<strong>Written By:</strong> N Say
<strong>Date:</strong> 2008-01-05 14:04:12
<a href="/article/192314244-rift-opens-in-liberal-party-over-appointment-of-ndp-mla">Article Link</a>

"The idea that 'we' know better than 'you' the people, what is good for you."

Durocher says his people "know in their bones about colonialism" and adds: "The central point is that the people of this riding resent, and I personally resent mightily, the attitude of certain southerners that they know what's best for our riding."

Orchard, an anti-free-trade activist and two-time contender for the Progressive Conservative leadership, was instrumental in helping Dion stage a come-from-behind victory in the 2006 Liberal leadership contest. In an interview Friday, Durocher estimated that Orchard's organization delivered at least 150 delegates for Dion, without which he likely couldn't have won.

Dion, who initially appeared to give his blessing to Orchard seeking the nomination in Desnethe-Missinippi-Churchill River, appointed former Saskatchewan cabinet minister Beatty late Thursday. The byelection in the riding will be held March 17.

Durocher said he's disappointed that Dion has shafted Orchard after all the Saskatchewan farmer did to help him in the leadership race.

"It's not very principled. It's not very fair."

...

<a href="http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080104/national/byelxn_liberals_beatty">http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/080104/national/byelxn_liberals_beatty</a>

   

It is unfortunate that the public have so little interest in the way our democratic system has been subverted by the supporters of oligarcy and autocracy. Stephane Dion has so far interfered with the nomination process for bi-elections in four ridings in order to "crown" Liberal candidates. This has become a general trend in all establishment parties.

When did leaders co-opt the authority to select the candidates? The legislation under which they have co-opted the power, as I understand it, was to prevent candidates who were totally unacceptable for clear reasons, such as having a criminal record, from becoming a candidate. In that case, the riding was expected to select a new candidate. The law was not intended to give the leader the power to select his or her personal choices and undermine internal party democracy.

The constitution of the former federal Progressive Conservative Party placed the sole power to nominate candidates with the local riding associations. The leader, under that constitution, could only reject a candidate for cause.

   

Paul Martin did the same with Sheila Copps etc. So did other so called "leaders".

I have great respect for David Orchard, have worked with his anti FTA campaign 20 years ago and had some very pleasant phone conversations, but I can't figure how he gets involved with these screwballers ?

But then, this is politics all over the world. Bloody power trips .

Ed Deak.

   

My theory is that Orchard and/or the people around him actually believed that we had a democratic system. Even when MacKay and the Conservative elite stabbed him and at least a quarter of their own members in the back, Orchard still believed that democracy would prevail.

Orchard always believed that you could join a political party and if you supported that party you would earn acceptance. I think he saw what MacKay and his cronies did as nothing more than MacKay's lack of integrity. I don't believe he understood the systemic problem with the way our political system has been evolving over the past four or five decades.

All I can say is that Orchard and his supporters were, and maybe still are, naive.

It is evident that democracy is rapidly failing and the general public seem to be content to allow that to happen. The question I have is this: can be anything be done to reverse this rapid movement towards oligarchy and autocracy?

   

Is there not a single political party ahead of others in regards to reforming its local constituancy governance???

Is there not a citizen group leading this important battle???

---
"We are all in this together somehow, some more than others somehow"

   

I work with the Progressive Canadian which is following the old Progressive Conservative constitution. It places the nomination process in the solely hands of the riding. A leader can refuse to sign the nomination for a candidate for just cause but has to allow the riding to select a replacement. We are considered a marginal party and all we can do is be true to the principle of the party constitution.

Unfortunately, Elections Canada law takes precedence over party constitutions and, as far as I can tell, any renegade leader could select his own candidates and the party has no power to prevent it except to try to get rid of the leader.

The establishment parties have almost an irrational fear of what they refer to as "special interests" gaining control of the nomination in a riding. They don't seem to comprehend the simple fact that they are acting as a "special interest" in selecting individuals that will support their agenda.

I have read some of the published justifications for this and in every case it comes down to control over the democratic process by a small, centralized group.

I was just looking at an article that claims that a segment of the general membership of the Ontario Progressive Conservative Party is being shut out of seeking a leadership review. This is being accomplished by refusing to notify them of delegate selection meetings for the February convention.