There is lots of talk among the general population about how they want the election process to be open, transparent and accountable.
People want there politicians to vote their ( constituents ) wishes and open the process to them so that they can see it at work.
Seems to have gone on deaf ears here in BC Liberal Surrey and the nomination process.
If rumors are true the recent nomination ( acclimation) of Stephanie Cadieux was an appointment, Marvin Hunt is being moved to another riding to run under an acclimation and tonight or soon newcomer and Sukh Dhaliwal crony, Puneet Sanhar, will be introduced/acclaimed in another riding.
The latter event apparently because Sukh was to be acclaimed but changed his mind in case he lost.
Given that these are fairly safe BC Liberal seats I am sure there would have been great nomination clashes should the process have been open.
Whatever happened to attracting good people to run in a nomination process and winning on their own merits?
This could be one of several factors in play by the time the election rolls around and they could conceivably lose these seats.
With the recent announcement by Dan Brooks of his intention to re-seek the the leadership of the BC Conservative Party, my readers have asked me a number of questions . They deserve answers.
One reader asked : Since Brooks quit and then announced his intention to run again, will he have to pay the $5000 entry fee? ( Why wouldn’t he, he quit the job causing the party to incur the cost of the leadership convention in the first place. )
Another reader asked: Since Brooks quit citing the lawsuit as one of the main reasons for stepping away does this mean the lawsuit is behind him and if it’s not will he quit again if it doesn’t go his way? ( I have no idea except to say that the whole thing is supposedly set for trial in November of 2016 and if things do not go his way quitting again would really leave the party in a lurch? Oh right. That’s happened once before.)
Another reader asked : If Brooks was implying that a settlement of his lawsuit was near, would he be so quick to give away his negotiating position in that lawsuit by announcing that the law suit didn’t bother him anymore and by extrapolation would he be so quick to give away the party’s in the event he was successful in the leadership race should he have to negotiate on their behalf for any reason? ( Who knows, you would have to ask Dan?)
A further reader asked : There are emails being sent out that contain Brooks endorsements. Does this mean Brooks has been vetted and given the green light? ( I don’t know, I don’t sit on the board.I have no have no idea where he got his email list. )
Finally a reader asked : The emails that have been sent out by the Brooks group ( including a news release) don’t give me an opportunity to unsubscribe. Doesn’t this violate Canada’s anti-spam legislation? ( I don’t know I am not a lawyer but the fines for breaching this are huge)
So it seems the Brooks candidacy has more questions than answers at this point from both the BC Conservative board and Dan Brooks.
I would imagine the answers will be forth coming soon.
I believe I am eminently qualified to render an opinion regarding this weeks latest Twitter gaffe by BC Liberal newly nominated candidate Randy Rinaldo.
Having been through the media gauntlet over the same issue in the 2013 provincial election and erring by firing them I can relate to the intensity of which the mainstream media will confront Campaign staff, managers , directors and candidates.
They play gotcha when a tweet or internet posting is discovered and then come at you to fire the candidate.
What we should have done then and what Rich Coleman ( He was the spokesperson) did right was keep the candidate in place and let the voters decide whether tweeting is a serious enough offense to cast their candidate ( Rinaldo) aside.
Make no mistake about it.
This is a winnable seat for the BC Liberals. They only lost last time by 743 votes.
It took the courage of Coleman’s Conviction ( and the party’s) to stand by their candidate.
In an interview with the CBC today NDP MP says that he is not prepared to announce whether he will run for the leadership of the NDP so quickly because it’s a 15-20 year commitment and that it the thought process leading up to his decision would take more than 24 hours.
Mr Cullen’s name has been bandied about for years regarding leadership aspirations and succession in the party. I can’t imagine he is just starting to think about it now.
Even more shocking is that he thinks it’s a 15-20 year commitment.
Enter the race now and run for leadership( fight off the leap manifesto) for the next 2 years
Win and fight for the next year in the run up to the 2019 election ( So far 2+1 =3)
Tomorrow the victim impact statements will take place in the case relating to the senseless killing of Maple Batalia.
It’s a shame that this happened and it’s a shame that every parent of a daughter in this country could not be there to show how this impacts them because they too are victims.
I am a father of daughters and I hope that the sentence in this case reflects society’s disgust for stalking and femicide.
Far to often pleas are accepted to close a file and save the family reliving the murder over and over again.
The problem with that is that sentences are more lenient and therefore other families who have daughters suffer through the very same moment.
I hope tomorrow, when the statements are read and the sentence is calculated, the court sends a message to the community, Maple’s family and yes Maple herself that this will no longer be tolerated and that Maple’s death has meaning.
The sentence should likely be life ( Maple’s family gets life without her) but not a moment less than 21 years with no eligibility for parole.
Maybe then the community will be a little safer and some of these monsters will think twice before committing the most heinous of crimes.
Brooks resignation follows his thumping in the previous provincial election, several resignations on the provincial board, lack of funds raised by his team and most notably the recent lawsuit launched against him and certain member’s of his leadership contest team for smear letters written against candidate Rick Peterson.
The allegations have yet to be proven in court and come up for trial in November of 2016.
The board in the announcement of his resignation applauds Brooks for staying on at least until the Party`s February AGM.
There are a lot of us who think he should leave now and the harder the door hits him in the rear on the way out the better.
The party is not dead. Brooks resignation opens the doors for some exciting candidates to step forward.
I have heard a lot of chatter about new leaders in the last 24 hours.