Thursday, November 06, 2008

Leadership Race Lite?

Will the cash strapped Liberal party be forced into a low-budget leadership process?

While we agree that the 2006 version was long and drawn out with too many candidates and too many debates, we do believe in a fair and balance and transparent process. We don't believe in compromising the integrity of this debate. We are looking for the best among us. We need to get it right this time.

A less expensive venue? Yes. A shorter process? Certainly.
Limit the number of candidates to serious contenders only? Frankly, if the Findlay's and Volpe's of the world think that they are improving this process and strengthening the party by running this time, then perhaps they didn't get the memo.

According to this Gazette article, "...At least half a dozen MPs made clear they want a focused campaign with a small roster. "I think the fewer the better," said Toronto MP Judy Sgro. "Frankly, I'd like to see the main contenders go in a room, flip a coin and come out and say this is who our leader is."
Toronto MP John McCallum said a short campaign with few candidates would keep costs down.
"From a financial point of view for the Liberal party, and one thing we're lacking is money, the more candidates there are, the more they raise money that might otherwise go to the Liberal party," he said.
Nova Scotia MP Scott Brison said "the more colleagues that are running for the leadership, the less effective we will be on the floor of the House of Commons."


The much anticipated rules of the race and fees for the candidates are to be announced this Saturday. Stay tuned.

5 comments:

MississaugaPeter said...

Andrew Steele over at the G&M has another take on it:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20081106.WBSteele20081106165641/WBStory/WBSteele/

"Like the races at Belmont, you won't understand the spin coming out of the Liberal caucus these days without a program.

My recommendation is the list of supporters for each leadership candidate in the last race.

For instance, let's dissect today's story on several Liberal caucus members wanting a fast, closed and – more or less – undemocratic process to select their leader.

First, the Liberal MP quoted calling for “flipping a coin” to see who should be leader: Judy Sgro. Okay, Wikipedia says Judy was with Ignatieff by the last ballot.

Next, John McCallum. Yep, Ignatieff from the beginning.

Scott Brison. Check. Ignatieff by the last ballot.

Geoff Regan. Ignatieff from the get-go.

Now, what do these four MPs have in common that might make them want to stampede the convention to the frontrunner? Ah-ha!

See, isn't politics easier to understand when you get the program?

Pick me up some crackerjacks on the way, will ya?"

Tobias said...

Impressive...most impressive.
Crackerjacks it is.

Anonymous said...

It's going to be a Bob and Ignatieff finish so build the rules to facilitate that.
Enough of the others wasting everyones time.

Arnone and Co. said...

mississaugapeter
can you kindly email us at
nextface@rogers.com.

We know you supported Kennedy last time and we would like to talk to you about Gerard's option this time.

Thanks
Robert

Anonymous said...

The article was very interesting and informative for me. weight loss Read a useful article about tramadol tramadol