Erin Weir saga #3

117 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Erin Weir saga #3

Continued from here.

Unionist

Can the NDP hand-pick a candidate in Regina Lewvan without the approval of the riding association?

The party leader has the power, under the Elections Act, albeit somewhat indirectly (it's actually the chief agent who files the list of party-endorsed candidates, but it has to be certified by the leader), to deny Erin Weir's right to run under the NDP banner - though bizarrely, the NDP Constitution doesn't spell out any such power. The leader has used that power on many occasions.

But how is a candidate picked?

Here's what Article XV, Section 1 of the NDP constitution says:

Quote:

The Federal Council shall create rules and procedures for the nomination of the federal candidates.

It's my information that those rules were just modified and approved earlier this month, and then distributed to the riding associations. I don't have a copy. Does anyone?

 

cco

I do. It's a 12-page PDF, a bit much to copy and paste here, but I can email it to you or upload it somewhere.

Pondering

If it isn't too much trouble upload please. I would be interested in reading it. 

Unionist

cco wrote:
I do. It's a 12-page PDF, a bit much to copy and paste here, but I can email it to you or upload it somewhere.

I've never tried it, but this might work: https://uploadfiles.io/. Guest users (no account needed) can apparently upload files up to 5GB, they'll immediately receive a share link, and the file stays up for 30 days. I'll Google around to see if it's considered sketchy.

NorthReport
josh

When was Weir charged with sexual assault?

cco

Unionist wrote:

cco wrote:
I do. It's a 12-page PDF, a bit much to copy and paste here, but I can email it to you or upload it somewhere.

I've never tried it, but this might work: https://uploadfiles.io/. Guest users (no account needed) can apparently upload files up to 5GB, they'll immediately receive a share link, and the file stays up for 30 days. I'll Google around to see if it's considered sketchy.


Here you go.

Unionist

cco wrote:
Unionist wrote:

cco wrote:
I do. It's a 12-page PDF, a bit much to copy and paste here, but I can email it to you or upload it somewhere.

I've never tried it, but this might work: https://uploadfiles.io/. Guest users (no account needed) can apparently upload files up to 5GB, they'll immediately receive a share link, and the file stays up for 30 days. I'll Google around to see if it's considered sketchy.

Here you go.

Hmm, didn't work. When I download, it gives me a pdf file with the right filename, but zero bytes. There may have been an issue with your upload, because when I look at the screen, it says this:

Quote:

Candidate_Nomination_Process_Rules_V3.pdf

Expires in: 4 Weeks   |   Size: 0 Bytes   |

Maybe try it again - possible when it says "slow" it really means slow? Meanwhile I'll hunt for another method.

Unionist

I did a test upload of the NDP constitution. It seemed to work for me - and the screen shows this:

Quote:

2013_CONSTITUTION_E.pdf

Expires in: 4 Weeks   |   Size: 446.9 KB   |

So... try again please!!

cco

It didn't work the second time either, but I managed to get it uploaded here, and confirmed with a test download.

Unionist

That worked - thank you, CCO!

Now to do some reading. But interesting to see, at first glance, that Melissa Bruno has the power to approve or reject all "prospective contestants for nomination", subject to an appeal process, while Jagmeet Singh has no powers whatsoever - the leader is not even mentioned in the entire document. I stand to be corrected, of course.

Aristotleded24

This issue is not going away:

Quote:

A simmering political battle within the federal New Democratic Party has once again boiled over in Regina.

On Wednesday night, the Regina-Lewvan NDP asked the federal party to allow MP Erin Weir to run as a candidate in this year's federal election.

Last year, federal leader Jagmeet Singh removed Weir from the party caucus after the NDP hired a third-party investigator to look into allegations of harassment by Weir. The investigation report was not made public.

...

The Regina-Lewvan NDP blasted Singh for not visiting Saskatchewan for more than a year and refusing to provide meaningful answers about Weir's ouster.

josh

Good.

Unionist

I don't know why the NDP members in Regina-Lewvan feel they should have any say in who the NDP candidate for Regina-Lewvan should be. 

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Unionist wrote:

I don't know why the NDP members in Regina-Lewvan feel they should have any say in who the NDP candidate for Regina-Lewvan should be. 

Thanks for that, I needed a good chuckle on here today.

montgomery

Unionist wrote:

I don't know why the NDP members in Regina-Lewvan feel they should have any say in who the NDP candidate for Regina-Lewvan should be. 

It's a matter of Jagmeet's principled position now isn't it. 

Do you think the question needs to be revisited by allowing an appeal? Or do you think that Jagmeet's position is cast in stone? Adhering to principles sometimes is costly.

I don't know enough about the issue to say one way or the other. And I don't know of any way to get true and unbiased information on which to base an opinion. 

Maybe you or somebody else can help out with that and we can turn this into a discussion? I mean, something more than just support or non-support of Jagmeet.

Unionist

montgomery wrote:

I don't know enough about the issue to say one way or the other. And I don't know of any way to get true and unbiased information on which to base an opinion. 

You might wish to start by catching up on the discussions and source references that have gone by here:

Erin Weir accused of "harassment"

Erin Weir accused of harassment 2

Plus the earlier portions of this current thread. Once you're up to speed, let us know if you have any questions or comments.

Aristotleded24

Unionist wrote:
I don't know why the NDP members in Regina-Lewvan feel they should have any say in who the NDP candidate for Regina-Lewvan should be.

Ouch. That is too true for words! :)

Misfit Misfit's picture

Reality is, if you run two NDP candidates, you split the vote and the Conservatives win the seat.

How much does Lewvan mean to the brass in the NDP? And for a party that may tank in this election, is continuing the fight really worth it?

Unionist

Misfit wrote:

How much does Lewvan mean to the brass in the NDP? And for a party that may tank in this election, is continuing the fight really worth it?

Once Christine Moore did her damage last year, and the party brass capitulated in terror, I would be extremely (but pleasantly) surprised if they stopped "the fight" and readmitted Erin Weir. Jagmeet Singh (or his handlers) showed he is somewhat capable of listening, when he moderated his original shameful statement on Venezuela after Niki Ashton, Svend Robinson, and Jessa McLean spoke truth to power. So who knows, maybe good sense and electoral self-interest will prevail here as well. But I'm not holding my proverbial breath.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Aristotleded24 wrote:

Unionist wrote:
I don't know why the NDP members in Regina-Lewvan feel they should have any say in who the NDP candidate for Regina-Lewvan should be.

Ouch. That is too true for words! :)

Yeah...if riding associations start getting to choose the candidates they actually want, it could cause...DEMOCRACY or something?

 

montgomery

Unionist wrote:

montgomery wrote:

I don't know enough about the issue to say one way or the other. And I don't know of any way to get true and unbiased information on which to base an opinion. 

You might wish to start by catching up on the discussions and source references that have gone by here:

Erin Weir accused of "harassment"

Erin Weir accused of harassment 2

Plus the earlier portions of this current thread. Once you're up to speed, let us know if you have any questions or comments.

Thanks. Those links don't tell me anything more than the links I followed myself in a search. I take it the issue isn't completely settled satisfactorily so I guess we'll have to wait.

Mighty Middle

Former Saskatchewan NDP cabinet minister Pat Atkinson says NDP leader Jagmeet Singh is damaging the party in Saskatchewan and should allow Regina MP Erin Weir to appeal the harassment investigation that resulted in his dismissal from the party caucus.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ndp-erin-weir-jagmeet-singh-...

Prompting Rick Smith of the Broadbent Institute to respond via twitter

I'll tell you what would have damaged the @NDP: not taking multiple complaints of harassment seriously #cdnpoli

https://twitter.com/rjcsmith/status/1091443757411520512

Mighty Middle

Chris Strain, who worked for Weir in his constituency office from 2016-17, is opposed to the MP's candidacy. 

Strain is part of a local political action committee called the Regina District Labour Council.

"Our committee unanimously decided to bring our position to the Lewvan AGM to actively make it clear a potential independent Weir candidacy would not be tolerated."

Weir has not committed to run as an independent. 

Strain said he handed out a sheet on the council's position and some facts on the NDP process for nominations and rules.

Strain said he left "after several members became violent and started throwing balled up sheets at me, yelling 'this is bullshit' and snatching them out of recipients hands."

Strain said his relationship with Weir goes back to 2013. He said he worked to help elect Weir in 2015, later working with him in his Regina office.

"I found there was a pretty toxic frat boy culture there and my contract wasn't renewed."

He said Weir has made "undignified comments and outbursts, at a time when labour, political parties and the USW are making a lot of effort to wipe out harassment and toxic masculinity, have shown how unsuited he is to serve the public and I would reiterate my call for him to step down."

Strain said his status as a NDP member expired at the end of 2018.

In response to Strain's comments, he said "I'm sorry to hear that he had a bad experience but I guess I'd need to have a bit more detail to be able to to respond more completely." 

Atkinson said said a very very very small group of people oppose Weir as the NDP candidate. "I find it difficult to understand how New Democrats, really good people, don't understand that when you go through a procedure like a harassment investigation there has to be due process or the outcome is not credible. And that is the problem in this case."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ndp-erin-weir-jagmeet-singh-...

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

It's not really even about Weir.  It's about whether it means anything at all to be a member of a riding association anymore.  If the NDP is going to end up being just as much about parachuting candidates handpicked by the leadership into a riding-candidates we can assume will have no connection to the riding, no understanding of the issues voters care about there, and no commitment even to "social democratic" principles, let alone anything near democratic socialism-than it goes without saying that the NDP can no longer be a party with any real reason to exist.

montgomery

Ken Burch wrote:

It's not really even about Weir.  It's about whether it means anything at all to be a member of a riding association anymore.  If the NDP is going to end up being just as much about parachuting candidates handpicked by the leadership into a riding-candidates we can assume will have no connection to the riding, no understanding of the issues voters care about there, and no commitment even to "social democratic" principles, let alone anything near democratic socialism-than it goes without saying that the NDP can no longer be a party with any real reason to exist.

I have to disagree Ken, I think the primary issue for now on this one is about the charges against Weir. That's the issue that has caused this to go on for so long. It's a very serious challenge to Jagmeet's leadership and for that reason it's going to have to be decided once and for all.

I don't know enough about the case to make a statement either way on the question of Jagmeet being either right or wrong, and consequently, Weir being right or wrong.

Debater

But doesn't the NDP Constitution allow the NDP Leader to have the final say on whether a candidate can run for the NDP?

It seems to be the case in our system for all political parties.

Mighty Middle

"As we understand it the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that sexual harassment must include sexual behavior. And in this case it did not. It was just simply someone standing too close," says Former Saskatchewan NDP cabinet minister Pat Atkinson

montgomery

Mighty Middle wrote:

"As we understand it the Supreme Court of Canada has ruled that sexual harassment must include sexual behavior. And in this case it did not. It was just simply someone standing too close," says Former Saskatchewan NDP cabinet minister Pat Atkinson

Good! You've moved this conversation along, at least for me, by defining one side of the debate. 

Unionist

Debater wrote:

But doesn't the NDP Constitution allow the NDP Leader to have the final say on whether a candidate can run for the NDP?

It seems to be the case in our system for all political parties.

Please read what I posted above on this issue, and let me know what you think. I also linked to the NDP constitution. Not sure what happened with cco's document.

 

robbie_dee

Alex Ballingall, "Emboldened by Local Support, SK MP Erin Weir Still Wants Back in the NDP," Toronto Star 1 February 2019

Quote:

OTTAWA—Saskatchewan MP Erin Weir is sticking with his campaign to return to the NDP after party members in his riding voted to let him try to become the local candidate in this year’s federal election.

In an interview with the Star, Weir said it was “heartwarming” to receive support from New Democrats in Regina-Lewvan, and that the vote should put pressure on NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh to allow an appeal of the harassment investigation that led to Weir’s ouster from caucus last year.

At the time, Singh said three allegations of sexual harassment and one allegation of harassment against Weir were “sustained” by the investigation.

“His office invented an investigation process without an appeal procedure, and he continues to deny requests for one,” Weir told the Star by phone from Regina.

“If the leader wants to overrule the local membership, I think there’s an obligation to make a very strong case.”

***

Weir has not ruled out running as an independent. But he said Friday that his presence in the riding since he won a seat in 2015 means he has a better shot of clinching it again if he runs for the NDP.

“The best chance we have to hold the constituency and maintain a progressive voice in Ottawa is to build on all of the canvassing, mailing and outreach that we’ve done,” he said.

In the meantime, he sits as an independent operating in the Commons under the banner of the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, the long-gone prairie-socialist precursor to the NDP.

“I get a spot in question period every week, which is way more than the federal NDP caucus ever gave me, and of course I have the latitude to speak out on issues of importance to Regina in a way that I didn’t always as a member of caucus,” he said.

“I’m having the most fun that I’ve had since getting elected.”

swallow swallow's picture

Mighty Middle wrote:

Chris Strain, who worked for Weir in his constituency office from 2016-17, is opposed to the MP's candidacy. 

Strain is part of a local political action committee called the Regina District Labour Council.

"Our committee unanimously decided to bring our position to the Lewvan AGM to actively make it clear a potential independent Weir candidacy would not be tolerated."

Weir has not committed to run as an independent. 

Strain said he handed out a sheet on the council's position and some facts on the NDP process for nominations and rules.

Strain said he left "after several members became violent and started throwing balled up sheets at me, yelling 'this is bullshit' and snatching them out of recipients hands."

Strain said his relationship with Weir goes back to 2013. He said he worked to help elect Weir in 2015, later working with him in his Regina office.

"I found there was a pretty toxic frat boy culture there and my contract wasn't renewed."

He said Weir has made "undignified comments and outbursts, at a time when labour, political parties and the USW are making a lot of effort to wipe out harassment and toxic masculinity, have shown how unsuited he is to serve the public and I would reiterate my call for him to step down."

Strain said his status as a NDP member expired at the end of 2018.

In response to Strain's comments, he said "I'm sorry to hear that he had a bad experience but I guess I'd need to have a bit more detail to be able to to respond more completely." 

Atkinson said said a very very very small group of people oppose Weir as the NDP candidate. "I find it difficult to understand how New Democrats, really good people, don't understand that when you go through a procedure like a harassment investigation there has to be due process or the outcome is not credible. And that is the problem in this case."

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatchewan/ndp-erin-weir-jagmeet-singh-...

Should be political action committee OF the Regina and District Labour Council. 

Aristotleded24

This is why Singh is not a leader. I believe that when he heard of this accusation that he wanted to throw Weir under the bus to get good publicity in the light of the #MeToo movement and it backfired big time. That's because this is absoluetly the wrong way to handle a sexual harassment accusation. Once an accusation is made, no matter how the incident is handled, the odds of someone being angry at how it is handled are close to 100%. For this reason, the consequences of such an accusation can have long-term, and sometimes fatal, consequences for an organization. So many people in Saskatchewan were angry with Weir being bounced, but now it appears that there are people who would have been angry had nothing happened to Weir. And long-term partisans actually quit over things like this.

There is no such thing as good publicity around sexual harassment. That's why there needs to be clear policies in place to determine a) what constitutes harassment, b) how accusations are supposed to be reported and investigated, and finally c) what consequences will result from the findings. Build that process, investigate to determine the facts, and then act on said facts. That's it.

Pondering

Even if you change the leadership of the NDP Weir will not be permitted to run again. He was not expelled for harassment sexual or otherwise. All he had to do was go to training which apparently he passed with flying colours so that is not what he was expelled for. Suggesting it was is a strawman argument. 

The local riding has a voice but so does the leadership. That is the cost of having a party instead of running as an independent. The candidate has to satisfy both levels. It makes sense for a party as they have a collective reputation. 

Is the NDP a grassroots party? If so what makes it different from the other parties?

R.E.Wood

Erin Weir questions legality of expulsion from NDP caucus, points to Philpott

Regina MP Erin Weir is questioning the legality of his expulsion from the NDP caucus last year.

This comes after MP Jane Philpott said in the House of Commons that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau violated her rights and the rights of Jody Wilson-Raybould when he expelled them from Liberal caucus without a full caucus vote.

"Now that the issue has been put out there for public discussion I think it is worth noting and worth remembering that Mr. Singh ignored the law when he threw me out of the NDP caucus," Weir said.

Weir said the question of legality stems from the Parliament of Canada Act, which sets out a model rule for expulsions from caucus.

"The NDP caucus voted to not adopt that model rule in 2016, which was far later than required by law and therefore of questionable legitimacy," he said.

"The reason the NDP caucus voted not to adopt those safeguards is that we were assured by our leadership that the only reason someone would be expelled is if they were subject to criminal charges and then a conviction."

Weir was expelled after a harassment investigation but no charges were laid.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/saskatoon/regina-mp-erin-weir-illegal-exp...

swallow swallow's picture
Unionist

Davies evades the question: Were these votes conducted at the NDP caucus's "first meeting following a general election"? If not, then arguably the NDP is in violation of the law (see Section 49.8(1)) ... but by default, it means that the provisions of Section 49.2 do NOT apply:

Quote:

Expulsion of caucus member

49.2 A member of a caucus may only be expelled from it if

  • (a) the caucus chair has received a written notice signed by at least 20% of the members of the caucus requesting that the member’s membership be reviewed; and

  • (b) the expulsion of the member is approved by secret ballot by a majority of all caucus members.

So that's the question. It doesn't matter that the caucus voted. What matters is whether they did so at their first meeting after the 2015 election. Even though I support Erin Weir in his egregious expulsion by Jagmeet Singh, I don't think this point works for him.

And all the more so in the case of Jane Philpott's argument. It's clear that the Liberal caucus never conducted these votes, having decided to "opt out" of that process altogether. So they can turf anyone anytime any way they like.

swallow swallow's picture

Davies says the NDP followed the law. 

Unionist

swallow wrote:

Davies says the NDP followed the law. 

There are several laws in the Act that I linked. Where does he say the NDP caucus had a vote during their first caucus meeting after the 2015 election? That's a mandatory part of the statute. There's no penalty for not following it. If he means they didn't violate the law in the manner in which they kicked Erin Weir out, I believe that's correct, as I said. But perhaps when you say "Davies says the NDP followed the law", you could just quote what he said so I can decipher that, please.

swallow swallow's picture

“For the 3rd (and last) time, I confirm that the NDP caucus conducted all 4 votes required by the Parliament of Canada Act. Indeed, I spoke to each motion and voted.”

Thats all I know. Retweets are not endorsements.

Unionist

swallow wrote:

“For the 3rd (and last) time, I confirm that the NDP caucus conducted all 4 votes required by the Parliament of Canada Act. Indeed, I spoke to each motion and voted.”

Thats all I know. Retweets are not endorsements.

He does not specify when those 4 votes were conducted. That is one decisive point. The other is that Erin Weir is quoted as saying the caucus never adopted the criteria set out in the Parliament of Canada Act. So someone is either mistaken, or lying. It would be really sweet to know who. Personally, I trust Erin Weir.

Mighty Middle

Erin Weir writes letter to the Globe & Mail

If Trudeau broke the law in expelling MPs from the Liberalcaucus, Singh broke the same law in expelling me from the NDP caucus since neither held the required Parliament of Canada Act vote at its first meeting.

https://twitter.com/Erin_Weir/status/1116686062561132552

Unionist

Mighty Middle wrote:

Erin Weir writes letter to the Globe & Mail

If Trudeau broke the law in expelling MPs from the Liberalcaucus, Singh broke the same law in expelling me from the NDP caucus since neither held the required Parliament of Canada Act vote at its first meeting.

https://twitter.com/Erin_Weir/status/1116686062561132552

This is not complicated.

If neither party caucus held the required vote at their first caucus - they both broke the law. But there is NO PENALTY prescribed in the Act for breaking that law.

More importantly - if they didn't have those first meetings to adopt the Section 48 procedure for expelling caucus members... then by default, those procedures DO NOT APPLY, and they can expel anyone they want any time they want.

In short - both Jane Philpott and Erin Weir are wasting their time on this issue. I sincerely wish I were wrong - but not this time.

Mighty Middle

Unionist wrote:

This is not complicated.

If neither party caucus held the required vote at their first caucus - they both broke the law. But there is NO PENALTY prescribed in the Act for breaking that law.

More importantly - if they didn't have those first meetings to adopt the Section 48 procedure for expelling caucus members... then by default, those procedures DO NOT APPLY, and they can expel anyone they want any time they want.

In short - both Jane Philpott and Erin Weir are wasting their time on this issue. I sincerely wish I were wrong - but not this time.

That is Erin Weir whole point. You can't accuse Justin Trudeau of breaking the law, when the NDP did it themselves.

So how can the NDP be outraged over Liberals "breaking the rules", when Erin Weir suffered the same fate by the NDP - that according to Erin Weir.

Unionist

Mighty Middle wrote:

That is Erin Weir whole point. You can't accuse Justin Trudeau of breaking the law, when the NDP did it themselves.

So how can the NDP be outraged over Liberals "breaking the rules", when Erin Weir suffered the same fate by the NDP - that according to Erin Weir.

You may be right. That could be the point Erin is trying to make - that the NDP's outrage is hypocritical. But it's not what he said. He said "if the Liberals broke the law, then so did the NDP when they expelled me". As I've pointed out, with reference to the statute itself, he's mistaken on that point - as is Jane Philpott.

Here's what Erin said:

 

Once again - YES, they both broke the law if they didn't hold a caucus meeting and vote after the 2015 election. NO, they didn't break any law when they expelled caucus members - never having voted to adopt the procedures set out in the statute.

radiorahim radiorahim's picture

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.

Aristotleded24

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?

Pondering

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?

A resounding yes to that. If Weir is more important to Saskatchewan than climate change and income inequality so be it. I am all for pragmatism but in my opinion Weir's comments denigrated the women who had reported including giving identifying information about a specific incident. Those two actions crossed the line. He hasn't apologized for either. He has doubled down and been militant rather than showing understanding. 

nicky

The CBC reports that Weir is supposed to make an announcement today on his electoral future.

josh

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

 

Pages