Committee of the Executive.
Jason is arguing for the immediate resignation of National Executive Policy Chair Joan Bourassa over on Facebook. I"m of the opinion that I guy not doing HIS job should not being calling for someone else's resignation for apparently not doing hers (mostly ist's just Jason who thinks she hasn't done her job).
Here's my reason for asking for the entire Ontario Management Committee to resign:
Article VII of the LPC(O) Constitution
ARTICLE VII - ANNUAL AND GENERAL MEETINGSAs you can see, the time has passed for any sort of proper, legal meeting of Ontario members. You know, Ontario members that form a large majority of the LPC membership across Canada. Those members.
Call of
Meeting; Notice; Authority
1. The Annual Meeting of LPC(O) shall be held each year at a time and place to be fixed by the Executive Board or in an electoral emergency the Management Committee, provided such date is no later than eighteen (18) months from the date of the prior Annual Meeting. The Executive Board may direct the President to call a special meeting of LPC(O) upon ninety (90) days notice at any time for such purpose as it may consider advisable. Those eligible to attend and vote at a special meeting shall be selected in the same manner as those who may attend and vote at an Annual Meeting. If an election or a Leadership Convention is called or there is electoral emergency after the time and place for the Annual Meeting or a special meeting is fixed, the Management Committee may postpone the Annual Meeting or the special meeting for such reasonable period of time as is required to enable LPC(O) to participate in the election or Leadership Convention or to deal with the electoral emergency even if as a result of the postponement, an Annual Meeting is held more than eighteen (18) months after the prior Annual Meeting . However, an Annual Meeting shall not be postponed to a date more than 24 months after the prior Annual Meeting. The Annual Meeting or a special meeting may review, and by majority vote, amend or revoke any act or regulation passed, taken or made by the Management Committee or the Executive Board, provided such act shall not apply retroactively.
Notice
2. Notice in writing shall be sent at least ninety (90) days prior to the Annual Meeting to all persons entitled to attend as delegates, other than those to be elected under paragraph 3 (b), (c), (d), (e) and (f), and to the secretaries of all Electoral District Associations and to the President and Secretary of all other organizations entitled to send delegates to the Annual Meeting.
Had we had such an AGM Ontario Liberals would have been able to meet in a proper forum to put forward and approve any policies or LPC Constitutional amendments to the National Convention in January. Instead we've had to make due with ideas on the fly. You see Jason Cherniak and his team members are equally responsible for what he says Joan hasn't done. That is they failed to properly consult the membership.
Jason has argued that the Management Committee didn't have enough time to call and AGM and that party resources in Ontario were too stretched to hold DSMs to such and event - even though DSMs were already being held anyway for the National Convention. Plus there was and election in May and October don't ya know. And, instead of having an AGM, the committee in its infinite wisdom decided to hold an event that pretty much costs the same amount called and Executive Board Meeting last week in Niagara Falls.
People in glass houses Jason. People in glass houses.
Feel free to discuss.
28 comments:
James, while I do not wish to be part of the discussion regarding the any individuals named in any discussion boards regarding Party business, and while you also have a compelling argument regarding the AGM and election of officers that requires more in depth information before passing judgement; I would like to address two items of Fact:
1. Regarding Policy submissions from LPC(O) to LPC. LPC(O) policy submissions to LPC were carried out as per the constitution in preparation for the Bienial Convention which was scheduled for June 2011. The Rally was held in February 2011 at Richmond Hill further to the full round of Regional Policy Rallies in late 2010. Of the 117 resolutions considered, 10 were submitted as required by NPEP.
There is also an 'evergreen initiative' in Ontario that allows for policy ideas to be brought forward, shared, and forwarded to a national forum. Prior to 2011, several EDA's and clubs provided policy direction input via this option. This year, there have been no such submissions as most of our members have either been otherwise focussed or perhaps even disheartened.
2. Regarding resignation: I have already announced that I will not be standing for the VP Policy job, past this term. This was done at the time I won my second term and has been repeated at every Policy committee meeting and Executive Board meeting. I have done this a) because I do not believe that one should occupy a management position past 2 terms, it does not allow for adequate renewal; b) Adequate capacity building requires interested individuals to have the opportunity to exercise some of the functions of jobs prior to even entering a campaign. While I am concerned that few people have availed themselves of the opportunity to step forward I am always available to support any and all invididuals who request such support.
Best Regards as always,
Maryanne Kampouris VP Policy LPC(O) and Candidate for National Policy Chair
To be precise, an LPC(O) AGM in Nov would have required DSMs DURING the provincial election. Instead, we let Liberals and staff across the province focus on local campaigns. I believe very strongly that if we had taken your advice, large numbers of Liberals in Ontario really would be calling for our resignations.
Also, don't forget that our original plan was to hold our AGM in Jan/Feb. With the national biennial in Jan, that simply was not feasible.
Furthermore, the amendments I proposed were vetted by the central region meeting open to all members. As the central region president, I believe I met my responsiblity.
Finally, we will hold our AGM early in the new year and it will allow LPC(O) to deal with constitutional amendments AFTER we know what is required following amendments to the LPC constitution in January.
I'm quite comfortable defending our choices and, to date, you are the only one who seems to be seriously upset. Not one person mentioned it to me at Exec Board (which does cost the same as an AGM when we meet our net 0 goal).
My impression is that party brass decided to prioritize party rebuilding (membership drives and fundraising; proper Liberalist revision; slimming down the party structure to enhance responsiveness and effectiveness and cut costs - the party is almost bankrupt and soon will be unless funds are raised; changing the way the next leader and candidates for MP are chosen etc), and to punt the policy decisions until a later date.
Having decided this, it was simply dropped on members in the usual top down fashion (no polling of members re priorities etc).
And the strange decision was made to have a policy convention AFTER the new leader was elected (in 2014).
And yet members were not asked to vote on this change - except for the convention.
Clearly what policies are needed must be an essential part of the debate when members and supporters are asked to vote on the next leader, so the blank-cheque method now espoused is illogical.
Plus, conventions are not the most democractic way to consult with party members and supporters - not many can afford to attend conventions. Using the internet to debate and vote on policies far more democratic.
What is clear from this mess is that the way in which policies are suggested, considered, and accepted or rejected is broken, and has to be fixed by substantial changes to the way in which we do it right now.
Unfortunately none of the resolutions before the convention really address this issue as a matter of priority.
There you have it folks. Two members of the Management Committee live on a comment stream. One contrite and reasonable, and one arrogant and unbending.
Some of you may remember how much I supported Maryanne in recent times. http://whatdoiknowgrit.blogspot.com/2009/04/breakfast-in-vancouver.html
With all due respect though Maryanne, any Policies from 2010 became irrelevant as of May 2, 2011 and the process has to start all over again.
I would agree with you James if those policies had been seen in the Platform. Since they were not, I believe that, while some details may need adjustment in the light of current realities, the policy direction from our members is still relevant and deserves to be recognised in a public forum.
Particularly as there is a requirement for the Leader to report (albeit trough the Caucus Accountability Officer) "to the Council of Presidents [I assume yearly] and each biennial convention of the Party on the implementation of the Party policies by the Caucus" .. And Yes.. we do need to 'start again' in every EDA and commission, working in our ridings to identify issues and develop solutions that we work on NOW, not just to provide resolutions to convention.
I also respectfully suggest that it is the Leader that should be acocuntable to report directly... anyone can compile a report.. but there is an ultimate accountability to the Party that rests with the Leader.
Maryanne
Unfortunately Maryanne we have no leader. Just an interim one. Had we adhered to our Other Constitution -the National one - we would have a leader already.
Tell me Maryanne, is Jason once again blowing smoke up everyone's ass by stating the LPCO AGM will beearly 2012? Did the ExecBoard -of which you are a member- ratify a 2012 date at their meeting last weekend?
For it to be "early" next year the cutoff for notice has already come and gone.
Jason has demonstrated to me that he is nothing more than a shill for his Zionist masters, and as such a traitor to this country. I'm certain many others would agree and therefore question how he is in a position that he is with the Liberal Party? Have Liberals, like the HarperCONS, become nothing more than apologists and co-conspirators against their own people?
Canadians! Beware of those in sheep's clothing who infiltrate your organizations pretending to be nationalists, while silencing and keeping true patriots out.
Resignation? Hell Yes!!
Canada should be ashamed for 'kowtowing' to Zionist pressure
Have Zionists taken over 'official' national political blogging sites in Canada?
John, I'm not sure where you're going with this, but I fail to see any comments on this chain by Jason that are Zionist. Nor is that the topic at hand. Perhaps you may want to stick to the matter at hand which is the LPCO constitution.
Jim - as I recall - in the past Jason has cried wolf and threatened to resign over every proposal that HE feels is pushing the party left in any way. Perhaps our answer to Jason is to propose a flood of left leaning motions that will appeal to the Canadian public; to propose a "takeback" of the handcuffs currently on Bob Rae being permitted to run for full leader and the occasional censure on Bibi Netanyahu's government for being intractable - and the Israeli PM being a pain in the tush even for his strongest ally President Obama. Somehow though I think Jason will keep proposing obstructive motions and take the ship down with him. Nature of the beast!
Maryanne - I don't know you but I strongly recommend that you add to your campaign the condition that you will not be submarined (as Joan Bourassa was) by a leader who dismisses the policy resolutions that the grassroots overwhelmingly voted for in the infamous Ignatieff coronation. This current executive are fighting like zombies to continue the path downward - not realizing how dead they are. I hope that you bring a breath of fresh are and some chutzpah to a job where dead wood doesn't realize it needs to be pruned!
Paul Darlaston
James, where I am going with this should be clear by now with my last two comments (follow the links).
The man uses his position to serve two masters, which is the Zionists first, followed by Canada a distant second, while at the same time actively working to promote the formers agenda at the expense of the later, while also at the same time using censorship on his blog to further his objectives of keeping dissenting opinions and true patriots from having their say, which is what a true democracy allows, and what Liberals use to stand for i.e freedom of expression.
Why would any political organization want or tolerate such a person in their ranks, never mind in a leadership role.
Resignation? Hell YES!! Better yet, fire him!
Wow!who knew it was the Jews!
C-Nuck, I'll stop you right there. Just as an apple and a orange are two different things, a Jew and a Zionist are as well. So don't try mixing apples with oranges by going down the road of the poor, hardpressed Jew when that is not the case here at all... but nice try.
John, while I understand your need to stir up an argument with Jason over his zionist positions, you are well within your rights on your blog. However this blog has nothing to do with said argument. This is about internal governance and a the lach thereof by an entire committee.
And, judgin by the response or lack therof from Maryanne, it would appear that the Executive Board met last weekend and DID NOT set a date for a 2012 AGM.
James, its your blog and your call, but I think you are being too kind in turning a blind eye to the fact the executive makes decisions and recommendations on behalf of its members, and as such, determines direction and focus as to what is and what is not important. Jason has demonstrated he has nothing but contempt for the democratic process by bringing his personal ideology into play with his decision making on behalf of the members, that is in direct opposition to what I think most people expect and want from their leaders. You cannot serve two masters, which I suggest Jason does, to our detriment.
Liblogs is a Zionist controlled blog that he runs that is the 'official' Liberal Party blog that prevents members (see links in my previous comments) from voicing their opinion in a democratic fashion. Jason sits on the executive as well. If he does what he does on his blog serving the Zionist agenda, what does he do on the executive board? Twiddle his thumbs? Not likely, and therefore my comments are relevant, in my opinion, in that they have everything to do with internal governance i.e. decision making by those serving two masters working at cross purposes to what true patriots in the Liberal Party and family believe in, and are working towards.
Jason Cherniak has a point. I mean, given that it was a snap election and no one could have known the date in advance it is completely unreasonable to have expected the Management Committee to have planned around the provincial election.
Sorry, someone's trying to get my attention.
Fixed election date? It was known four years in advance? The Management Committee had plenty of advance notice to plan around it either by having DSM's in mid October or early summer?
Oh. Nevermind.
Ahh those dastardly zionists that control the banks, the media and along with her Majesty are the foremost drug runners !
What surprise that Prince is out of work again!
Jim, we have our differences, but I hope you'll agree that Mr. Prince's comments cross a line far beyond reasonable discourse and should be deleted. I'm a "shill" of "zionsit masters"? Come on.
Jason Cherniak,
Well, I guess that clears that up and James should do your bidding (because you say so) and use the heavy hand of anti-democratic censorship against those who disagree with you, much like what you did to me on behalf of Warren Kinsella.
Have Zionists taken over 'official' national political blogging sites in Canada?
James, further to my last and final comment here on this post (unless Jason cares to defend his past actions?) I will let you and your readers decide for themselves if in fact Jason is a "shill" of "Zionist masters"? And, if so, whether or not he should continue in his leadership role with the Liberal Party of Canada, be fired, or resign?
Canada should be ashamed for 'kowtowing' to Zionist pressure
It would seem that you have been afforded free expression for your viewpoint on this blog, Mr. Prince. I think you have made your point. I will leave it to you to decide if in doing so you've somewhat contradicted yourself.
Mr. Chamberlain,
The subject of this post is that Jason Cherniack should resign.
I have offered from first hand experience evidence of why he should by way of 'free expression', as you put it.
Now, if you are suggesting I leave it alone, I believe that is what I said I would do in my last comment?
Time to tell the anti-semite to go away.
No difference between an anti-semite and an anti-zionist.
All apples aren't red but apple juice can be made from them all.
Facebook was not the best of forums for this sort of thing. Then again, I suppose there could have been worse. Minimally, to advance an opinion publicly is to also invite a response, and given the nature of the opinion, it lacked judgement. Perhaps Mr. Cherniak, respectfully, you can concede to that. We have to find a better way to deal with sort of stuff -- and perhaps we can all at least agree on that?
Safe holiday driving, everyone.
Craig, somebody had to say out loud what many people are whispering in private. I don't agree that it was a bad decision.
Mr. Cherniak (Jason) - Thought about your reply; thanks for it. I cannot speak to what is being said to you but I guess the bottom line for me is when one calls for someone's resignation, it should not be without some expectation that the person doing that will be held to a higher standard for their own actions. And to reiterate, your Facebook page wasn't the best of ways imho to express your views but to be fair you could have chosen much worse. In the end you will follow your own counsel but I am offering this for your own reflection. Sometimes it's best to write the letter and stick it in your desk for a few days before sending it. That's all.
Post a Comment