St. Paul's by-election

Stuart Parker used to be leader of the Green Party in BC, then saw the light and joined the NDP and is a leading figure in the electoral refrm movement - I think he would be a good candidate.

madmax wrote:

Hoskins ran in a former Liberal Stronghold against Diane Finley and he was CRUSHED.  Clearly its a good thing, as he was not committed to the riding, and his words were lies.  Just another "I am good on Paper" candidate. Of course.... isn't this how Ignatieff got started.   

Hoskins wasn't "crushed"; he only lost two points off the previous Bob Speller tally, and Diane Finley's margin actually shrunk (thanks in part to an independent candidate spurred by the Caledonia situation et al).

And besides, Haldimand-Norfolk federally wasn't so much a Liberal stronghold as a fortuitous beneficiary of (a) the 1988 free trade + dawn-of-the-CHP election, and (b) the Chretien/Speller power dynamic versus the disunited right.  Provincially, it's been a different story in the past (think Bob Nixon agrarianism); but currently under Toby Barrett it's about as solid as PC seats get...

While Judith Moses is the only candidate currently within the St Paul's boundary, Charles Finlay grew up in St Paul's and his parent's still live in the riding, and Eric Hoskins lives right in downtown Toronto - they were hardly 'parachuted' in.  Let's stick with the facts shall we?

I've actually gone out and met all of the Liberal candidates this week - as I live in St Paul's - and they are a surprisingly strong trio of individuals.  The riding would do well with representation from any of them. 

How 'madmax' can say that Dr Hoskins is simply 'good on paper' is beyond me given what he's actually achieved - against the odds! - for children in war torn areas around the world.  He's not just a talker - he's a doer who has achieved much, and we could use a few more people of action in Queen's Park.   He has a lot of real world experience - it's amazing what he's achieved given his age.

Judith Moses has a lot of experience in government and clearly is a policy person - which is great.  We need clear ideas for change.  And having another qualifieid and intelligent woman in Queen's Park can only help.

Charles Finlay is a strong generalist - which I like - but also has gone out there in the local Toronto community and made a positive difference for people with mental health issues.   Again, not just a talker.

You'd be hard pressed to find another party nomination with three such strong candidates.

Not me you can  be sure. 

Josh Matlow has declined to run, but seems to be supporting Finlay.

And it sounds like Parker wants the NDP to move leftward as well:

Quote:

It's time for people on the left to find our courage; for too long we have offered voters nothing more than capitalism with a human face. That time is past. We must speak truthfully and courageously.

Quote:

The St. Paul's byelection offers an opportunity to speak out in favour of a politics based on courage and honesty, a politics that is not constrained by focus groups and wedge issues. It is my belief that we are closer to assembling a new majority that supports economic and political democracy than we realize.

What prevents us from connecting with voters so often is not the fact that their values are not the same as ours but rather our fear of even attempting to honestly and courageously explain and advocate those values. We don't even try to speak for childless people on welfare or for prisoners awaiting trial because some hired gun consultant has told us not to even try. We refuse to challenge the justice of a tax system that allows the richest to transfer massive wealth from one generation to the next, completely unscathed for fear that people have so internalized the justice of inherited privilege that there is no point in even questioning it.

We must find our courage. Canadian voters would far rather place their "X" next to a person or party with which they do not agree than one that they do not respect. As long as the so-called left's policies are based on a mealy-mouthed cowardice, we will lose - whether we sit in the legislature or not. Voters are not the fools they are portrayed to be; they can sense liars and cowards. The crying shame is that in today's politics, the choice is between cowards on the left and bullies on the right. This has to change.

Lord Palmerston wrote:

Josh Matlow has declined to run, but seems to be supporting Finlay.

Well there's one strike against Finlay.

madmax wrote:

adma wrote:

Hoskins wasn't "crushed"; he only lost two points off the previous Bob Speller tally, and Diane Finley's margin actually shrunk (thanks in part to an independent candidate spurred by the Caledonia situation et al).

The guy was a parachute phoney candidate with a great resume and no riding connection.  Had the Liberals had a REAL candidate, Finley would have been toast. Yes, some die hard Liberals voted for this opportunist, they also voted Liberal inspite of how much Dions policies were Hated in Haldimand.  In the meantime, Diane was not well liked, had a rightwing racist wackjob taking 1,000s of votes because she did nothing with regards to the situation in Caledonia.  

There purpose was to beat the Conservative machine, and it should have occured. The choice of the riding association cause their own demise. 

Meanwhile.... the Candidate left the riding as he appeared.

Uh, I think you're letting a partisan (or something) chip on the shoulder blind you to the psephological truth.  Look: we're talking 2008, the Dion election, in rural Ontario.  Under the circumstances, and even with McHale factored in, even a REAL Liberal candidate couldn't have taken out Diane Finley; indeed, judging from the results in other Tory-held rural Ontario ridings that year, such a candidate (even Bob Speller?!?) might have done even worse.  (Compared to the 32.35% here, look at non-parachute/opportunist Liberal neighbours: 23.53% in Elgin-M-L; 23.97% in Niagara West-Glanbrook; 19.39% in Oxford; even the losing Liberal incumbent in Brant got less than a percent more than Hoskins.)

So, stop venting your bile, and look at the 2008 results across Ontario.  Except by miracle or with some hyper-populist phenomenon (whether Grit, or indirectly through McHale himself doubling his vote count and allowing Hoskins up the middle), No. Liberal. Could. Have. Won. In. Haldimand-Norfolk. In. 2008.  And it's because of Dion, not because of Hoskins.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

Well there's one strike against Finlay.

I don't see Matlow as being any worse than your average Liberal.  Do Libs feel differently?

Lord Palmerston wrote:

I don't see Matlow as being any worse than your average Liberal.  Do Libs feel differently?

I'm not a Liberal supporter, but I see Josh Matlow as exemplifying everything that is slimy and wrong with the Liberal Party. I feel more kindly toward the average Liberal voter.

To me, Finlay, a Bay St. lawyer, seems like the best Liberal candidate from an NDP point of view.

Anyway I'm curious if they're going to be scheduling the federal and provincial nomination meetings around the same time.

A disappointing piece in the local neighbourhood rag:

http://www.mytowncrier.ca/three-grits-vie-for-st-pauls-seat.html

I have so far e-mailed everyone at NDP provincial office and the local paper's reporters about my candidacy. But apparently, there are no declared NDP candidates in the race, according to the provincial secretary as quoted by the local paper. However's it's nice to know that once they've lined up a favoured candidate and the fix is in, then and only then will they call a nomination race. I understand that this is how things work but usually there's at least an effort at a facade of inclusion and democracy.

Oh -- did I mention my sending e-mails to the riding executive members via their web site, the party web site and their Facebook group?

Thanks for the edit. That's what I get for having my girlfriend pick my photo. I'll get a different one put up.

But I'm still calling it as I see it. The article is about who is seeking the nomination for each party; hair-splitting over how the NDP phrases its comments indicating that no one is publicly campaigning doesn't really get us anywhere. By the logic you are employing, the Liberal Party has no "nominees" either and the article should be about no one. I'm not waiting to see the lay of the land; I'm not keeping a low profile; I'm publicly campaigning, having announced my candidacy in an hour-long radio interview on CFRB and followed it up with a raft of news releases so it is very hard to see the Provincial Secretary's comments as anything other than a denial of that situation.

Also, the idea that the timing of the nomination meeting will be based on who provincial office officials want to win it does strike me as less than fully democratic. Of course, "democracy" is a malleable term.

You know it seems kind of strange that the centrepiece of you campaign seems to be an attack on the NDP itself. 

Do you think that maybe riding NDP members might wonder if you have a whole other agenda going on and that is making them nervous?

Ah, but that is not what you are doing in this thread.  You have not questioned the direction of the NDP - something in my experience is neither novel or new- instead you have attacked the NDP itself, its staff and it would seem the members of the St Paul's riding association. 

All of which would tend to reinforce the idea that maybe you have another agenda.

As well you don't have to act like you have the nomination - you do need to act like you have something to offer.  This is not the Green party where they are just happy to have someone to put on the ballot.  Contested nominations are not all that unusual in the NDP.

Stuart_Parker wrote:

I think that the St. Paul's byelection represents a great opportunity for the party to move in a different political direction in order to regain relevance for voters. The fact that questioning the party's current direction and seeking to articulate a course for returning to broad public relevance is being interpreted by some as "an attack on the NDP" only reinforces my view that the party needs a serious course correction.

We are in the nomination phase of the contest -- this is the phase that is about the party and what face it chooses to present. If I make it to the next phase, the campaign will obviously exclusively focus on promoting the New Democratic Party as the best option in St. Paul's but I think it would be both dishonest and unproductive for me to spend this phase of the contest acting like I already have the nomination.

Stuart  please ,tell me a bit more about why you are seeking the NDP nomiantionb in St. Paul's? I asusme you bnow are a card carryign member of the ONDP and live in St.Pauls's or at least in Toronto. and have some involvment with the riding?

When it comes to a nomiantion meeting for a general election each NDP riding assoiation is supposed to sets up a serch commitee and approaches prospective cnadiates. There is some discussion about the rules and some "screening" of candiates- you have to provide a picture, a bio ,a statment about any ctriminal or civil proceedigns you are involved in that might emabaras the party.etc. there are guidebooks avialble for those interested in seeking the nomiantion.  .When the riding has completed a fair search  they send the material and a reprot to provincial office and request permission ot hold a nomiantion meeting. Permission should not be granted if the riding ahs not conducted a fair search or if there is no affirmative action candisate.

Once permission has been granted to hold a nomination pemeeting notice must be maield out to all members in the riding at leat 14 days before the meeting. Only those NDP members in good standinf who live in the riding can vote at the nomiantion meeting. I strongly recommend you start snnging up members now and get the memberdhip and other paperwork into provincial office.pronto. given this is a by-elecion provincial ofice will be playing ane ven stonger role than usual.

solidarity

Peter

So you haven't handed in your nomination papers yet and you went on this ranting tear.  Not a very good sign. 

Again you might want to actually listen to the concerns of NDP members in the riding before informing them of everything that is wrong with the NDP and how you will fix it by being a by-election candidate in a single riding.

Oh - I misunderstood.  I thought you had the papers but had not submitted them.  Waiting for them is something different.

The party 'structure' is people - and your relationship with them.  In an election campaign it is the party structure - regardless of party- that supports the candidate.  If you can't respect the people who will be doing the vast majority of the work on 'your' campaign you frankly have no business being a candidate.  If you are successful there will be all kinds of people working on your campaign because they believe in and support the principles of the NDP - you will be secondary in some ways.  If you want to be successful you might want to check your ego a bit and start to realize that the candidate's role is to articulate the hopes and dreams of the people working in her name in a campaign.  In short it is not all about you - although you get to have your names on signs, to participate in debates and do all the fun stuff- even though it is physically and emotionally exhausting.  Of course you are important, but you are no more important than anyone else on the campaign team.  Less so than many.  You represent them just as much as they represent you to the general public.

If you also want to make it clear you are a sincere New Democrat you might want to articulate why you are no longer a Green instead of seemingly spending all of your time being critical of the NDP.

V. Jara wrote:

Babblers: while I have never met Stuart Parker, I have heard good things about him from other NDPers. I'm willing to cut him some slack on the nomination front as...well...I have had some bad experiences with the ONDP and their lack of ? professionalism? organisation? giving a shit? That being said patience and a certain degree magnanimity are two political virtues that would serve any potential nominee well. Also, even if Stuart were to win the nomination, he still has a lion's task ahead of him for this byelection. Whoever wins the nomination, the whole NDP (Stuart included), should put their shoulder behind the wheel and try to move this party forward. The ONDP is in a rough way and needs to find a way out. Could Stuart be part of that? I don't know, but I'll listen. The facebook snafu, while I didn't see it, is not the best but hey...it's now in the past. Go St. Paul's NDP go!

Agreed. While I don;t know Stuart  I am pretty impressed by what I have hearrd and read. The ONDP should be shouting from the rooftops that we have such an impressive potential candidate

Stuart Parker (born 1972) was leader of the Green Party in British Columbia, Canada, from 1993 to 2000.

Prior to winning the party's leadership at the age of 21, he had been the founder and spokesperson of the party's youth wing, the Young Greens from 1988 to 1992 and was best known for coordinating the group's successful national campaign against McDonald's Restaurants' use of ozone-destroying foam packaging. Parker and the Young Greens received substantial credit from Canada's national media in 1990 when the restaurant giant abandoned the use of chlorofluorocarbon-based foam. The group's continued campaign against the use of CFCs in foam packaging led to CKF Incorporated, Canada's largest manufacturer of CFC-based foam, abandoning the use of CFCs in manufacturing in 1993.

Parker managed to take the party from a tiny group of 59 in 1992 to a party that was only four candidates short of a full slate in the 1996 provincial election. He built links to poverty activists and labour groups. During his leadership, the party's standing in public opinion polls rose from 1% to 11%. During his time as party leader, Parker was arrested in anti-clearcutting blockades in Clayoquot Sound in 1993 and the Slocan Valley in 1997.

Reversing his earlier position, he negotiated agreements with the municipal affiliates of the then-incumbent New Democratic Party of British Columbia (NDP) provincial government and the labour councils of Vancouver and Victoria in 1998 and 1999, resulting in the first and the only Red-Green coalitions in Canadian history in BC's 1999 municipal elections. As part of these coalitions, the Greens won their first-ever municipal seats in Canadian cities.

Ultimately, his focus on building a broadly left-wing green party in BC brought criticism from some members of the environmental movement in the province. Those people played a significant role in the efforts that eventually led to Parker's defeat at the party's March 2000 convention - after previous unsuccessful attempts in 1998 and 1999.

At the time of Parker's defeat, his supporters in the party were in negotiations with the NDP over a potential provincial electoral alliance. His successor, Adriane Carr, cancelled these negotiations.

Parker's departure from the party came as the Greens were perceived to be moving to the political right. He subsequently worked with the NDP in the 2001 provincial election and with the federal New Democratic Party in the 2004 federal election.

Upon leaving the Green Party, Parker initially worked as a lobbyist for Mike Geoghegan. He later became a strong advocate for electoral reform, specifically proportional representation. A co-founder of the BC Electoral Change Coalition in 1997, he has served on the board of Fair Voting BC (2000-2002, 2006-present) and on the board of Fair Vote Canada (2005-2007).

The nephew of Harry Jerome, Parker was the first BC political leader of African descent and gave the keynote speech to the opening ceremony of the province's Black History Month in 1994.

He is currently living in Ontario, where he is pursuing a doctorate at the University of Toronto.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_Parker

Wow, somebody has been beefing wiki enteries.

Quote:

Upon leaving the Green Party, Parker initially worked as a lobbyist for Mike Geoghegan.

Quote:

After Glen Clark became premier Mike Geoghegan became increasingly disillusioned with the leftward drift of the NDP, and by 1997 Mike had joined the BC Liberals.

In 2003 he was hired as the president and CEO of the BC Construction Association[1]. Thanks to his frequent appearances in the media, the BCCA enjoyed an extremely high profile. That ended when in November 2003 Geoghegan made some highly controversial remarks about NDP MLA Jenny Kwan.

Thanks so much for the positive responses to my potential candidacy.

Last night, I was campaigning at an Ethiopian community event (I appear to have been invited to balance the Liberal nomination seeker the Ethiopian community is backing). It seems very clear, based on Liberal Party gossip received not just there but from a variety of individuals well-placed within the OLP, that we're facing a byelection call in mid-August for a voting date before the end of September.

So I'm anticipating that our crew will really need to alter its somewhat leisurely nomination plans what with the Greens, Tories and Liberals all nominating next week in anticipation of an imminent election call.

One more thing: I'm curious to know what issues you guys think I should be focusing on both in the nomination process and in the election. I have to confess that I think the party's current HST focus may be a mistake.

On the HST activity.

Small busines out here in BC are freaking, so in order to combat that anger brewing, Canwest had a representative from the forstry industry on telling people, it was going to save them hundreds of millions and thus many people their jobs. A similar false trope used over and over agin by forestry industry execs, for every different situation.

Sure enough they are going to save 100's of millions, but it is not going to save jobs, just as the other profit enhancing measures have not. They are too busy shipping their tenured non-processed timber off shore, and they are not interested in maintaining jobs, jobs cost them money too. Moreover,  what it is going to do is remove those 100 of millions out of the government coffers and into their pockets. So their timber is going to be even freer than it was before.

Re: general election issues: Part of Michael Bryant's initial success in 1999 was having worked on tenant issues in the community prior to getting into politics. It was one of the reasons I felt comfortable "strategically" voting for him against incumbent Tory Isabel Bassett. 

A potential hot button item could be the streetcar right of way construction delays but most of the work is now complete in St. Pauls.

There may also be issues about recreation facilities for youth although it's a problem for more people more north-west of the riding. A small part of the riding was in the pre-amalgamation Borough of York which had invested in before & after-school programs and used the schools quite a bit for recreation programs. York couldn't afford to build many community centres & swimming pools. Harris effectively gutted some of those programs with the education funding formula. With downloading and the megacity's "race to the bottom", lower income residents got shafted. 

Forest Hill is also part of the riding and they have their own unique issues.