NDP Leadership Convention 2017

[136or142]

Linda McQuaig.

[136or142]

Linda McQuaig.

She speaks no French GONG!

From wiki: In the 1970s McQuaig and four friends co-owned a house they called The Pit in Toronto's east end, where they hosted frequent house parties and dinners for friends in academia, media and the arts. In 1976 she lived for a year in Paris, where she learned French...

[136or142]

People should stop wasting time suggesting public intellectuals with zero political experience as leadership material. It's simply not going to happen.

She ran against Chrystia Freeland in the 2014 byelection and she ran in the 2015 General Election.

If the party members are determined to move to the left, the most obvious choices would be her, Niki Ashton or Avi Lewis/Naomi Klein.  Unless people here can suggest somebody else.

Niki Ashton is from isolated Northern Manitoba and ran poorly in the last leadership race (though she may have improved since then) and Avi Lewis/Naomi Klein are genuine public intellectuals with zero political experience.

Linda McQuaig is from the center of the media universe and she's run for office before, albeit unsucessfully. 

[136or142]

Jagmeet would likely be a shoe in to succeed Andrea Horwath as ONDP leader after 2018 (or if a miracle happened and the ONDP won that election he would be a senior cabinet minister)...the only reason i could see for why he might want to go federal is that i hear he is personally much more interested in federal than provincial issues.

Isn't he also the New Democrat that joined the idiotic protests against the changes to sex education?

[136or142]

Unfortunately, yes:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMGQZSecdFc

It's mostly in Panjabi so I can't understand what he's saying but he's speaking to an anti-sex ed group.

As I recall, all he said was that the government should have done more community consultations on the curriculum rather than imposing it from on high. He never actually said he was opposed to the substance of the sex ed reforms.

The government did considerable consultations and the opponents of the reforms could never say what they opposed other basically 'sex is icky and we don't want our innocent children to learn about it.'

If Singh said that, then he's a liar and should not be considered for leader.

Also, when people say "the government didn't consult widely enough" or "we weren't consulted" it's really means "they didn't do what we wanted them to do."

So, either Jagmeet Singh is lying or he's pandering.  Not unheard of in a politician, but not leadership material either.

[136or142]

When you are an opposition politician and the government of the day brings in a policy that is wildly unpopular in the riding you represent - but where you and your party are actually supportive of the substance of that policy - then the logical thing to do it is to attack the government for incompetently managing the issue and failing to bring stakeholders onside etc...

1.I don't know that it was wildly unpopular in his riding, just that the loudest voices were against it.

2.I can see your broader point, but I don't think that necessary includes him giving speeches in front of those loud voices.  He could have spoken against it in the legislature without being seen to endorse the opponents, and, therefore, pandering to them.

[136or142]

When you are an opposition politician and the government of the day brings in a policy that is wildly unpopular in the riding you represent - but where you and your party are actually supportive of the substance of that policy - then the logical thing to do it is to attack the government for incompetently managing the issue and failing to bring stakeholders onside etc...

Jagmeet was in a "no real win" situation and I think he handled it well; he did not come out against something he/the party supports and was able to push the concerns of his constituents. He did get some push back from some members of the party I saw but nothing that would harm him to any extent.

... for some reason I just saw Darrell Dexter's name floated/mentioned as possibility? hmmm not sure on that one but he does have government experience...

BTW here is how the government consulted on the changes at the time:

"One parent in each publicly funded school in the province, usually a parent council chair, was provided a survey late last year. While the survey asked questions about educational priorities and what sources of information are trusted in forming curriculum, it did not ask parents specifically what they feel should be included in the sexual education curriculum or use many of the specific terms and concepts that have upset some parents.
The government says the survey was distributed to some 4,000 individual parents and that the Ministry of Education also consulted widely with various parent groups. The government also says the new curriculum has been designed by experts in order to equip students for the realities of modern society" http://www.cp24.com/news/what-you-need-to-know-about-ontario-s-new-sexual-education-curriculum-1.2369847

I think that is pretty broad consultations.  Again, the only people who complained their wasn't enough consultations were the ones who were really saying 'they didn't do what we wanted.'

I think the NDP will want a candidate from the Atlantic region, but not Dexter.   If Maureen MacDonald gets back to being fully healthy, she could be a strong candidate.  Certainly no worse than any other provincial politician, like Jagmeet Singh.

[136or142]

When you are an opposition politician and the government of the day brings in a policy that is wildly unpopular in the riding you represent - but where you and your party are actually supportive of the substance of that policy - then the logical thing to do it is to attack the government for incompetently managing the issue and failing to bring stakeholders onside etc...

Do you seriously think an NDP government would have done it in a more "consultative" manner?

The Ontario NDP? Probably. It has much more of a populist streak behind it.

How do you consult with people who say they dislike the changes but can't explain what they dislike about them? (and that has nothing to do with any potential language problems) or,  if they can explain them, their views essentially come down to 'I don't believe sex education should be taught in school.'

Consultations are one thing, but elections have consequences and not all opinions are equally valid.

[136or142]

When you are an opposition politician and the government of the day brings in a policy that is wildly unpopular in the riding you represent - but where you and your party are actually supportive of the substance of that policy - then the logical thing to do it is to attack the government for incompetently managing the issue and failing to bring stakeholders onside etc...

Do you seriously think an NDP government would have done it in a more "consultative" manner?

That's not relevant to the issue though. As DL says, if the government gives you an opening as an opposition pol, you take it, regardless of what you may or may not do in government.

I think this is old style politics that that leads to promising to be everything to everyone and results in disillusionment and cynicism when the opposition becomes government. 

[136or142]

There is actually a theory that the Ontario purposely "mishandled" the sex education file because they wanted it to be as controversial as possible. They wanted it to become a wedge issue that they could use against the PCs so they did minimal consultations and went out of their way to provoke a reaction. I don't usually go for these crazy conspiracy theories but the Ontario liberals sre such a cynical and corrupt party that i wouldnt put it past them.

Anyways, its all water under the bridge, the curriculum is in place, the protests have petered out and even Patrick Brown of the PCs is now avoiding the issue. Its over.

Now after that huge segue let's get back to the federal NDP leadership contest

and with all that, Yes Jagmeet Singh could be a potential leadership candidate.
That leads us to deep dive into Provincial parties... whom from any provincial NDP could/might jump to federal politics?

I'm sure Greg Selinger speaks French as he's likely to be out of his day job in a couple weeks

[136or142]

They mention 1972 and 1989 were the last big ones (2003 with Jack Layton was more personality but i'd say still power (old guard with Blaikie) vs principles (new school) with Layton) where these "principals vs power" battles come up.

I don't think Audrey McLaughlin vs. Dave Barrett was a left/right or "principles vs. power" split.  In some ways it was an earlier version of Layton/Blaikie - with a more "modern" and "post-materialist" appeal vs. "old guard."  The former put more emphasis into appealing to the young, to social movements, Quebec etc.

Of course Layton turned out to be a much better leader.

In some ways McLaughlin v. Barrett was also an east/west split and a gender split.  McLaughlin's support was as you said, but she was also strongly backed by the Ontario NDP establishment.  I think they regarded Barrett as too much of a potential loose cannon and some were concerned about the party being even more dominated by westerners as at that time 19 of the 44 members of the caucus were from British Columbia.  Although McLaughlin was the M.P for Yukon, she had been a long time resident of Ontario and was apparently fairly well established in Ontario NDP circles.

In that race, Howard McCurdy was the urban candidate, and Simon de Jong was the 'principles first' candidate.

[136or142]

Yes but there are many examples in canadian and Britsih history of once dominant parties being wiped out. Whatever happened to Social Credit that ruled BC for all but three years 1952 to 1991? The Union Nationale in Quebec went from being government in 1970 to 0 seats in 1973 and are now a dead party.

I think these are mainly the result of the decline in rural populations.  Union Nationale likely was a victim to the then growing separatist sentiment, but it has returned in some form as first the ADQ and now CAQ, though these parties are more urban influenced.

Social Credit was a largely Interior B.C dominated party, which made it at times very populist and at times very socially conservative,  but clearly, in terms of them being the 'free enterprise coalition' party, the B.C Liberal Party is the new Social Credit.

[136or142]

Heh, forgot why I came to this thread to post in the first place. There is a new name in the mix that I don't believe has been mentioned on this thread.  The two journalist membe panel on the CBC program 'the House' both mentioned that Jack Layton's son, Mike Layton, was interested in seeking the leadership.

[136or142]

Just to segue briefly to the 1989 NDP leadership convention, a big factor was the fact that Dave Barrett spoke no French whatsoever - and it didn't help when he dismissed this as being equivalent to not being able to speak Chinese. Remember that in 1988 the NDP had made a major push in Quebec and though they won no seats it was still fresh in peoples minds that Quebec had been so winnable so recently. Also in 1989 the dominant political issue was Meech Lake and so with national unity at the top of the agenda - having a unilingual anglo as leader was a non-starter for many people.

At the same time there was a powerful sentiment in 1989 that the NDP ought to be the first party in Canada to be led by a woman and so McLaughlin's gender helped her a lot.

Wasn't it John Crosbie in 1983 who dismissed his inability to speak French to being the same as his not being able to speak Chinese?

[136or142]

Yes, obviously Cullen is the frontrunner at this point.

I would agree with that sentiment. But caveat emptor. During the last 2012 NDP leadership race Cullen's website had "Green Party" colours - not NDP colours.

And with the NDP membership discussing the Leap Manifesto over the next few years - climate change is obviously a forefront issue within NDP ranks these days.

Yet here's the situation in Cullen's riding of Skeena- Bulkley Valley:

1. Cullen's riding of Skeena-Bulkley Valley is the terminus for major LNG proposals (Petronas, ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, Chevron, CNOOC et al) in the port cities of Kitimat and Prince Rupert.

2. Aside from some fringe elements within the local FN communities, the Haisla FN, 5 Tsimshian FNs, and even now the Lax kw'alaams FN is also on-board. In addition to that all of the communities... Kitimat, Prince Rupert, Terrace, etc. also support LNG. One can basically now say that LNG has obtained "social license" in these areas.

3. Problem is that just one of these LNG proposals will see a major spike in GHG emissions - from natural gas electrical generation at port to a major GHG increase in natural gas fracking in NE BC.

And therein lies the crux of his problem... Cullen can't oppose future LNG development in his riding or he may well lose his seat in 2019. OTOH, Cullen needs to oppose these same LNG developments (with major GHG emissions and climate change) in order to be competitive in the NDP leadership race.

A classic "Catch-22".

I thought you had left here and weren't coming back.  Did you write this before or after you refused to pay off on our bet that I won fair and square?  You still owe me $1,000.

Lotuslander is an anti NDP troll, and a liar  and I would appreciate it if he was banned.

If  it helps to get him banned from here, I have his private message to me where he refuses to pay the money he owes me.

I let this go up to now because I'm not a materialistic person and I don't need the money and I never expected you to pay me if you lost the bet in the first place (though I would have paid you had I lost), but I did so on the assumption that Lotuslander wouldn't post here ever again.

[136or142]

Nathan Cullen is an unusually creative person for a politician.

[136or142]

Brosseau is considering.

It would be nice if the article actually contained a quote or something. Instead it just says that she, along with almost every other MP asked has not "ruled it out". I don't blame her. It's good for her image to be the subject of idle speculation...if someone asked me if I would run for the NDP leadership I would also not rule it out and would bask in all the imagined scenarios about speculation about secret exploratory committees. Why not be coy.

All that being said, being leader of a party is not the same thing as being star of a reality TV show. You have to show evidence that you can be CEO of a party with millions of dollars of assets and liabilities and that you have mastery of complex policy files and that you are a shred tactician etc....with all due respect to Brosseau she has exceeded expectations as a local MP but I think people,are getting wayyyyy ahead of themselves in thinking she is leadership material right now. She's still only 28 years old for god sake

Brosseau will win the leadership if at the time of the convention she is on holiday in Las Vegas.

[136or142]

Stop ruining our fun, DL. This isn't the first time we've heard about a REB candidacy. Her story is right out of a movie; I think she would attract a lot of attention. Of course, she may not be able to carry herself in a national campaign (yet), so it would be a gamble. But there's a reason why she was the only NDP MP to see a positive swing in her riding. You can't ignore that kind of hard data.

The factors that make someone successful at the riding level have almost nothing to do with the attributes of being a national party leader. At the riding level its all about person to person contact...and on top of that the bar she had to pass to be seen as a good MP was very very low. Previous MPs from that riding had been totally invisible, and there was a myth that she spoke no French at all when in fact she had been to French immersion in elementary school...but at the national leadership level there would be totally different expectations and the bar would be very high not very low.

The reason REB's name gets bandied about at all is that people are engaging in "magical thinking" that somehow the way to compete with Trudeau is to find another bright shiny object that is bilingual.  There is a lot more to leading a party than that.

Having an inspiring personal narrative is a wonderful thing...but its only one part of what you need to be to lead a party.

Didn't you also say that when I pointed out that Linda McQuaig learned French in Paris in the mid 1970s that she had forgotten all of it.  Ruth Ellen Brosseau taking French immersion in elementary school would have been about 15 years prior.  It's entirely possible she had similarly forgotten all of it.

On the other hand though, I more or less agree with you.  I think she would be a reasonable choice for interim leader, if the party decided it didn't want Mulcair to remain on for 1-2 years.

[136or142]

No. Pearson, Diefenbaker, King were all unilingual, and the situation regarding bilingualism was completely different. Liberals had Quebec lieutenants (or as deputy PM in Lapointe's case) to run Quebec issues for them.

I suspect this has more to do with the Quiet Revolution.  I think it's perfectly understandable that 25% of the population of the country would find it unacceptable to have a Prime Minister who can't speak in their language.  Unless it's somebody like Jean Chretien who couldn't speak any language.

[136or142]

Division over whether the date should be this fall, next winter or later.

From the article:
Leaders must be elected by secret ballot; every party member is entitled to cast a ballot; and voting is held in rounds, such that candidates with the least support get dropped off the list until a front-runner has 50 per cent of the votes plus one.

How does this voting work, are the 'rounds' an instant run-off, or are they genuine rounds involving people needing to vote again either on the same day or on a later day?

[136or142]

Division over whether the date should be this fall, next winter or later.

From the article:
Leaders must be elected by secret ballot; every party member is entitled to cast a ballot; and voting is held in rounds, such that candidates with the least support get dropped off the list until a front-runner has 50 per cent of the votes plus one.

How does this voting work, are the 'rounds' an instant run-off, or are they genuine rounds involving people needing to vote again either on the same day or on a later day?

If it's like 2012, then it's both. People who mail in their vote do so by IRV, and those who go to the convention can vote in each round, separately.

Thanks!

[136or142]

What if the NDP held a leadership convention and nobody ran?

[136or142]

Cullen is OUT.

I'm trying to come up with a line about how Cullen not running may Killen the NDP, but I can't quite get the grammar right.

[136or142]

Now that Cullen is out I don't really know if anyone is suitable to lead the NDP. The only ones that stand out are Ashton and Boulerice. Unless a hail mary happens I question if the NDP will even be able to keep official party status after this election.

What's wrong with Charlie Angus? He's likable and he seems to be nearly as creative as Nathan Cullen.  (I'd joke 'alsol he's beefy' but I'm being serious.)

[136or142]

Obviously I'm not asking for any insider information if anybody has any, but if a LEAP Manifesto supporter wins the NDP leadership (especially say Niki  Ashton) and if the Liberals remain governing for the most part on the center left, are there any New Democratic M.Ps you could see crossing the floor to join the Liberals?

The reason I specifically don't want anybody to post insider information is because I don't want to get anybody into any kind of trouble. I'm not asking this to be snarky or whatever, I'm just genuinely curious.