And its not up the Executive whether a Leader 'can stay' or not.
Im the formal sense its not up to any body at all: the Leader is there until she resigns. But least of all is it up to the Executive.
Its up to the membership to make their wishes known. Which is obvioulsy happening now. But dont slough off responsibility for what was told or not to the Leader after the election.
So the split is delayed. We might as well look for paralells or learn the lessons of history.
Queen James cut and ran. But the important battle cry "I'm outa here" was not heard. DARN
Its kinda like the Roundheads and the Cavaliers. Eh?
Denice? You know that thing you had about renaming the NDP? You want to whisper you prefered name to some soon to be x colleagues?
Because there is probably a naming convention coming up pretty soon.
It could be the MDP (More democratic party), Or MDP (Most democratic party) or the PRP. (The pro rep party).
You might as well tell us your ideas. Because the damage done by James to the provincial NDP is not going to do your federal re-election campaign any good. (And I think you are a damn good MP)
The postponement was probably a good idea. Both sides are so heavily invested in their positions that a permanent fracture might have occurred, which would serve neither side very well right now. Better to let tempers cool and both sides reassess their positions, even if just to make absolutely sure they know what they're doing.
Oops. Thought I was posting in the continuation thread.
On reflection, I think you are right. I think the NDP needs to amend their rules related to provincial council and leader making and policy making.
You cannot seriously tell the voters that the people that they elect have NO vote in a leadership review.
Because frankly to me the whole thing smacks of freemasonry or whatever the left wing equivalent is.
My MLA is in a safe ndp seat. She owes her position totally to the nomination. And it shows.
She is totally alligned with the leadership. If she wasn't a vessel for their words, would she be an MLA at all?
Until the NDP reform their rules to allow a bit of bottom up democracy there is a gap in the market just waiting to be filled by a bright left wing party with a vision and rules that back up that vision. Freedom of speech for MLA'a would be a start.
The postponement was probably a good idea. Both sides are so heavily invested in their positions that a permanent fracture might have occurred, which would serve neither side very well right now. Better to let tempers cool and both sides reassess their positions, even if just to make absolutely sure they know what they're doing.
Let's all vote for millionaire Jane Sterk and the really non-democratic Green Party.
BTW try to be more consistent, things you have advocated are definitely less democ.ratic than what is, but yet you howl "no democracy"
My MLA is in a safe ndp seat. She owes her position totally to the nomination. And it shows.
The postponement was probably a good idea. Both sides are so heavily invested in their positions that a permanent fracture might have occurred, which would serve neither side very well right now. Better to let tempers cool and both sides reassess their positions, even if just to make absolutely sure they know what they're doing.
I think 2001 showed that there are very few safe NDP seats in the wrong circumstances. MLAs are still accountable to their electorate.
Agreed, but if you are not allowed to re run under the party banner because someone higher in the party power structure does not like you or stacks your nomination meeting, that accountability is greatly reduced. Currently the Accountability to the electorate is seen as a very minor component. It has become feudalism. You can only become a knight for the party, (an mla) if you agree to be a pawn first and foremost. That removes the knights power so much that the knight is rendered pretty useless. Imagine playing chess with a queen, and pawns against a normal set up. You cannot even hope for a draw. Give back the power to speak more or less freely to mla's and the whole party becomes stronger and more dynamic.
Brian
My MLA is in a safe ndp seat. She owes her position totally to the nomination. And it shows.
The postponement was probably a good idea. Both sides are so heavily invested in their positions that a permanent fracture might have occurred, which would serve neither side very well right now. Better to let tempers cool and both sides reassess their positions, even if just to make absolutely sure they know what they're doing.
I think 2001 showed that there are very few safe NDP seats in the wrong circumstances. MLAs are still accountable to their electorate.
Closèd.
