Where's Layton today?

46 posts / 0 new
Last post
MUN Prof. MUN Prof.'s picture
Where's Layton today?

I understand that Jack Layton is in Cole Harbour today with Sidney Crosby and Lord Stanley's Cup.

MUN Prof. MUN Prof.'s picture

Halifax:

Layton is expected to arrive in Halifax today to meet with Premier Darrell Dexter and tour some of the province’s ridings before attending the federal NDP convention this Friday at the World Trade and Convention Centre in the downtown core. Ridings Layton plans to see leading up to this weekend's convention include Chester-St Margaret’s and Lunenburg.

Ken Burch

When did the NDP win the Stanley Cup?

Pogo Pogo's picture

They didn't win it per se, but formed an inovative coalition with the NHL Players Union and snuck the cup away from the NHL management.  Many complain that they have no right to the cup and it divides along party lines.

NDPP

Some observations on Jack Layton and the NDP posted on Rabble's frontpage by Judy Rebick worth a read:

Is the Party Over?

http://www.rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/judes/2009/08/party-over

"the [CBC] guest host asked me why wasn't going to the NDP convention. I've kind of given up on the NDP. Frankly it didn't even occur to me to go. I have been involved in efforts to change the NDP since the 1980s, in Ontario and with a few exceptions it has been almost impossible..."

janfromthebruce

thanks Judy for the blast off leading into the convention and perhaps a fall election.

melovesproles

Good article on the post-activist NDP.  Jack Layton took Jeffrey Simpson's advice after all, anyone think there is a glimmer of a chance he'll say anything nice about the party?

Stockholm

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

gunder

Brilliant article, and a breath of freah air to counter the rather insular and foreboding feeling heading into the weekend.  I voted for Jack partially on the strength of the NPI "feel" he adopted.  While I'm not as despirited as some are (I confess I didn't fully understand what it was all about in 2003), there is a lot of unfinished business, to say the very least.

 

The current achillies heel of the NDP (if we can narrow it down), is our mind-bending inability to expand on our base.  Not cater to it, not reach beyond it, but actually put some roots down and display real solidarity with other segments of the progressive movement.  Not to say the party doesn't want them to succeed,  but it seems unable to establish real, lasting connections any more.    I think that is the best thing about opposing the Afghan mission - we really have grown the peace movement in Canada.  I don't see why we can't use the same strategy in other policy areas.  Maybe we are and I'm just ignorant, I don't know.

 

  I refuse to join another knee-jerk consumer protection-y facebook group until we make a concerted effort to fight more closely with our allies on the ground.  The flipside of that coin is that NDPers can't be shy about their political affiliation all the time in community work - it might nake some people uncomfortable, but too bad.  The ones who really want to get things done will come around, at least in the short term.  One thing that absolutely must be said in favour of Jack Layton's leadership *among many others; I'm not putting him down at all) is that he knows how to pull in the best candidates to build a riding. The party will continue to make gains from that, and we're indebted to the current leadership for it.  

But that's just a start.  Paul Dewar is definitely one of a handful of "leadership material" in the current caucus.  He, Nathan Cullen, Niki Ashton and a few other people are cause for optimism, certainly enough for me to keep on going into the foreseeable future.  I have to remain hopeful that the kind of big-tent, solid left party the NPI proposed will exist someday soon (those fateful words...) and it will be some pernutation or outgrowth of the NDP as we know it.

gunder

Stockholm wrote:

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

 

Yeah, that Judy Rebick, what a joke! She's obviously just a crazy Socialist goon who likes to hear herself talk! God knows she's never contributed anything constructive  to the womens' movement...

 

Stockholm, I admire a party stalwart more than most (probably because I am one) but, man, do you read yourself sometimes?Tongue out

sachinseth sachinseth's picture

saw jackie yesterday at the taste of the danforth!

V. Jara

I often find Judy Rebick's comments mildly foolish, but I agree with her point about the NDP needing to be open to more ideas from its membership and to be a party that actually fosters and encourages discussion of new ideas as opposed to stifling them. I don't understand why the party would not be more willing to take/hear suggestions for improvement from its membership. If people are members of the NDP, they are already fairly committed to the cause, so there should be no problem there. Some of the most successful left-wing movements have also succeeded through broad-based mass consultations, like the ANC in South Africa's (prior to their banning) wide spread consultations on a new vision for the country. It would be really nice for a change if in the next NDP fundraiser mailing, the party were to ask members how they think the party could be improved. They could use the same letter to ask for money to help them review and implement some of the best ideas submitted. I suspect they would get a lot of good suggestions that they had not thought of before and maybe some people that don't normally donate money (or generally donate less) would do so. That same approach could be adapted to other interactions with the party base and the public- in fact, this is what Layton was briefly doing (whether he realised it or not) at the beginning of his leadership through things like public consultations on the federal budget. One of the problems with the public consultations on the federal budget could potentially be I think (although the idea was still a good and I believe successful one) that the public consultation question might have been too constrained or too specific. A better question might be something like, "what could (we as Canadians or) the Canadian government do to make life better for you and your family?" I would love to hear the answers that most members of the public would give to that question. We would live in a better country if it was asked and acted upon on a daily basis. Now back to my fantasy land of starry eyed idealism...

Pogo Pogo's picture

gunder wrote:

Stockholm wrote:

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

 

Yeah, that Judy Rebick, what a joke! She's obviously just a crazy Socialist goon who likes to hear herself talk! God knows she's never contributed anything constructive  to the womens' movement...

 

Stockholm, I admire a party stalwart more than most (probably because I am one) but, man, do you read yourself sometimes?Tongue out

Like JR, Ralph Nader has a long list of accomplishments as an activist.  They both also have few successes in electoral politics.

Stockholm

I guess the issue is that the NDP is a political party and for parties to win seats and win elections, they need to have a certain level of professionalism etc... how do you think people like Gary Doer and Darrel Dexter win elections? (hint: it isn't by mobilizing a "children's crusade" of people wearing mismatched socks who attended an anti-globalization rally 10 years ago).

melovesproles

Quote:
Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

So Stockholm, an Ontario NDPer is giving lectures on what it takes to win in politics.  I guess you might have tasted success fleetingly under the turncoat Rae, its not difficult to picture you at that time, berating the base for getting uppity, "Who cares what the whiners who voted for us say, we can do whatever we want, where are they gonna go?"

Anyways, nice straw man, I get the feeling you didn't listen to the Current panel or read the article, I don't hear Judy Rebick mention Nader much at all, she seems pretty enamoured with the Obama campaign whenever I tune in.  She mentions that the NDP hasn't looked at the Obama campaign's successes and still doesn't get it when it comes to motivating youth and minority voters.  Which is pretty spot on.  Dewar comes off pretty well in the interview.

Stockholm

I listened to the interview and what Dewar was pointing out is that the NDP has in fact done a lot of what Rebick is asking for and that on top of that they have been making all these overtures to the Obama camp to try to learn from them etc... but its always damned if you do and damned if you don't. Listening to Judy Rebick its like she's saying why can't the NDP run a campaign like Obama's campaign - but then  she and her ilk also don't like it when the NDP invites OBama's top stratgeists to help the NDP do exactly that.

There are obviously lessons to be learned from Obama, but he was also very much in the right place at the right time. First of all he had a campaign budget of something like half a billion dollars, he operates in a political culture where you have three networks that bfroadcats political news 24/7 and where politics is an off-shoot of showbiz AND you had a ridiculously unpopular incumbent President, a war that is a disaster, an economic meltdown etc... We just don't have all those factors in Canada. If Obama had run in 2000, there would never have been nearly the same exitement about his candidacy. For all the talk about outreach to youth and minority voters - the turn out among those groups was only slightly higher than it was in 2004 and of course in Canada we don't have nearly as large a minority population as the US has in the first place.

"She mentions that the NDP hasn't looked at the Obama campaign's successes and still doesn't get it when it comes to motivating youth and minority voters."

This is simply false, the NDP has been looking VERY closely at what the Obama campaign did and the fact they are having the artchitects of that campaign  address the convention speaks volumes. With regard to minority and youth voters - it would be a lot easier to motivate them if George W. Bush was running Canada - but unfortunately, most people are just mildly irritated and/or indifferent to Harper - You look at polls that ask people about their attitudes towards him and only about 15% "strongly disapprove" of him - though I guess that if your whole life is lived in some totally unrepresentative far left sub-sub-culture you might assume that EVERYONE hates him.

gunder

Stockholm wrote:

I guess the issue is that the NDP is a political party and for parties to win seats and win elections, they need to have a certain level of professionalism etc... how do you think people like Gary Doer and Darrel Dexter win elections? (hint: it isn't by mobilizing a "children's crusade" of people wearing mismatched socks who attended an anti-globalization rally 10 years ago).

My question would be, "why can't we have a party that is both activist AND professional?"  Certainly, you're right some of the time: The more hardline sections  freak out when the party tries to update its image or broaden its appeal in any way, with totally counterproductive results .  But some of the time  the central party loses focus too easily, lags behind the membership at large (Lebanon/Gaza, anyone?) and sets themselves up for these banal confrontations, as the whole name change exercise demonstrates.

NDPP

Where is Layton's NDP on the War in Afghanistan?

http://www.rabble.ca/news/2009/08/where-laytons-ndp-war-afghanistan

'And now we face increasing NATO pressure to extend the mission beyond 2011. From that time when the NDP leader was loudly demanding "troops out now" he has shifted to his current weak stand. It is truly dismaying.'

Bookish Agrarian

Obama's success was very much about convinicing 'middle America' he represented change in terms of economic policy and by giving them something to believe in.  It was not an appeal to big ideas but to several simple initiatives.

Every time New Democrats try to do this some fringe element claims the NDP is selling out.  Clearly there are those on the left who want a talk shop, not a successful politicial party. 

melovesproles

Quote:
Obama's success was very much about convinicing 'middle America' he represented change in terms of economic policy and by giving them something to believe in.  It was not an appeal to big ideas but to several simple initiatives.

I don't think that is true.  The bailout, the most significant economic issue during the election, was championed by Bush and Obama.  He benefited somewhat by his association with Clinton and nostalgia for the 90s but Obama never would have been the Democratic candidate based on his economic expertise or vision.  He took some principled stands on foreign policy(Out of Iraq, shut down Guantanamo, diplomacy with Cuba and Iran), alot of which he has since jettisoned but to say that this wasn't crucial to his message of 'hope' is revisionist.  Of the Americans I know there was a lot more to their complete disillusionment with their country than simply economic policy.  If Obama had had the same economic policy but parroted Kerry on foreign policy then you would not have seen the same mass movement support. 

There is a serious vaccuum when it comes to a progressive Canadian foreign policy right now and facing off against Harper and Ignatieff should be like shooting fish in a barrel for a competent left of centre party that isn't completely risk averse. 

 

MUN Prof. MUN Prof.'s picture

This thread has been thoroughly hijacked, so I'll play along just for fun.

If Rebick is satisfied with yelling at the House of Commons through a megaphone that's fine with me. Go ahead and yell. Single issue zealotry is not exactly a sound basis for a successful political movement.

The federal party has been doing good work organizing and getting the ground game together since Layton was elected leader, and the growing seat count is good evidence of that. It's very clear that there are a few self-aggrandizing personalities about who are upset that they are unable to continue to influence the party apparatus over and above the will of the party membership.

It's no secret that many party staff and many more activists are not of the same generation as those who have been wandering in and out of the party for the past 30-40 years as it has suited them. I get a sense that Rebick and Caplan and others would rather that the more youthful among us take a seat over at the kiddie table, do what they are told, and let the "adults" make the same mistakes over and over.

 

Bookish Agrarian

melovesproles wrote:

Quote:
Obama's success was very much about convinicing 'middle America' he represented change in terms of economic policy and by giving them something to believe in.  It was not an appeal to big ideas but to several simple initiatives.

I don't think that is true.  The bailout, the most significant economic issue during the election, was championed by Bush and Obama.  He benefited somewhat by his association with Clinton and nostalgia for the 90s but Obama never would have been the Democratic candidate based on his economic expertise or vision.  He took some principled stands on foreign policy(Out of Iraq, shut down Guantanamo, diplomacy with Cuba and Iran), alot of which he has since jettisoned but to say that this wasn't crucial to his message of 'hope' is revisionist.  Of the Americans I know there was a lot more to their complete disillusionment with their country than simply economic policy.  If Obama had had the same economic policy but parroted Kerry on foreign policy then you would not have seen the same mass movement support. 

There is a serious vaccuum when it comes to a progressive Canadian foreign policy right now and facing off against Harper and Ignatieff should be like shooting fish in a barrel for a competent left of centre party that isn't completely risk averse. 

 

I was talking about the election, not the primaries and I was basing it on actual exit polling data.

Oppo-Guy

I agree with MUN Prof.  Both on the hijacking and that the party has been making some amazing strides under Layton.

You can't sell old ideas as new ones.  Yet that's what Rebick and a handful of likeminded people are proposing.  They expect that a party operating on the margins with ideas that can be easily marginalized is all that Canadians need.  They are wrong.  Just ask the Bloc Quebecois.

If the NDP is a good idea with 12 seats then it has to be a good idea with 172 seats.  Only being professional party with modern structures, aparatus and approach will get us there. 

It is a mistake to equate modernization with being staid.

genstrike

Oppo-Guy wrote:
You can't sell old ideas as new ones.  Yet that's what Rebick and a handful of likeminded people are proposing.  They expect that a party operating on the margins with ideas that can be easily marginalized is all that Canadians need.  They are wrong.  Just ask the Bloc Quebecois.

Last I checked, the BQ was the most popular party and won the most seats in Quebec.

kropotkin1951

If Jack's Way works so well where is his success?  A plurality of Canadians have always wanted liberal governments in all parts of the country. The Manitoba NDP et al give those people what they want and they have electoral success. Why should socialists and social democrats join the NDP nationally if it only wants to become a new liberal party.  Why not just join the existing liberal party like Ujhal and Bob have done? If electoral success is the goal then why have a third party at all? 

If the electoral "left" refuses to even talk about progressive ideas then how is that helpful to anyone who sees our society and believes it requires significant structural change not mere tinkering at the edges.  The centrists in the NDP are the same as my liberal friends who want my vote and support because they aren't as bad as the Harperites.  

MUN Prof. MUN Prof.'s picture

The NDP doesn't refuse to talk about progressive ideas. Here are a handful of the motions set for discussion this week:

1-01-09 Ensuring Credit Card Fairness
1-02-09 Support for the Fishery
1-04-09 Guaranteeing Loans in Forestry Sector
1-07-09 Support for the Family Farm
1-08-09 Fairness and Balance in Monetary Policy
1-10-09 Support for High Speed, Rural and Northern Rail
1-11-09 Creation of Jobs Commissioner
1-12-09 Encouraging Social Enterprises
1-14-09 Support for Sustainable Transportation
1-15-09 Protection for Canadian Wheat Board
1-17-09 Protection of Wild Salmon
1-18-09 Transparent Oversight of Foreign Ownership
1-19-09 Support for Shorterned Work Week
1-20-09 Increasing the Northern Residents Tax Deduction
1-21-09 Energy Policy
1-22-09 Opposing the Outsourcing of Telecommunications
1-25-09 Making Income Splitting for Seniors more Progressive
1-26-09 Halting Public Private Partnerships
1-28-09 Support to Municipalities for Transit
1-29-09 Restrictions on Captive Supply of Livestock
1-30-09 Democratic Management of Banks & Insurance Companies
1-31-09 Guaranteeing Domestic Supply and Management of Energy
1-32-09 Local and Worker Control in Auto Industry
1-33-09 Democratic Management of Banks & Inurance Companies
1-36-09 Support for High Speed Rail
1-39-09 Support for 'Buy Canada' Provisions
1-40-09 Acquiring Controlling Interest in Energy Industry
1-41-09 Convening of National Forestry Summit
1-42-09 Protecting Canadians through Public Research
1-46-09 Establishing Marine Protected Areas
1-48-09 Limiting Monopolies and Cartels
1-50-09 Ensuring Sustainable Transportation
1-53-09 Promoting Collective Bargaining
1-56-09 Promoting Sustainable Democratic Economies
1-57-09 Support for Strategic Economic Sectors
1-58-09 Strategy for Economic Recovery
1-59-09 Measures to Save Manufacturing Jobs
1-62-09 Halting Genetically Modified Wheat
1-65-09 Creation of Telecommunications Infrastructure
1-67-09 Ensuring A Progressive and Fair Taxation System
1-69-09 Support for Product Labelling
1-77-09 Halting Expansion of Nuclear Power
1-78-09 Investing in Infrastructure
2-03-09 Establishing Sustainable Water Policy in Canada
2-04-09 Supporting Urban Density to Combat Climate Change
2-05-09 Ensuring Energy Security for Canadians
2-06-09 Establishing Targets for the Production of Clean Fuel Vehicles
2-14-09 Directing Infrastructure Funding to Transit and Energy Efficiency
2-20-09 Protecting the Environment for the Common Good
2-26-09 Building Support for a Moratorium on Tar Sands Development
2-35-09 Reaffirming Support for a Ban on Bulk Water Exports
2-39-09 Updating Climate Change Action Strategy
3-08-09 Support the Creation of a Poverty Reduction Act
3-13-09 Support for Due Process and the Abolition of
3-16-09 Support to Increase Canadians Pension Plan Benefits
3-20-09 Non-Criminal Alternatives to Prohibition of Psychoactive Substances
3-22-09 Improving Health & Safety Provisions in Canada Labour Code
and so on . . .

Oppo-Guy

kropotkin1951 asks  "If Jack's Way works so well where is his success?"

Electorial / Party Success:

2004: 1 million new NDP voters.

2004: Secured a multi-million dollar Ottawa office building so the party would never be denied bank loans to finance future elections.

2006: 1.5 million new NDP voters.

2008: The second best result in the history of the party: 37 seats and 18% of the vote in a five party race, including the party's first seats in Quebec and Alberta in 20 years.

2008: $5,412,940 in annual fundraising - the highest for the NDP since union / corporate donations were banned.

Policy / Legislative Success:

Pressed Harper to issue a formal apology to First Nations residential school survivors.

Ensured that the Conservatives' failed "Clean Air Act" was sent to an all-party committee for a complete re-write.

Rewrote the 2005 federal budget to put $4.5 billion onto the priorities of ordinary people, including climate change, transit, housing and education.

Secured all party support to pass the NDP's Seniors Charter in the House of Commons.

Secured passage of the NDP's Veterans Charter in the House of Commons, despite opposition from the governing Conservatives.

Negotiated with the other party leaders to pass in one day legislation to modernize veterans' benefits.

Made the NDP's "Worker's First Bill" law so that employees' wages would be protected in the event of employer bankruptcy.

Showed leadership as the first party leader to call for an end to Canada's combat role in Afghanistan.

There's just a few of his successes.  If anyone wants to pull a Bob or Ujjahl by joining, or for that matter creating their own Liberal Party, they are welcome to do so.  But let's stick to the facts, 'kay?  Becasue that is clearly not what Layton and the NDP have been doing.

Michelle

MUN Prof. wrote:

This thread has been thoroughly hijacked,

I agree, but I think an interesting discussion has broken out.  I wonder what you'd think of me changing the thread title for this thread, and starting a new one with your original title, and I'll try to keep a better eye on it so that drift doesn't happen in it?

Would that work for you?  Because I think your original thread subject was interesting, but so is the drift. :)

Michelle

P.S. Any suggestions for a new thread title for this thread that would capture the discussion that has broken out? 

josh

Where's the NDP today?

Ken Burch

Where's This Thread Today?

NorthReport

Well Jack was in Mahone Bay yesterday, As for today, not sure.

Seniors in dire straits


Recession puts strain on food banks, federal NDP leader told

 

Mr. Layton said some of the issues he's hearing about as he speaks to seniors across Canada include the protection of pensions, particularly with companies going bankrupt, as well as the need for a revamped Canada Pension Plan and affordable housing for seniors.

The NDP leader had planned to speak Tuesday morning in Hubbards but was told by organizers of a seniors picnic in the community centre that he couldn't give a speech because it was a nonpartisan event. Mr. Layton was, however, allowed to take the microphone for a few minutes to explain why he was there and then chat with seniors.

 

 

http://thechronicleherald.ca/NovaScotia/1137081.html

Ken Burch

Could we give the thread premise the "Where's Waldo?" treatment and actually create children's books where you try to find Jack Layton in a very large crowd?

Jingles

Quote:
Showed leadership as the first party leader to call for an end to Canada's combat role in Afghanistan.

...and for a new one in Sudan.

He still wants troops in Afghanistan. He has said nothing about NATO, about civilian deaths, or about the occupation in general. For him, it's a mission.
No different than the liberal/conservative coalition.

Fidel

Jingles wrote:

 

Quote:
Showed leadership as the first party leader to call for an end to Canada's combat role in Afghanistan.

...and for a new one in Sudan.

He still wants troops in Afghanistan. He has said nothing about NATO, about civilian deaths, or about the occupation in general. For him, it's a mission

And dont forget [url=http://www.ndp.ca/press/dewar-congo-calling-will-canada-answer]The Congo[/url] where an estimated six million human beings have been slaughtered since 1998, and a large majority of the genocide perpetrated by US proxies Rwanda and Uganda.

Or is it that Canada's two dirty-rotten old line parties consider a modern day holocaust of six million human beings at the hands of US proxies "none of anyone's business"? Why are Canadians glomming on to the American mantra that the UN is ineffective and should be replaced by a US-led NATO? What in hell is a US-led NATO doing about ongoing holocaust  in resource-rich African Congo? Besides nothing?

Fidel

Stockholm wrote:

Judy Rebick wants the NDP to be to Canada like what Ralph Nader is to American politics - a party of valiant losers that revel in being crushed and who have no aspirations to ever winning anything.

I listened to Judy on TVO? talking about how successful and wonderful the Obama campaign was and that the lousy NDP should take notes. She and Basil the Liberal werent very friendly with Nystrom or Ashton at all. I thought "this stinks" and turned it off.

remind remind's picture

 

.

Fidel

Well I must say that Judy's view of the Obama campaign is or was correct. Apparently they did wonderful things with not only tapping grassroots funding and support by FaceBook et al and the electronic campaign end of things, they motivated Americans to get out and vote. That's not an easy thing to do given the American version of FirstPastThePost and voter turnouts typically worse than Canada's. Full marks to the Obama campaign there.

But I believe Obama's presidential candidacy as well the Democrats general election campaign were also funded by some of the richest people in America and Wall Street. It's been said that even the superrich in America had lost faith in the Bush regime's economic policies and realize themselves that the country was sliding into deep economic trouble. Will billionaire families and Bay Street be funding the NDP's campaign next time around? I highly doubt it. Even though Canada has lost jobs at a faster pace on a per capita basis than the US has since the meltdown began, the rich in Canada, I think, realize that our economic wagon was tied to America's with FTA-NAFTA and was the most poorly thought out bit of colonialism in history. And they know that whatever happens in the US will affect us down the road. The rich in Canada will tend to favour the two oldest political parties who've come through for them time and time again with tax cuts and respecting Canada's blue blood wealth and incomes no matter what the economic conditions. 

remind remind's picture

Bad move on Brad Lavinge's part, he showed exactly what the NDP is under Layton, 2 faced hyprocrits and absoluterly no one should be supporting the Layton and Lavinge  lead NDP.

Bookish Agrarian

I strongly disagree remind.  Here's what I wrote in the specific thread about Larsen who you previously referenced before editing I guess.

 

Frankly if he was doing that it is a serious breach of ethics in my books.  Imagine what would happen if single issue people on all kinds of issues from abortion to equal marriage starting doing that to try and push their agendas.

 

I have no problem with someone being striped of credentials if they were subsidizing people based on their support or nonsupport of a particular resolution or issue.

This is one of those times you have to seperate support for an issue or individual with integrity of democracy.

 

remind remind's picture

Dana has spoken here for months about assisting people who wanted to support a cannabis resolution at the convention, to go, if they could not afford to and it is not all of a sudden or anything, and I answered you in that thread too.

I am done with the federal NDP,  under Layton, this is the last last straw.

Bookish Agrarian

Well I never saw it and if I had I would have definitly commented on it.  It is just so very wrong on so very many levels.

remind remind's picture

I strongly disagree, and I know that lobby group's  members help each other get  to a convention, goes on all the time. As do ridings assisting their people to go to support riding resolutions.

Caissa

Does the NDP want the side story publicity that revoking Larsen's delegate status is going to get them? All questions of ethics aside for the moment, I think it was a terrible tactical mistake.

remind remind's picture

Say nothing of silencing Libby, by sending her away from the convention, when she was even supposed to give a speech, and after marginalizing her as deputy leader.

Slumberjack

Sealed