tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post3321628651595525213..comments2024-02-07T16:22:39.625-05:00Comments on Jeff Jedras: 36 proposed Liberal constitutional amendments dissected and explainedUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-60202266525820464582012-01-05T00:12:29.957-05:002012-01-05T00:12:29.957-05:00I'm disappointed with #4. This would have been...I'm disappointed with #4. This would have been the perfect opportunity to bring in the same 41-day voting requirement for local candidate and even EDA elections, but they totally punted it.<br /><br />Here in Halton, we just had one of those farcical executive elections where the whole process was hijacked by a guy who brought in a bus load of new 'members' who we've never seen before and will likely never see again. It was sickening, and it happens all the time.<br /><br />I know these 'insta-member' drives give a temporary boost to the bank account, but ultimately they are demoralizing, counter-productive, and would be incredibly easy to eliminate with a 41-day membership rule. We just need someone with the guts to do it.Jennifer Smithhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14610902519752808810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-4101323245678450382012-01-04T17:12:02.638-05:002012-01-04T17:12:02.638-05:00Ken,
I think you're referring to a policy pro...Ken,<br /><br />I think you're referring to a policy proposal; those are separate from the proposed amendments to the LPC constitutions discussed here and I'll tackle them in a future post. Without knowing the specifics of the proposal though, I'll say the idea of a preferential ballot for general elections has merit.<br /><br />Thanks Jordan. I disagree with doing policy and reform separately, though. The constitutional stuff needs to begin, obviously. And on policy, it can't wait until we pick a leader. Policy development needs to be an ongoing organic process, developed from the membership up. It doesn't need a permanent leader to happen. The next leader should buy into the policy being developed by the members, not come in and force policy down. <br /><br />On leadership, putting primaries aside we've essentially done away with traditional conventions. Assuming there's no change it will be weighted one member, one vote, with voting likely happening electronically, and/or by phone. There may still be a central gathering with speeches but it won't be a traditional convention, and I expect ridings and regions will want to organize satellite events and watch the results.<br /><br />Jason, when the protection for incumbents angle occurred to me it definitely softened by concern about appointing up to the number. I still wonder though, why allow 20? It could still a leader to protect their favourites and leave opponents unprotected, instead of using the reserve to appoint fresh new "stars" as may be the intention. I would still prefer completely open nominations, but I leaning voting yes as it's moving in the right direction.Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14971310821484459106noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-27287316373668989682012-01-04T15:46:22.219-05:002012-01-04T15:46:22.219-05:00For the limit on appointments, I would consider th...For the limit on appointments, I would consider that to include protecting MPs. That being the case, 20 is really not that high at all.Jason Cherniakhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12473304114206630747noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-8505985290267859892012-01-04T13:42:56.780-05:002012-01-04T13:42:56.780-05:00Good read, though I only skimmed a lot of it I sti...Good read, though I only skimmed a lot of it I still found it very useful. I think this is all the party should be focusing on when members meet next week. I don't think there is much sense in focusing on election policies, like the monarchy and marijuana legalization, at this point in time. While I'm not a member of the party or anything I think it would have been smart for this convention to be about rebuilding the actual party from inside out and waiting till the next convention, when there will be a permanent leader, to actually discuss policies for the next election.<br /><br />If the party doesn't adopt a primary system, and if some of the rules can be rearranged after the convention, I think the party should look at having basically two different conventions for selecting the next leader. What I mean by this is that the party should look at having a vote in one city, which would possibly decide the top two or three candidates, and then waiting a few weeks and holding a convention in another city where members would vote for the leader. Similar to what the Alberta PCs do, except I don't know if selling memberships in between is right. I think this would spread out the leadership race a bit more (possibly adding more excitement), holding it in different regions of the country allows for more people to attend at least one convention, it would allow members to get to know the top candidates more, and it would give them more time to decide who exactly they want as their next leader. Members should also be aloud to vote in person, by phone, or internet. This type of race would only work of course if there is enough candidates, it would not really make much sense if there are only three candidates running for the leadership.Jordanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17547900136161596590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-19402125.post-5152216480804476842012-01-04T13:37:33.354-05:002012-01-04T13:37:33.354-05:00What is your position on the "Preferential Ba...What is your position on the "Preferential Ballot" proposal? Had Jean Chretien made this change there never would have been a Stephen Harper controlled PMO.Ken S from Ramarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16254288785207296880noreply@blogger.com