

Cutting Edge really talks about being the first to do it, and Peter wrote the policy for both the Federal and Provincial Wings of the party.

Well, I wouldn't say the federal or provincial party has been winning kudos on the environmental policy front. In fact, the federal party's biggest gains in the last election came from ignoring environmentalists who insisted that gouging consumers was the way of the future.

Peter's got some contradictions he has yet to work out.

Like the fact that he supports (or used to support) raising electricity rates. In fact, he praised Dalton McGuinty for breaking his promise to keep a cap on hydro rates, offeing the Liberal Leader congratulations for eliminating the "artificially low" rate.

Given the misery and mass layoffs that rate hike caused - particularly in the forestry communities - I'm not sure this is the sort of thing Tabuns should be bragging about.

JMasse.... There is a direct connection between an increase in energy prices and mass layoffs in the forestry sectors. In the cases in the mill closings in Kenora and Thunder Bay, energy prices was the prime reason cited for closing those mills.

The fact is that the cost of energy directly impacts the cost of production, so if your cost of energy goes up, the cost of production goes up. When Harris deregulated the power system, the price of power became much higher than in neighouring jurisdictions like Manitoba and Quebec, meaning that it became much cheaper to operate in those provinces than in Ontario. That same effect on the cost of production extends beyond the forestry sector to all of the manufacturing sector too.

That is one of the reason why Gilles Bisson and Charlie Angus  have been fighting against Abitib Consolodated, who is trying to sell of their hydro dams in all across the province for a quick buck. Those are the same dams that provide the electricity to their mills.  They realize that by selling those dams, the company will have to pay a higher cost of energy, which will raise the cost of production even further and will increase the likelihood that Abitibi's remaining Ontario mills in Iroquois Falls and Fort Frances might close. 

To make the point simple, because of Ontario's current hydro policies, it costs more to produce anything in Ontario than in the provinces next door. That puts us at a competitive disadvantage and pushes business out the door. That's a reason why we should the province should have never privatized hydro and that's something that Howie Hampton had been fighting against for years.

That being said, that doesn't mean that we shouldn't make all the investments in alternative, renewable energy sources and on more energy conservation. The fact is that every single candidate in this race is in favour of making those investments. Mr. Tabuns is no different in that regard. There needs to be a mixed plan, that takes all of these things into consideration. We cannot afford to have higher hydro rates if we are going to have any industry left to buy that hydro.

 

http://www.saultstar.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1351146

As you can see, being the voice of Toronto's policy wonks can be a problem for someone who wants to speak for a whole province.

In Northern Ontario, hell in most of Ontario, telling people that their electricity is "subsidized" and needs to be more expensive (as Tabuns has) is a recipe for getting run out of town on a rail.

I know some environmentalists have embraced "market measures" but that doesn't make it smart.

They could. I learnt recently that the Vespa wind turbines you see around Sault Ste. Marie, and all over Ontario, while made in Germany, where designed in Canada with public dollars. So what happened? The government (I assume the Feds) lacked faith in the market and allowed the patents to expire.

The issue is not who pays and for whose benefit. The question is in what direction are we headed, where to we want to be and how to we get there? The problem with planning is that it requires hindsight, analysis, foresight and a vision. The ideologues, political mercernaries, and mid-level opportunistics we tend to elect usually lack all of the above and especially foresight and vision.

 

I didn't realize that it was the role of the Leader to define policy for the Party.  I thought policy was determined at convention, with the adoption of resolutions.  I thought the role of the Leader was to communicate the policy adoptedd by the Party and lead the Party in the House and in elections.  My mistake.

Robo.... Thank you for pointing that out because that what I was thinking too. Last time I checked it was up to a leader to lead, build the party and communicate party policy. Howard Hampton and Jack Layton don't choose the entire platform and policy, bit by bit, by themselves. If that were the case, someone like Peter Tabuns would have never had any input into the provincial and federal platforms, something that I've heard him talk about having done at different debates.

The whole point of a leadership debate is to choose someone who can lead a whole group of people with varying ideas and varying approaches, but similar goals and core beliefs. It's also about choosing someone who can build the party, and personally I want the person that's actually done that in their part of the World. That's Gilles Bisson. He's actually helped to build the NDP to such strength that saw us nearly sweep the North in the last Federal and saw us as by far and away the 2nd choice of that same area in the last Provincial. I want that winning experience at the helm helping to build up all regions of this province to where they are having the same kind of success that the North has had.

You're missing the point. The fact is that it's the party as a whole that develops policy and comes up with that vision, it's the leader that needs to build the party and help communicate that message. The fact is that if you don't win seats, you can't do much with any vision.

As for Gilles, Charlie is a great guy, but it has been Gilles hard work over the past 18 years that helped to make the situation better to help someone like Charlie win. I feel very safe in saying that Charlie would tell you as much himself. The fact is that during the last provincial election we were literally hundreds of votes away from winning 2-4 more seats, and that had absolutely nothing to do with the Federal party. That was the work of Northern MPP's like Gilles who helped to get the structure in place to make them competitive election after election. 

Finally, as for crime, that is an issue for everyone everywhere. Every community in this province has crime, and in every single one of those communities the overwhelming number of victims of crime are the poor and the disadvantaged, the same group that we profess to represent. The fact is that there are gangs, drugs and all kinds of crime in all parts of the province, and to igonre that is to be naive at best. It's an issue that speaks to everyone in different ways, in all parts of the province. Plus, heaven forbid that a Northern candidate speak to an issue that Torontonians care about. The nerve of him to do that . Gilles idea about opening schools for after hours activities for youth is a great idea that has been proven elsewhere to keep kids involved in activites, put them on the right track, learn important life skills, build better communities and keep kids out of crime. That's a concept that can work anywhere, regardless of the size of the community. Crime is a symptom of poverty, and it needs to be looked at that way. 

You are absolutely right SH, we certainly can't campaign on that, but what we can campaign on is the growing jobs in the new energy sector. Its not just manufacturing and designing jobs its also teaching and training. Research and development positions as well. There are many oppurtunities for Ontarians in a high resource economic market. Certainly during a recession the biggest question is where are we going to get the jobs of today. As for the question of where are we going to get the money, because a lot neh-sayers will jump all over us on that one, we will respond with smarter less wasteful spending particularly the savings of getting out of the Nuclear Era.

No offence intended SN, but suggesting that being anti-nuke - a cornerstone of NDP policy for a long time- is somehow radical is just plain silly. The fact is many people left and otherwise know that Nuke power is not only just dangerous, outdated and prohibitively expensive with constant cost overruns  (I'll bet ya a shiny nickel that the "new/refurbished" power plants are going to cost a hell of a lot more than McGuinty will admit)...  Just because the McLiberals lacked any vision for real energy efficiency, and not developing real alternatives as well as the amazing spin off of jobs that would create -face it, they copped out-  does not mean Nuclear is right. This is not a "far left" point of view at all IMHO.

As for "paying more for energy"..... Tabuns was a special advisor to Layton on climate change..... the result of it being Hard Cap, with big polluters pay, NOT every day Canadians. Last time I checked, that's what's being embraced by the rest of the western world, including the U.S. (Despite what the hopefully soon to be ejected Federal Cons say, they are not going to be able to dictate a "do nothing" climate change policy with the incoming U.S administration). Finally, the lead balloon of the alternative Carbon Tax in Canada is a dead horse. See last election and palpable outrage in BC for details. I've gotta spin bust this one because you obviously haven't read Tabun's New Energy Economy.... I suggest you do.... it starts with 5 points, the very first one being....

• Lowering energy costs.

http://www.tabuns09.ca/newenergyeconomy

 

 

 

If the last federal election proved anything it is that the average person is sadly, not overly concerned with the environment. (See Green shift failure) Yes nuclear is impractical and expensive and everyone wants a better way but the simple reality is that infastructure renewal, health care and the economy rank much higher on the priority list of the average Ontarian. People like having their electricity readily available to power their homes, computers, tvs, hospitals and lifestyles. To suggest that the strategy to attract voters to the party is to tell them we are gonna make big corporations pay to lower our energy and we're going to clean  up the nuke plants at the same time is a tad naive.  Its even more naive to buy in to the concept that dismantling nuke plants and building wind farms and solar plants is the way of the immediate future. The next twenty years is going to be about roads, cities, transit, and servicing the needs of retiring (read voting) baby boomers.  Not about ban the bomb, hemp shoe, love ins.  This talk does not translate to the language of the employed electorate.  If the NDP wants to grow they need to talk about issues that resonate with left center voters and move a touch away from the extreme left.  I've seen the five point plan. It is nice. Try selling it to the masses and convincing them that they wont have to pay for it and you'll be riding the third party opposition benches for the next twenty years.