Liberal non-policy convention

[Alta4ever]

Nice dream. Stephen Harper has moved away from the original party platform, to appear like he was governing from the centre. Now with the risk of losing his core support with threats of a new Reform style party being created, he's taking a few steps back to the right. He has one party policy now. Do anything to stay in power and if he had grassroots, he's smoked them all.

As stated in my response to Capricorn above:

"The resolutions are not binding on the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper. (On abortion) The party was not keen to air this issue – debate was limited during the private workshops on Friday and organizers cut off arguments yesterday over the objections of some delegates. Speaking to reporters after the vote, Justice Minister Rob Nicholson was quick to note Harper has publicly stated the Conservatives will not reopen the abortion debate.

Well see if they put forth the abortion issue again and limit the powers of the human Rights Commission. As to tough on crime, that's been kicking around forever, so was not a new policy. The conventions give delegates a chance to hash over ideas that do not necessarily become part of the party platform. At the Liberal Convention the resolutions would not be binding on the government of Prime Minister Michael Ignatieff.

Remember these:

Equal marriage

Abortion

Human Rights Commission

Non-elected senate

Deficit

Gun registry

Women's rights

All there and locked up tight. Harper won't even allow his caucus free speech to discuss them openly. He only answers to the little voices in his head.

sorry Were you their, because I can tell you that the media didn't get it right.

[capricorn]

She probably hung up and said 'what a fruitcake', but I didn't care. It was nice.

Maybe there are sane Liberal party workers out there after all.

[Molly]

At least it sounds like she was likely a volunteer and believed in what she was doing.

During the last election, a student living at my house worked part time as a telemarketer. One of her assignments was to make campaign calls for the Conservatives.

Dunno... she sure as H-E-double toothpicks didn't vote Conservative, but would you call her a Conservative party worker?

[Smallc]

So do I. Did you get the personal phonecall?

No, but I don't live at home right now, so that's probably why.

[waldo]

It's an interesting issue in that Liberals are so paranoid they won't discuss policy matters openly in case their ideas are stolen. Sounds like an excuse for the elites to hatch party policy behind closed doors, away from the media and without grassroots input. That internet "En Famille" exercise is just to appease the peasants.

as I said, a bogus disingenuous thread... in your zeal to fabricate "controversy"... in your concerted efforts to deny the content of your own linked to article, you're hopelessly mixing decisions and process relative to platform policy versus convention policy.

there appears a commonality of process between the Liberal and CPC parties as to whether convention policy eventually works its way into platform policy. Don't let that stop you from fabricating!

as for 'guarding' platform policy I expect all parties have reservations in bringing that platform policy forward prior to an actual election... and since the CPC couldn't be bothered to actually table a platform during the last election... and since the CPC had to be "pressured" by the media/public/Opposition into finally bringing forward a platform - they finally relented (caved to the pressure) and brought an election platform forward, albeit one conveniently timed after the leaders debate.

should we be surprised the Harper Conservatives would actually deny the Canadian public an understanding of their intentions? Why didn't your CPC party bring forward an election platform at the beginning of the last election... like other parties did? Other parties offered the Canadian public a statement of intent should they become the governing party... why didn't the CPC do the same? What was the CPC hiding by not bringing forward an election platform? What was the CPC "afraid" of? Is your CPC party above actually informing the Canadian public of it's (election) platform intentions?

[Progressive Tory]

At least it sounds like she was likely a volunteer and believed in what she was doing.

Dunno... she sure as H-E-double toothpicks didn't vote Conservative, but would you call her a Conservative party worker?

I got a call last February, months before the election, from our local Conservative office. She asked me if Stephen Harper could count on my support. I asked her to hold for a moment and then came back on the line. "Sorry, no donkeys flying today. Guess you're out of luck."

I think she also said "what a fruitcake".

[capricorn]

A mere six weeks to go for the Liberal convention in Vancouver and little to get excited about.

Liberal convention about nothing, Grits complain

---

"It's a convention about nothing," grouses one disgruntled Grit, echoing a description often applied to Jerry Seinfeld's television sitcom of the 1990s.

"Some people are wondering why we're bothering to have a convention at all."

---

Given the lack of drama, it's not surprising that the party expects only 1,500 to 2,000 Liberals - out of almost 7,000 eligible delegates - to show up in Vancouver.

And most of those won't have been elected by members in their ridings. In all but about 30 ridings, there was no competition for the 22 available delegate slots so anyone who expressed an interest in going was simply acclaimed.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/br...ewAllComments=y

How successful was En Famille, the new age method of involving the grassroots in directing the party's future and crafting policy? What will be the impact of canceling traditional convention policy workshops?

The party has done away with policy workshops at which delegates have traditionally chosen the priority resolutions they want put to a vote on the convention floor. This time, the priority resolutions will be chosen in advance by riding presidents.

In lieu of workshops, the party will stage "think-tanks" at the convention, a series of town hall-like forums at which delegates will be able to question prominent Liberals and shadow cabinet members.

Organizers maintain that the policy process has actually been more open and inclusive than it has been in the past.

In the last few months, about 1,000 Liberals took part in online policy workshops, which culminated in a straw poll of the resolutions participants deemed most important. Riding presidents are supposed to be guided by that poll and grassroots consultations in their constituencies when they choose the priority resolutions for the convention.

But many Liberals were unaware of the online policy debate and some who did take part were miffed to discover that riding presidents would have the final say on resolutions.

"I think some of the changes were well-intentioned but the implementation has left something to be desired and has been poorly communicated," says Sheila Gervais, a former national director of the party.

She says many ridings presidents, including her own, were unaware that they were supposed to choose the priority resolutions or that they were supposed to be consulting with their members about them.

Montreal MP Justin Trudeau, co-chair of the convention, acknowledges that "this process absolutely is imperfect" and that "there are people who are unhappy" with it.

"But we're limited by our constitution. We're limited by the newness of the technology, the difficulty of getting the message out."

I'm certain hundreds of diligent Liberal members spent precious time contributing to the online policy site En Famille. The merits of their input will be decided by riding presidents who will make the final decision on which recommendations go forward.

The risk that their concentrated efforts could be ignored should be all the more disappointing for the grassroots because, as Justin Trudeau said:

"We're not going to have a perfectly packaged answer to present at the end of the convention."

Rather, he sees the convention as "the kicking off of a renewal process that will cover the next few years."

In other words, party elites will get the final word on the party's direction for the next few years.

However, one positive outcome for the Liberal grassroots from this convention may be the adoption of "one member, one vote" method of choosing the leader. That would be a good thing.

[jdobbin]

You've been reading dobbin's posts. He sees anger in a lot of posts by non-Liberals.

I actually see more personalization in non-Liberals posts.

As far as the policy conference goes, I think it is more than unfortunate.

The party really needs policy work but I think the fear is that the revealing policy prior to an election is toxic so they have resorted to "think tanks" and a policy platform that will be decided away from the public in secret somewhere.

I think the one thing the party is looking to get through is a one member, one vote policy and a streamlined convention process for next time.

The party mots likely fears that Harper is prepared to pull the plug at any time and that is why they have acclaimed a leader and decided to avoid a public policy discussion that the Tories could use as ammo against them. In that sense it is not that much different from the last Tory policy convention in Winnipeg where there was very little decided in terms of policy.