NDP Convention

113 posts / 0 new
Last post
thanks
NDP Convention

 

so today i got a flyer from the NDP regarding their August Convention.

why was i expecting this?

mustabin when i remembered Gonzales' office was downhill from St. Clarens.

anyway, it looks like an awesome convention, with lots of energy and i'd love to go.

thing is i've already committedto a wedding on aug. 15. 

i'm helping out in the kitchen- should be fun!

really looking forward to it.

anwyw , just popped in to share that, hope its a good weekend for everyone.

Smile

Dana Larsen

Considering the deadline to register as a delegate was mid June, it is pretty bad if they only sent out the convention notice to be received in late June!

the grey

The deadline to register was not in mid-June.  That was just the early bird deadline.

Scott Piatkowski Scott Piatkowski's picture

And the early-bird deadline itself has been extended until July 15.

The notice promises special rates from VIA and accommodation starting at $38.00 a night.

Unfortunately, I can't make this one.

West Coast Greeny

Anything interesting going on at this convention, outside of the name change debate?

More importantly, will delegates be getting blitzed? I talked to some Liberals last winter who seemed to have an, erm, very good time. I swear a hangover was responsible for Dion's election.

Wilf Day

Scott Piatkowski wrote:
The notice promises special rates from VIA.

And they mean it. My round trip costs, at full rates, $594.30. Even with the senior's discount it costs $535.50. At the convention rate it cost me $297.15.

Dana Larsen

Does anyone know if the deadline to submit resolutions also been extended?

"End Prohibition" has a standing offer to help with the travel expenses of anyone going to convention who will help promote and support our resolution on drug policy reform.

Stockholm

I booked a roundtrip flight during a seat sale for $109 each way, plus taxes and I went on priceline.com and got a 4-star hotel for $70 US per night!

David Young

Stockholm wrote:

I booked a roundtrip flight during a seat sale for $109 each way, plus taxes and I went on priceline.com and got a 4-star hotel for $70 US per night!

If I may ask, Stockholm, which riding are you going to be representing as a delegate?

I'll try to meet you in person, as I'll be one of the delegates from South Shore St. Margaret's!

 

alisea

We must organize some sort of get-together for babblers and bloggers.

Wilf Day

alisea wrote:
We must organize some sort of get-together for babblers and bloggers.

Do I qualify?

alisea

But of course!

Mojoroad1

alisea wrote:

We must organize some sort of get-together for babblers and bloggers.

 

Agreed!

largeheartedboy

I'm down for a babbler get-together.

I'm sure there will also be a Tweetup at some point too.

Halifax has lots of great wtering holes downtown, which makes it a great convention location.

Dana Larsen

Quote:
Halifax has lots of great wtering holes downtown, which makes it a great convention location.

What about the tokers? Can any locals let us in on where delegates can go to safely enjoy some cannabis medication?

Wilf Day

Peggy Nash for President.

Quote:
Today Canadians are alarmed at seeing their jobs, their pensions and their financial security undermined by recklessness in the financial markets. Glaring gaps in our social safety net and lack of action on environmental solutions leave too many Canadians vulnerable. My parliamentary experience has taught me some key lessons about the importance of our Party. I know that Canada needs the New Democratic Party to be strong, credible and progressive, and we must organize and build like never before.

Prior to electoral politics, my life’s work has been in movement politics. As a senior representative of the CAW, I have led many rounds of collective bargaining and many workplace campaigns. My vision for Canada also draws on many years of work in movements for women, human rights, childcare, housing, environmental sustainability, culture and international justice. I believe that my concrete experience and networks in these movements can strengthen our Party.

As Canadians long for a vision of a better tomorrow, we need to focus on what unites us. I look forward in joining with you to build our common New Democratic vision for the future and for the good of all Canadians.

 

remind remind's picture

Goooooooooooooo Peggy!!!

ottawaobserver

To beat another diversity drum:  ce n'est pas en français.

Wilf Day

ottawaobserver wrote:
ce n'est pas en français.

C'est fausse.

Voici.

ottawaobserver

Excellente!  Je n'ai pas vu le lien entre les deux.

Corvin Russell Corvin Russell's picture

What is at stake in this convention? Is anything of political interest going to happen? Are there major issues to be discussed? Is the party going to take a controversial, leading position on anything? Why should anyone go who isn't getting their way paid by someone else?

Unionist

Corvin Russell wrote:

What is at stake in this convention? Is anything of political interest going to happen? Are there major issues to be discussed? Is the party going to take a controversial, leading position on anything? Why should anyone go who isn't getting their way paid by someone else?

Huh? You're asking substantive questions? You're asking about political content rather than marketing form? What kind of subversive element are you anyway???

PS to Wilf and ottawaobserver: It's not my native tongue, but I believe that when "c'est" is followed by an adjective, you use the masculine (c'est excellent, c'est faux) - although if you deliberately used the feminine, I can appreciate that improvement!

Dana Larsen

Quote:
What is at stake in this convention? Is anything of political interest going to happen? Are there major issues to be discussed? Is the party going to take a controversial, leading position on anything? Why should anyone go who isn't getting their way paid by someone else?

Has there been a list of proposed resolutions circulated?

It would be very helpful if there was a way that delegates and riding associations could find out all the resolutions before they went to convention.

Especially since the Resolution Prioritization panels are apparently happening before the call to order. Which means delegates will have virtually no time to familiarize themselves with the range of resolutions which have come to convention.

Big Daddy

Dana Larsen wrote:
Does anyone know if the deadline to submit resolutions also been extended? "End Prohibition" has a standing offer to help with the travel expenses of anyone going to convention who will help promote and support our resolution on drug policy reform.

 

How very... umm... democratic... I don't know who you are or what else you believe in but if you vote for our motions on dope we'll give you some money... yep, that's sure democracy at it's finest!

remind remind's picture
Dana Larsen

Remind, I followed that link but I couldn't find any actual list of resolutions, merely a list of resolution categories.

Quote:
yep, that's sure democracy at it's finest!

Yeah, how dare we organize and work together!

Many riding associations, unions, advocacy groups and others share resources and help fund their members and colleagues to get to conventions. What we're doing is no different.

Big Daddy, you seem to be against any drug policy reform. Are you an NDP member, and are you going to convention?

Fidel

Dana, if the NDP refused to add drug policy reform to their agenda, would you still support and vote for the NDP?

Big Daddy

Dana Larsen wrote:
Remind, I followed that link but I couldn't find any actual list of resolutions, merely a list of resolution categories.
Quote:
yep, that's sure democracy at it's finest!
Yeah, how dare we organize and work together! Many riding associations, unions, advocacy groups and others share resources and help fund their members and colleagues to get to conventions. What we're doing is no different. Big Daddy, you seem to be against any drug policy reform. Are you an NDP member, and are you going to convention?

 

So what other groups pay people to go to convention and vote for their resolutions.

 

Dana, I was a longtime NDP supporter even back when you were voting and working for the Marihuana Party.  I may go to convention, not sure.  If I vote for your resolution, will you give me some cash?  If I vote for an amended version of your resolution, will you give me some cash?  I would like to know.

Le T Le T's picture

Quote:
Dana, I was a longtime NDP supporter even back when you were voting and working for the Marihuana Party.  I may go to convention, not sure.  If I vote for your resolution, will you give me some cash?  If I vote for an amended version of your resolution, will you give me some cash?  I would like to know.

It's pretty clear that Dana said EndProhibition would "help with the travel expenses". Not everyone can aford to travel the country going to useless political pissups. If EndProhibition are helping their members attend they are infact contributing to the democratic process by increasing the accesibility of the event. But all you can do is say pot bad, Dana bad, and miss the fucking point. People like you are why people like me left the NDP back when Dana was working with a party that wasn't power hungry and affraid of taking on real issues.

sway

Have a look at this again maybe..........

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PYA5R4264Mg

 

 

What some say and what they do are very very different !!

 

I cant get into it here too much but I was shocked to find absolutely zero help from dana in qcity after all his promises in fact he slept through any  debate on the subject and his group thought the high light of the convention was getting kicked out of a restaurant miles down the road from the convention  just for smoking cannabis like kids.

 

Anyone wanna bet no cannabis resolutions get to the vote?

 

Maybe next time...eh?

 

After the Greens win seats with the issue ..eh?

 

Have fun in Halifax and do not worry as its got more BC Bud than BC infact.( more bars than gas stations too as I remember from my military days)

 

Big Daddy

Le T wrote:
People like you are why people like me left the NDP back when Dana was working with a party that wasn't power hungry and affraid of taking on real issues.

Thanks, because this clearly shows your intention which is to pass pot motions as opposed to building a larger movement that can effect positive changes for Canadians.  Here's what you should do and I don't say this lightly: leave.  Go away.  Find some other party to disrupt.  Maybe join the Liberals.  Or if you think that a substantial number of Canadians support Marihuana issues to the exclusion of all others, start up a Dope Party.  I do't say this lightly, because people here say that I should leave the NDP and it really pisses me off.  But in your case, it's appropriate.  Hasta luegos!

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Gee, i wonder who belongs in the NDP more? A campaigner for the decriminalization of pot, or someone who thinks Michael Ignatieff's [url=http://rabble.ca/comment/1038135/martin-dufresne-wrote-Big]"take on foreign policy is spot on in all aspects in my opinion"[/url]?

Big Daddy

I don't know but maybe if you talked to more than just social activists, you would have a more accurate answer.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Oh, good. On top of everything else, contempt for social activism!

Stockholm

All I know of Ignatieff's views on foreign policy is that he supports the invasion of Iraq and that he supports torture and that he is a neo-con. Most Conservative voters don't even go along with that - let alone NDP voters.

Dana Larsen

Quote:
Dana, if the NDP refused to add drug policy reform to their agenda, would you still support and vote for the NDP?

If this resolution doesn't pass I will still support and vote NDP. Yes of course!

But don't forget that the NDP has already got drug policy reform on our agenda. The federal NDP has already passed resolutions calling for marijuana to be "decriminalized" and for the whole issue of drug use to be treated as a health and social issue and not a legal and criminal one. And Libby Davies, the party's drug policy critic, often speaks of the failures of prohibition and the need for a system of regulated access and non-punitive drug policies.

However, I should add that I also strongly support getting our troops out of Afghanistan, and stopping the spread of GMO foods, and resisting unification with the USA, and stopping the corporate take-over, and I support human rights and social equality and democratic reform and public health care and worker's rights, and many other issues where I admire and support my party's stance and the NDP's work to make Canada and the world a better place.

Quote:
Dana, I was a longtime NDP supporter even back when you were voting and working for the Marihuana Party. I may go to convention, not sure. If I vote for your resolution, will you give me some cash? If I vote for an amended version of your resolution, will you give me some cash? I would like to know.

If you were serious I would say you should contact us to see what your needs and situation is and maybe we could help you to get to the convention. But you are not serious and so please don't do that.

Please note that the only people we're offering help to are NDP members who have already been approved as delegates by their riding associations. Probably it's going to be six or seven people, and they've all agreed to help work our table, (although at this point I don't think we're going to be allowed to have one.)

If you're not yet registered as a delegate I think it might be too late to go to convention anyways.

George Victor

 

Dana, I find your work abominable not because of the effect of marijuana in a world that seems to need some means of escape from the big existensial questions about survival, but because you take it before a polity that does not make the oh-so-refined evaluations of political commitment found here.

That makes you "the enemy" as much as any neo-con out to defeat the party and do damage to good people. And if you can't understand that, then your narcissism knows (to paraphrase Barby  Amiel) "no bounds."

KenS

At best, I'll say that's 'his opinion'.

But I don't know if that much credit is deserved for "the enemy", etc.

George Victor

 

Pee on the political effect, in effect.

Unionist

Big Daddy wrote:

I don't know but maybe if you talked to more than just social activists, you would have a more accurate answer.

NDP Strategist 1: Yeah, if we could only get rid of the social activists, and focus on those supporters who think the NDP should be Liberal Lite, we'd be doing well.

NDP Strategist 2: Isn't that what we're doing already?

Dana, I don't know how you persevere and keep your equanimity.

 

Stockholm

Unionist, you've got "Big Daddy" all wrong. He doesn't want the NDP to be Liberal Lite - he wants the NDP to be Reform Party Lite.

Dana Larsen

Quote:
Dana, I find your work abominable not because of the effect of marijuana in a world that seems to need some means of escape from the big existensial questions about survival, but because you take it before a polity that does not make the oh-so-refined evaluations of political commitment found here.
That makes you "the enemy" as much as any neo-con out to defeat the party and do damage to good people. And if you can't understand that, then your narcissism knows (to paraphrase Barby Amiel) "no bounds."

I actually don't understand what you are saying, but I'm not sure narcissism is the cause.

Does anyone else understand this? I honestly don't get what this means.

George, are you upset because I am bringing a drug policy resolution to the NDP convention? Or is it that if the NDP adopts this resolution he feels this will hurt the party politically?

More Canadians support marijuana and drug policy reform than currently vote NDP. So it seems that adopting these policies could lead to an increase in our vote support.

Unionist

I understand George to be saying that he doesn't have a problem with drug policy reform himself, but he doesn't think the rank and file of NDP delegates/members are as reform-minded as we are - and that therefore they will see you as just as much an enemy as if you were trying to get the party to go in the exact polar opposite (neocon) direction. George can tell you if I'm correct or not. I don't share that assessment myself, but you already know that.

 

George Victor

 

It is what the Cons would do with it in the broader context of an election, u. And other party members understand that.

And Dana, I'll modify that old Greek handle to say you are just interested in self,  not capable of assessing the larger party interest because of a preternatural preoccupation with pot.

And just observing the degree of self-interest out there in the populace at large, making it the party that accepts pot  would not cause people to turn on  to social reforms, or to give an ear to the threat of environmental collapse - a marvelous campaign opportunity if the NDP should ever get over its irrational position on nuclear energy. 

No, you represent a threat to electoral success.

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

George Victor wrote:

It is what the Cons would do with it in the broader context of an election, u. And other party members understand that.

Yes, where have we heard that old argument?

Let me see: Same-sex marriage, withdrawal from NATO, repeal of the abortion laws, nationalization of the banks - in fact, every major policy resolution advocating a distinctly progressive direction for the NDP!

Dana Larsen

Well George, I am not able to pass resolutions all by myself. Any ideas I might propose would have to be passed by riding associations, then at a convention by those in attendance. So it is the party which will decide what is right for it, and assess the larger party interest, not me.

However, a majority of Canadians support complete legalization of marijuana, usually it polls around 53-57% support. So it would seem that supporting legalized marijuana is actually a route to electoral success.

Quote:
making it the party that accepts pot would not cause people to turn on to social reforms,

Legalization of marijuana is a social reform.

At a time when both the Liberals and the Conservatives are backing mandatory minimums for minor drug offences, the NDP could differentiate itself from the other two parties, align itself with public and media opinion, and call for an end to the war on drugs. Indeed, the party has already done this repeatedly in Parliament over the past few months.

Quote:
or to give an ear to the threat of environmental collapse - a marvelous campaign opportunity if the NDP should ever get over its irrational position on nuclear energy.

Rather than nuclear energy and the risks and harms that come with it, we should recognize that increased cultivation of hemp is a necessary part of environmental protection and human survival. Using hemp for food, fuel, fibre and medicine is extremely important for our society both economically and environmentally. Legalization of marijuana would open up the hemp industry and allow it to achieve its full potential.

George Victor

 

As I say, Dana, if you can't empathize with the moms out keeping the stuff out of the schoolyard, you are very properly given a deaf ear by the party.  You just don't get it, mate. Kids come first. Humans are burped on the scene with a hell of a lot of learning/growing up to do. You make it difficult for parents who realize the pitfalls ahead for the junior types.

And we could grow hemp in a very controlled way, licensed growers with 100+ acre plantings, without the "legalization of marijuana", the "golden" stuff for home consumption. Just the ticket for those former tobacco farms, perhaps? Hell of a lot less harmful (take if from a former smoker of tobacco now puffing on an inhaler to overcome effects of COPD).

 

Dana Larsen

Quote:
As I say, Dana, if you can't empathize with the moms out keeping the stuff out of the schoolyard, you are very properly given a deaf ear by the party

Of course legalized marijuana would be much easier to keep away from children than the failed system of prohibition we have now. It is prohibition which endangers children. Underground dealers don't ask for ID... well most don't anyways.

Indeed, during alcohol prohibition, the rallying cry to END alcohol prohibition was "to protect our youth" and "save our children" from the harms of prohibition.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/files/repeal-prohibition-campaign-car.jpg

The idea that we need to put adults in jail for something we don't want kids to do is nonsensical. We don't want our young children to have sex, drive cars, or drink alcohol, but we don't put adults in jail for doing those things.

lombar

George Victor wrote:

 

As I say, Dana, if you can't empathize with the moms out keeping the stuff out of the schoolyard, you are very properly given a deaf ear by the party.  You just don't get it, mate. Kids come first. Humans are burped on the scene with a hell of a lot of learning/growing up to do. You make it difficult for parents who realize the pitfalls ahead for the junior types.

And we could grow hemp in a very controlled way, licensed growers with 100+ acre plantings, without the "legalization of marijuana", the "golden" stuff for home consumption. Just the ticket for those former tobacco farms, perhaps? Hell of a lot less harmful (take if from a former smoker of tobacco now puffing on an inhaler to overcome effects of COPD).

 

 

Even the dippers have a punishment fetish for cannabis users. Sadly, the status quo does not prevent kids from aquiring drugs. It may put them in prison for drugs, prisons that still have drugs in them. Some even harbour some fantasy notion that prohibition protects the public. The schoolyards are not awash with liquor are they? Using this fantasy notion to justify imprisoning adults for cannabis must be rooted in prejudice. So you are basically unwilling to let your kids make their own choices about drugs without threatening to destroy their lives should they choose unwisely. Further you would then entrust them to be 'corrected' by a penal system that would put them in far more danger than smoking any pot.

George Victor

 

You make my point Lombar.

The little ones should be protected from exposure to pot, racist thought and poverty. All good, social democratic goals.

Cop out on your own adult time, should you "choose unwisely", as you put it  in  your grownup's  wisdom. Don't leave it to a child to choose. That is the height of irresponsible nonsense.

Dana Larsen

As usual, the pot discussion is taking over the main topic of the thread. I would have thought this conversation better suited to one of the threads I started specifically about the cannabis/drug policy resolution...

Quote:
The little ones should be protected from exposure to pot, racist thought and poverty. All good, social democratic goals.

Actually, more youth should be using cannabis!

This might sound like a very controversial statement, but considering that we currently dose many of our children with Ritalin, Prozac and dozens of other pharmaceutical drugs which are known to be harmful and dangerous, wouldn't it be better for them to be using cannabis-based medicines, which are safe, cheap and effective?

For instance, cannabis is an excellent treatment for ADHD in many cases. The best modes of ingestion in these cases is usually a tincture, a capsule or a food product. Using cannabis extracts to treat ADHD is generally safer and more effective.

At our medicinal cannabis dispensary, we sell marijuana products to young people, as long as they meet the medical necessity requirement we demand of all our clients, and also they must have parental permission.

If we really cared about the health and welfare of our children, we would seek to protect them from the real killers: sugar, caffeine and fatty foods.

Quote:
Don't leave it to a child to choose.

But of course our current laws don't leave it up to the parent to choose either.

If a parent chooses to share alcohol in their own home with their teenaged children they are breaking no law. But if a parent chooses to share marijuana in their own home with their teenaged children they could be imprisoned and have their children taken away.

Pages

Topic locked