Erin Weir accused of harassment 2

133 posts / 0 new
Last post
MegB
Erin Weir accused of harassment 2

Continued from here.

Issues Pages: 
Regions: 
robbie_dee

Is there really anything left to be said? Perhaps there will be more to discuss after the Burnaby South byelection.

robbie_dee

This is perhaps worth noting:

Weir won't be banned from attending provincial NDP events (Regina Leader-Post)

Nice to know Erin hasn't suddenly turned radioactive at least.

Misfit Misfit's picture

The provincial and federal parties are two separate entities but who are supposed to share a common social democratic vision.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..what they share in common is that the leaderships represent the third way. that they never offer up an alternative to neoliberalism or capitalism.

Unionist

Misfit wrote:

The provincial and federal parties are two separate entities but who are supposed to share a common social democratic vision.

Not sure what you mean. The only way to be a member of the federal party is to join the provincial party. They are one and the same.

JKR

robbie_dee wrote:

This is perhaps worth noting:

Weir won't be banned from attending provincial NDP events (Regina Leader-Post)

Nice to know Erin hasn't suddenly turned radioactive at least.

Will he be banned from attending federal NDP events?

Mr. Magoo

Quote:
Not sure what you mean. The only way to be a member of the federal party is to join the provincial party. They are one and the same.

Do you join them separately?  Are there separate fees or rights?  Can you join a provincial NDP without joining the federal NDP?

If so, then they're not really one and the same.  It just means that provincial membership is a condition of federal membership.  I'm not saying there's a logic to such a condition of membership, but there you go.  Parties, eh?

ed'd to add:  well, NVM.  Looks like they offer a package deal.  Huh.

Misfit Misfit's picture

I did not have a provincial membership when I got my federal membership. Maybe it works that way in your province but it doesn't in mine.

Unionist

Misfit wrote:

I did not have a provincial membership when I got my federal membership. Maybe it works that way in your province but it doesn't in mine.

You can't get a federal membership without a provincial membership. In any province. Article III, Section 1(2) of the federal NDP constitution reads as follows:

Quote:
Applications for individual membership shall be dealt with in accordance with the constitution of the appropriate provincial Party and shall be subject to the approval of that provincial Party.

Not sure what forms you signed, but if you'd like to share the text, I'd be interested in seeing what happened.

Unionist

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Do you join them separately?  Are there separate fees or rights?  Can you join a provincial NDP without joining the federal NDP?

No. No. And No.

Quote:
ed'd to add:  well, NVM.  Looks like they offer a package deal.  Huh.

Correct.

cco

One asterisk: In Québec, federal membership doesn't make you an NPDQ member, and vice-versa. In fact, quite a few federal NDPers I know here are also QS members.

Unionist

cco wrote:
One asterisk: In Québec, federal membership doesn't make you an NPDQ member, and vice-versa. In fact, quite a few federal NDPers I know here are also QS members.

Slightly wrong, cco. This is exactly why I didn't join the party in 2010 during the federal leadership race. I went to the table and read the texts. Here's Article III, Section 1(1) of the federal constitution:

Quote:
Individual membership shall be open to every resident of Canada, regardless of race, colour, religion, sex, gender identity or expression, sexual orientation, or national origin who undertakes to accept and abide by the constitution and principles of the Party and who is not a member or supporter of any other political party.

It used to be interpreted that if there was no provincial NDP (which used to be the case), you could join even if you were a member or supporter of another provincial party. I thought that was too cute by half in 2010, and didn't join. Today, even that is clearly impossible.

As a member of QS, I was (and am) not eligible for NDP membership. Your NDP/QS friends are all in violation of the constitution. Unless some genius interprets the "not a member or supporter" clause as applying only at the moment of signing the application form - which would mean you could join, and the next day, join three more parties. That also would be too cute by half.

I'm well aware - and very happy - that many who support the NDP federally also support and work for QS provincially. But I guess I'm repeating myself: That's a clear violation of the constitution.

 

gadar

Unionist wrote:

 They are one and the same.

That is my understanding as well.

Keeping that in mind, isnt then the Alberta group of NDP pulling against its parent organization? 

Unionist

Ousted NDP MP Erin Weir says he plans to seek his party’s nomination again

Quote:
“The real question is what Mr. Singh intends," Mr. Weir said in a phone interview from Ottawa. "Will he ignore more than 2,000 NDP members in Regina–Lewvan and appoint his own candidate?” [...]

Mr. Weir also denounced Mr. Singh’s comments this week dismissing a letter signed by more than five-dozen former Saskatchewan NDP MLAs and MPs in support of Mr. Weir. The NDP Leader suggested he would not be intimidated by people of “privilege.”

“I find it disappointing Mr. Singh has tried to dismiss 67 long-serving Saskatchewan NDP MPs and MLAs as ‘privileged’ rather than engaging with the substantial concerns they raised about the lack of due process and common sense they raised,” Mr. Weir said.

voice of the damned

gadar wrote:

Unionist wrote:

 They are one and the same.

That is my understanding as well.

Keeping that in mind, isnt then the Alberta group of NDP pulling against its parent organization? 

Well, I guess. But is this the very first time in history that a provincial NDP has disagreed with the federal NDP, or another provincial NDP, on a particular matter? (In the manner of, say, the Lougheed-Davis-Clark non-love triangle during the 80s "Energy Wars")

Also, is the federal party actually constituted as a "parent organization" vis-a-vis the provincial parties? Do the latter have some obligation to align their policies with the former, but not vice-versa? (Sincere question)  

 

Notalib

Unionist wrote:

Ousted NDP MP Erin Weir says he plans to seek his party’s nomination again

Quote:
“The real question is what Mr. Singh intends," Mr. Weir said in a phone interview from Ottawa. "Will he ignore more than 2,000 NDP members in Regina–Lewvan and appoint his own candidate?” [...]

Mr. Weir also denounced Mr. Singh’s comments this week dismissing a letter signed by more than five-dozen former Saskatchewan NDP MLAs and MPs in support of Mr. Weir. The NDP Leader suggested he would not be intimidated by people of “privilege.”

“I find it disappointing Mr. Singh has tried to dismiss 67 long-serving Saskatchewan NDP MPs and MLAs as ‘privileged’ rather than engaging with the substantial concerns they raised about the lack of due process and common sense they raised,” Mr. Weir said.

Stunning arrogance on display..... but par for the course for Steelworkers.

This list will only grown, Weir will not be an NDP candidate, and he his cohorts will continue to destroy the party's electoral potential. All so predictable.

https://www.facebook.com/notes/vicky-smallman/a-thank-you-for-ndp-leader...

brookmere

voice of the damned wrote:
Also, is the federal party actually constituted as a "parent organization" vis-a-vis the provincial parties? Do the latter have some obligation to align their policies with the former, but not vice-versa? (Sincere question)  

No. Note "principles" not "policies".

Each province of Canada shall have a fully autonomous provincial Party, provided its constitution and principles are not in conflict with those of the Federal Party.[/quote]

http://xfer.ndp.ca/2013/constitution/2013_CONSTITUTION_E.pdf

josh

Unionist wrote:

Ousted NDP MP Erin Weir says he plans to seek his party’s nomination again

Quote:
“The real question is what Mr. Singh intends," Mr. Weir said in a phone interview from Ottawa. "Will he ignore more than 2,000 NDP members in Regina–Lewvan and appoint his own candidate?” [...]

Mr. Weir also denounced Mr. Singh’s comments this week dismissing a letter signed by more than five-dozen former Saskatchewan NDP MLAs and MPs in support of Mr. Weir. The NDP Leader suggested he would not be intimidated by people of “privilege.”

“I find it disappointing Mr. Singh has tried to dismiss 67 long-serving Saskatchewan NDP MPs and MLAs as ‘privileged’ rather than engaging with the substantial concerns they raised about the lack of due process and common sense they raised,” Mr. Weir said.

Good for Weir.  Keep fighting.

voice of the damned

brookmere wrote:

voice of the damned wrote:
Also, is the federal party actually constituted as a "parent organization" vis-a-vis the provincial parties? Do the latter have some obligation to align their policies with the former, but not vice-versa? (Sincere question)  

No. Note "principles" not "policies".

Each province of Canada shall have a fully autonomous provincial Party, provided its constitution and principles are not in conflict with those of the Federal Party.

http://xfer.ndp.ca/2013/constitution/2013_CONSTITUTION_E.pdf

[/quote]

Thanks.

So, basically, they can have different or even contradictory policies from the federal party, as long as their stated principles are the same. That would seem to allow quite a bit of leeway.

robbie_dee

Notalib wrote:

Stunning arrogance on display..... but par for the course for Steelworkers.

So Steelworkers are no longer welcome in the NDP either?

Unionist

Notalib wrote:
 

Stunning arrogance on display..... but par for the course for Steelworkers.

Why are you doing on babble? Have you taken a moment to read our policy?

Quote:
This list will only grown, Weir will not be an NDP candidate, and he his cohorts will continue to destroy the party's electoral potential. All so predictable.

Such a powerful figure, Erin Weir. Destroying the NDP's electoral potential from coast to coast. Have you ever considered stand-up comedy?

Quote:
https://www.facebook.com/notes/vicky-smallman/a-thank-you-for-ndp-leader...

I know some of the women who signed this. It's sad that this issue has created such division and confusion, but that lies at the feet of Mr. Singh and his handlers. Here's a very telling excerpt from Vicky Smallman's statement:

Vicky Smallman wrote:
Nobody is entitled to differential treatment because they have been around a while or have special connections. Using intimidation to get what you want isn’t appropriate. Period.

If anyone can figure out what this has to do with the Erin Weir story, please let me know. People are just jumping up and down and getting excited.

robbie_dee

Jagmeet Singh says he won’t apologize for ‘privilege’ comment (Globe and Mail)

Quote:

NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh says he will not apologize for dismissing critics of his handling of the Erin Weir case as “privileged,” despite a call for him to do so from the provincial NDP Leader in Saskatchewan.

Ryan Meili said the federal NDP Leader’s pointed comments earlier this week, focused on Saskatchewan members of the party, were unfortunate and out of line as an attack on members of the NDP political family.

“I disagree with those comments and I think that he should address that and speak more respectfully to the members," Mr. Meili said in a phone interview on Thursday from Saskatoon.

***

I don’t believe that’s a group of privileged people," Mr. Meili said. "He may disagree and he has every right to disagree with the points they are bringing forward, but he shouldn’t dismiss them out of hand.”

But Mr. Singh said on Thursday he would not apologize. Of his critics, he told reporters they are “using a position of privilege to do good work for the community,” but added, "to use that position to try to have a change of position when it comes to harassment is not going to happen.”

josh

. . . .  he said while showing off one of his thousand dollar suits.   He added, "my suit may be privilged, but I'm not."

Unionist

josh wrote:

. . . .  he said while showing off one of his thousand dollar suits.   He added, "my suit may be privilged, but I'm not."

LOL!

How does the saying go? "If the suit fits..."

He's getting some very bad advice from some very self-important back-room people. I blame him of course for following it. But we shouldn't kid ourselves. He amply reflects the sad state of most NDP sections and governments in recent decades - more afraid of the rich and the mainstream media than of the people whose interests it proclaims and then betrays.

Unionist

From Erin Weir's Facebook post today:

Quote:

Through various media yesterday, I reiterated my apology to those who felt uncomfortable. Their feelings are valid. I have completed sensitivity training to help me be more attentive to non-verbal cues.

I have also reflected on how we can have frank debates, which are fundamentally important in politics, in ways that do not make anyone uncomfortable.

It’s a dilemma. If you argue in front of other people, someone might feel embarrassed. If you argue alone with someone, they might feel intimidated.

Some good advice from my training was to just say to the other person that we need to hash some things out and ask where they want to have the discussion. That’s one example of how I will strive to avoid misunderstandings in future.

robbie_dee

Quote:

Weir Seeks to Appeal Investigation

posted by Erin Weir on September 19, 2018

September 19th, 2018

Regina–Lewvan MP Erin Weir is requesting an external appeal of Jagmeet Singh’s harassment investigation based on its lack of due process.

“I have never wanted to prolong this situation by appealing or taking legal action,” said Weir. “Instead, I made a good faith effort to participate in the process set out by Mr. Singh, apologize to those who felt uncomfortable, and complete all the remedial actions discussed with me.”

In the past two weeks, Singh has repeatedly stated that the investigation’s findings of standing too close, talking too long and having an argument make Weir a threat to workplace safety. Meanwhile, many others have raised serious concerns about the investigation’s lack of due process and expansive interpretation of harassment.

“Having an outside authority such as the House of Commons’ Chief Human Resources Officer or the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal review the investigation process and report could resolve this controversy,” said Weir.

“Regardless of what an external appeal may determine, I apologize to those who felt uncomfortable and will be more attentive in future. What I do not accept is being expelled based on a single investigator’s discretion without an appeal.”

Backgrounder

Appeal Procedures

The Canadian Human Rights Act, the longstanding NDP staff collective agreement, and the NDP Policy on Discrimination, Harassment and Sexual Violence adopted earlier this year all provide appeal procedures.

Rather than using any of those processes, Singh’s office invented its own process to gather and investigate complaints against Weir. Its terms of reference directed the investigator to follow “the investigation process set out in sections 3.3.6, 3.3.7 and 3.3.8 of the House of Commons Policy on Preventing and Addressing Harassment.”

Singh’s office excluded the appeal procedure set out in sections 3.3.9, 3.3.10 and 3.3.11 as well as other due-process provisions of the House Policy. Weir was never notified of any opportunity to appeal.

Earlier this year, the Standing Committee on Procedure and House Affairs recommended expanding the appeal procedures in the Code of Conduct for Members of the House of Commons: Sexual Harassment. The NDP’s representative on the subcommittee, MP Sheila Malcolmson, supported this amendment as well as adding other due-process provisions such as a one-year limitation period.

In Weir’s case, all of the incidents investigated were from more than a year beforehand. No complaints were made under any of the above processes until after Singh had invited them through his special investigation.

Grounds for Appeal

Points for an external review to consider include:

1.) The investigation began by soliciting anonymous complaints. Singh’s office emailed all 250 federal NDP staff. Extensive national media coverage of Singh declaring that he would “believe survivors” and suspending Weir at the outset of a “harassment” investigation created a presumption of guilt and led people to retrospectively reinterpret past interactions with Weir through that lens.

2.) The complaints obtained were immediately escalated to a formal investigation. There was no opportunity for mediation, even after MPs Christine Moore and Weir jointly proposed it to Singh.

3.) The complaints were never presented in such a way that Weir could properly respond. The summary provided to him contained no names, cited years rather than specific dates, and did not mention specific locations for some complaints.

4.) Rather than evaluating each complaint separately on its own merits, the investigation report lumped complaints together. The “sexual harassment” finding was based not on upholding any particular complaint, but on concluding that Weir probably stood too close and talked too long because some people said so. The “harassment” finding was based on taking witness testimony from a rejected complaint and then using it to uphold a different complaint.

Conclusion

Over the years, several New Democratic MPs have crossed the floor or opted to sit as independents. But perhaps the only other New Democratic MP expelled from caucus by a federal leader was Manon Perreault, who was convicted of public mischief in 2015. A criminal conviction requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt (and could be appealed).

The investigator appointed by Singh found that, on a balance of probabilities, Weir engaged in conduct “on the less serious end of the harassment and sexual harassment spectrum.” If one investigator interprets complaints as probably reaching the lower end of a spectrum, another investigator examining the same complaints may well reach a different conclusion.

http://www.erinweir.com/appeal

Mobo2000

"There was no opportunity for mediation, even after MPs Christine Moore and Weir jointly proposed it to Singh."

This puts Moore's actions in somewhat of a better light for me.  

And this confirms that Weir never knew the identity of the complaintants, which is so unfair and absurd:

"The summary provided to him contained no names, cited years rather than specific dates, and did not mention specific locations for some complaints."

 

josh

Good.  Glad to see he's doing this.

6079_Smith_W

I had a conversation last weekend with someone who is a lot more familiar with this than I am, in particular some of the background, and why some people are having nothing to do with it. While I don't think it absolves the party of any of their fuckery, I no longer think it is quite so one sided. Sadly, it is a big dumpster fire with lots of problematic behaviour to go around.

Not going to get into it here, but suffice it to say some blank spots have been filled in for me that make this a bit more nuanced.

Unionist

I saw this! Good for Erin Weir, and good for the party, if it is interested in being "New" and "Democratic" that is.

NorthReport

Thanks for your voice of reason Smith amongst the maddening crowd of whirlwind comments here, the vast majority of which are just political gotcha comments, with little or no substance.

Weir fiasco causing NDP to face long-standing sexism in its ranks

Regardless of its public pronouncements. the NDP has also subscribed to the notion of "what goes on in the party stays in the party".

https://leaderpost.com/opinion/columnists/weir-fiasco-causing-ndp-to-fac...

6079_Smith_W

Well that's the thing - the accusations, and the narrative of the old guard against newer reformers in the party (which also came up in the spring) is only a cover for other things, though a number of people I know on FB seem to be framing it as that and nothing else.

Falling into battle lines like that is a sure recipe for repeating this down the road next time there is a similar crisis.

 

josh

6079_Smith_W wrote:

I had a conversation last weekend with someone who is a lot more familiar with this than I am, in particular some of the background, and why some people are having nothing to do with it. While I don't think it absolves the party of any of their fuckery, I no longer think it is quite so one sided. Sadly, it is a big dumpster fire with lots of problematic behaviour to go around.

Not going to get into it here, but suffice it to say some blank spots have been filled in for me that make this a bit more nuanced.

Without some specifics, it’s impossible to evaluate that nuance.

6079_Smith_W

I'm not asking you to. I'm just telling you that some of the gaps got filled in for me, and sadly, it doesn't vindicate anyone involved.

Unionist

I'm sitting here giving thanks, once again, to the workers' movement. No member of my union could ever be subject to discipline under the sort of secret star chamber process endured by Erin. And now Smith has confidential information. How lovely. I await the day when all the overlords like Singh and his gang are shown the door, and true transparency and rank-and-file control are instituted. Decades of experience with this party tell me that optimism is not warranted.

NorthReport

Quite the slew of comments here from primarily males who actually have one side, or little, or no information about what actually happened. 

Unionist

NorthReport wrote:

https://leaderpost.com/opinion/columnists/weir-fiasco-causing-ndp-to-fac...

Thanks for sharing this article, NorthReport. It does hit the nail on the head (my emphasis):

Quote:

What’s been lost amidst all this virtue-signalling and name calling over who’s a drawing room socialist and who isn’t, is the lack of a clear reason why Weir has been dumped.

That Singh’s office started its investigation after hearing about (but not directly receiving) third-party complaints, that it asked for complaints against Weir, that Weir seems to have apologized and went through training, and that the complaints investigated were described by Weir’s trainer as “on the ‘less serious’ end of the spectrum” only undercuts Singh’s rationale for giving Weir the boot.

Yet in his response to the 67 signatories, Singh offered the heavy implication that it’s his job to keep his office free of workplace harassment. Doesn’t such a charge require some evidence that harassment occurred?

Yes, Mr. Singh would do well to heed this advice. Give us an actual "clear reason why Weir has been dumped". Explain your "rationale for giving Weir the boot". Provide us with "some evidence that harassment occurred".

Well put. But Singh appears to be a puppet of the nameless handlers behind the scenes. He's doubling down. It would be interesting if Erin Weir's principled fightback is what finally brings this Singh character down. I'm making popcorn.

6079_Smith_W

Probably no more confidential than the musing about autism that has been up and down this thread. But like that, it isn't the sort of thing I feel comfortable tossing around here.  That is why I didn't weigh in on that speculation either.

And in fact, Unionist, it is almost all stuff which has been mentioned already in this thread, not really a big secret. It has already been established that he had differences with some in the party. But it is a personal take from several people I know who know those involved better than I do, and whose opinion I trust. And it also happens to fill in those gaps I already felt were there.

As I also said, it doesn't change my opinion at all of what the party did. That remains a complete fuckup, IMO. Blaming it on "the privileged" just digs it in further.

 

robbie_dee

X

Mr. Magoo

Quote:
Probably no more confidential than the musing about autism that has been up and down this thread.

If you think that musing was kind of silly, and pointless, I would agree.  But there were no confidentiality issues about it.

quizzical

i am a woman and i am a woman who is xxx triggered by inappropriate sexual overtones, harrassment and assault.

i have issues with how Erin Weir has been treated and how it's been handled.

i have issues with northern report trying to frame this as it's all men in this thread trying to be "men's. step off NR on this front imv.

Coldwell Coldwell's picture

David Weir, Erin's father, provides a trenchant critique of criticisms of his son in a recent letter to the Regina Leader-Post:

https://leaderpost.com/opinion/letters/letter-macewens-arguments-regarding-erin-weir-disputed

For reference, here's the specific article his letter addresses:

https://leaderpost.com/opinion/columnists/weir-doesnt-appear-to-understand-impact-of-his-actions

Mr. Magoo

I honestly think that if Singh had said "OK, Erin, you watched that whole PowerPoint presentation on harrassment, you got 88/100 on the follow-up survey, you said sorry and you turned over a new leaf, so welcome back!" then we'd still have an Erin Weir thread.

Except it would be people -- hopefully different people -- asking whether a leopard can change its spots, whether "sensitivity training" is some kind of moral car wash, whether Weir has "friends in high places" and whether the NDP really believes victims or wanted to throw a brief sop to #metoo.

Personally, from everything I've read about this, it doesn't really sound like Weir is any kind of Weinstein-esque predator, and probably belongs in the same slot as some guy "manspreading" on the subway.  And I would totally agree that his treatment was kafkaesque, although not especially unusual these days, really.

But FWIW,  I don't see that the NDP had any really good way of coming out of this smelling like a rose.  Turf him and some people will take it out on you.  Welcome him back to the fold and others will take it out on you.  What option did Singh have that would please everyone?

Unionist

Mr. Magoo wrote:

What option did Singh have that would please everyone?

A fair and "normal" investigation, with appropriate conclusions. Instead of paying some character to run an "investigation" that I could easily have had an arbitrator laugh out of court if it happened at my workplace. That would have pleased everyone, whether they liked the outcome or not.

Once Singh opted for a kangaroo court out of sheer cowardice, and went fishing for complainants, with the accused not being allowed to know who the accusers were, and allowing one of the accusers to go public (anonymously) and not giving Weir any guidance as to how to reply... Singh screwed himself.

So Singh should either abjectly apologize to Weir and hope he comes back to caucus. Or more appropriately, Singh should quit and let someone wiser take on the role of leader. For whatever Singh is, he is not wise. Nor principled. Really really bad combination.

NDPP

A common enough combination especially among Canadian politicians. Prime ministerial even.

Mr. Magoo

Quote:
That would have pleased everyone, whether they liked the outcome or not.

???

I think that one man's "fair and normal investigation with appropriate conclusions" is another's "rigged" process, with "predictable" outcomes.

Again, I'm not even disagreeing with regard to whether or not standing too close to someone is more heinous than "manspreading" -- I'm only suggesting that if that were the outcome, this would still be contentious and there would still be plenty of folk suggesting that something in the milk ain't clean.  I really don't think that the process is the problem, the outcome is, and the outcome is the problem because half of the people won't be satisfied by one outcome and half the people won't be satisfied by the other.  Unless there's a way to arrive at both outcomes at once, I don't think there's any way that Singh could have made this a win-win.

Notalib

NDP members who worked on Regina MP Erin Weir’s 2015 federal election campaign are now calling for his resignation.

In a petition circulating online, roughly 30 NDP volunteers, employees and constituents living in Weir’s Regina-Lewvan riding say they are “disgusted by Erin Weir’s behaviour.”

The letter attached to the petition describes the signatories as, “People who worked and volunteered with Erin Weir, and who donated our time and money to get him elected in Regina-Lewvan. We are people who currently live in or have lived in Saskatchewan, who are represented by Erin Weir as our Member of Parliament, and who are members of the provincial and/or federal branches of the NDP.”

Found here: https://leaderpost.com/news/politics/former-weir-volunteers-now-calling-...

Mr. Magoo

Quote:
In a petition circulating online, roughly 30 NDP volunteers, employees and constituents living in Weir’s Regina-Lewvan riding say they are “disgusted by Erin Weir’s behaviour.”

When something like this goes down, if only 30 people can be bothered to fill out an online form to grind their axe with you, that's actually pretty good.

I think the previous two "letters" -- from people whose names are known and whose involvement with the NDP is bona fide -- carries much more weight than something like this.

In a perfect world, I'd love to see each signator have to tell us, in their own words, what they thought the disgusting part was.  The talking too much?  Or the standing too close?

 

Notalib

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:
In a petition circulating online, roughly 30 NDP volunteers, employees and constituents living in Weir’s Regina-Lewvan riding say they are “disgusted by Erin Weir’s behaviour.”

When something like this goes down, if only 30 people can be bothered to fill out an online form to grind their axe with you, that's actually pretty good.

I think the previous two "letters" -- from people whose names are known and whose involvement with the NDP is bona fide -- carries much more weight than something like this.

In a perfect world, I'd love to see each signator have to tell us, in their own words, what they thought the disgusting part was.  The talking too much?  Or the standing too close?

 

Yeah, its not like a former staffer and campaign volunteers matter anyway right?

 

quizzical

i'd like to see the petition and the names on it.

and know just what they're disgusted about. 

 

Pages

Topic locked