This morning I posted that the fundamental problem in the NDP is now broken trust.
A minority of caucus led by Jenny Kwan took the leader of the party down in a coup for unspecified and undocumented charges. Their coup overrode the party constitution and the overwhelming wishes of its governing body. Their coup overrode the wishes and support of the majority in caucus.
The 13 loudly aired their dirty laundry in public. They followed a thought out plan with the pressure ratched up in public and fed by strategic leaks and prepared statements.
The coup has likely cost the party the next election. The media is already full of comment saying the NDP aren’t up to opposition let alone government. And I’m told the party started hemorrhaging money and members at precisely 11:15 yesterday.
Can such a serious mess be fixed? Labour tried and failed, done in by the intransigence of the 13.
Still the problem can’t be papered over. Broken trust will undermine every action the party takes, including the act of electing a new leader.
I was in a room today full of people when Lana Popham walked in. People turned away. Former friends stared glassy eyed at her. There was no animosity. People just waited for her to leave before they went on sharing their business. Afterwards, several talked about her leaks over the past couple of weeks. She is viewed as untrustworthy.
Lana’s problem permeates the party now.
How can caucus members who supported James trust those who stabbed her in the back? Why would anyone say what they actually think in front of Kwan or Lalli knowing their penchant for character assassination? How can a new leader trust any of the 13 when she or he has to make a difficult decision? How can the party do it’s job while this remains unresolved? How can renewal possibly take place in this context? How can the voters trust any ‘decision’ made by the party?
This morning I wrote that to effect real renewal trust must be rebuilt. But to rebuild trust there must be a reckoning. There has to be a consequence to the actions that led to this impasse and this broken party.
In reply, Lesli Boldt asked an interesting question. How much reckoning is necessary? I’m sure Boldt’s answer is ‘none’. After all she had more than a toe dipped in the whole mess. But ‘none’ isn’t a basis for renewal. It’s more like one of those 24-hour truces declared in Palestine – 24 hours to stockpile and reload.
One person has paid – Carole James. I believe wrongly, but let’s leave that aside. What’s been done to her is done.
There’s still the other side. Trust is mutual. Renewing trust requires mutual action. In other words the 13 who instigated all this can’t get off scott-free.
But there is one way that might lead to renewal. And the one who holds the power to start the process is the one who is calling most loudly for renewal. Jenny Kwan. She started this. She has the ability to come to party’s aid and end it.
Kwan must resign.
It’s the only chance to put this behind us. Otherwise real renewal is dead in the water.
Absolutely Kwan must resign, along with the rest of the Baker’s Dozen. The BC New Democrat’s Provincial Council must purge the thirteen from the party, and then get on with making the party better than ever.
Those 13 have proved that they don’t belong in the New Democratic Party.
Jenny’s media today sounded a bit desperate, like the child confronted with consequence of their actions and desperate to minimize the affair. Sadly, I’ve worked on her campaigns in the past, but she is now dead to me. I’ll come back to Mount Pleasant when she is gone. Until then it’s Fairview or Hastings that gets my $ and time.
Both BC NDP and BC Lieberal constitutions are flawed in requiring Party members to support leaders blindly. Membership in the NDP had declined to 11,000 or fewer members. Thousands of members left the party because of the my way or the highway approach. The 84% was from those who were left and felt compelled to vote.
Correct me if I am wrong but the party does not use one member one vote.
Both Parties are uneasy coalitions of people who fail to achieve compromise demonstrable to the voting public. The problem is public confidence is compromised each time these parties try and fail to keep it together. Differing views need to be made clear to the public not hidden like inconvient facts.
Kwan resigning is exactly the wrong move. You need members to Show differing opinions in both parties and you need other parties in the Leg. to provide balance.
The NDP used Lana to sell there image and then marginalized her, shame on those folks. Did you expect her to just sit around and be marginalized.
Who is Lana? I’ve never heard of her.
Oh wait, is Lana the name in the leaked NDP email on the Holman site that mysteriously disappeared hours later. If so, who is she. Is she a riding volunteer somewhere? I’ve never heard of her before this?
Ah, thank god for google. She’s an MLA. Who knew. And, she’s one of the dumb dozen. Isn’t that cute – her first play for relevance is to destroy her future in the party. Not very smart. So glad she outed herself as an idiot before the NDP formed government.
Thank you Ian! Well said…Jenny must resign!
Wish I could post this. But can’t. Sorry
I am sorry to see Carole James go. She could do much good. But she went out with head high. Kwan cannot quit. NDP cannot afford to have any more loss. time to heal not call for more heads to roll. Maybe Moe, he should go. But that is all.
I do not agree that Kwan needs to resign. There is no evidence she did anything out of malice. In a true democracy we should all have the right to say what we want. If James couldn’t hold the party together than it is best she be replaced.
People like Kwan have strengths the party needs to use on a daily basis. Even if msm won’t cover what the NDP has to say, M.L.A.s need to be out there working to let the public know where the party stands. If M.L.A.s were given something to do they might not have had the time to “ferment” an uprising.
As to the matter of trust, if you are in politics and you trust anyone besides your very nearest and dearest, you are a fool.
Kwan shouldn’t resign – she needs to be taken out by a contested nomination.
Let’s treat Kwan to what she gave Carole.
This is the democratic way for us to vent. Find a new candidate who can be trusted by members and other MLAs.
Let’s see how Jenny does in a contest that isn’t a slam dunk.
Let’s see how Jenny does with a real job.
Ian,
Now i’m curious, are you going to wait until after you tare the party to shreds before you honour your ultimatum?
Kwan will not resign, and the rest of the baked dozen cannot be asked to leave. That would make a total mockery of Carole James resignation which was offered up in order to avoid losing 13 seats.
Nomination contests? Yes! But that will take time, and it’s a fair bet that most of the baked dozen will survive based on incumbency advantage. After all, who else has access to membership lists other than the local executives.
I am curious about the statement that Holman’s site featured a Lana Popham email, and that this was later withdrawn. There’s no mystery around the fact that Bill Tieleman and Sean Holman were both key organizers of the plot to dump James. But by removing tell tale traces they’re going one step further, proving conclusively that all their protestations to being just disinterested observers (Holman) or concerned party members (Tieleman) are totally fake. They had a personal hate on for either James or Sihota, or both, and acted on it to the nines and thirteens.
Ryan, just following up on your statement that “Differing views need to be made clear to the public not hidden like inconvient facts”…. could you please direct me to where I can read more about the group of thirteen’s views and policy ideas that are so profoundly different from the leader that they felt it necessary to get rid of her? hmm… inconvenient facts
Politics is rough business. You speak as if there is no one else in the party able to lead. You sell the BC NDP short. You ignore the fact BC did not want Carol James as leader. The BC NDP has been unable for the past 5 years to expose what the BC Liberals are doing to this province. Your continued focus on James resigning allows them to continue doing this. I supported Carol James and tried in vane to get others too but she was framed very effectively by the BC Liberals and the BC NDP was unable to overcome this. Now you are allowing them to characterize the BC NDP negatively again. You are doing a disservice to whoever becomes leader.
Get on with the job of being an effective opposition party. It is so important to the province that the Liberals do not win again because BC as a prosperous society may be lost forever.
Ian Reid need to step down from his hate-filled bully pulpit!
If we listen to you…Don`t worry, we won`t, you are now irrelevant to all concerned..
You Ian are acting the big baby, take your ball and go home…..Mommy is calling you!!!!
Scathing, you bet…Grow up man…This has become pathetic.
Carole gone, good riddance…Ian next!
well said Ian – i agree with you 100%
let’s just say from far away here in Ontario, we are appauled by the way Carole was treated by her colleagues and the members she stood by and supported.
Sadlyshe won’t be the next Premier and BCNDP won’t be government….just sitting there in opposition for another 4yrs if not more, hope the reckless band of 13 is content to be in 2nd place.
Here’s an interesting
Angus Reid poll. None of the potential candidates come close to the approval rating that Carole James had which Bill takes such liberties with in his article, of course, but that’s what we’re left with now.
Note that Adrian Dix places highest among New Democrats at 38% positive. Mike Farnworth gets highest at a net 15% when Liberals are included, but doubt they’d ever vote for him if there is a Liberal candidate on the ballot (there will be).
The lowest scoring contenders were George Heyman, former BC Government Employees Union president (minus 17,) Jim Sinclair, president of the B.C. Federation of Labour (minus 26) and in last place, former MLA Moe Sihota (minus 41.)
Grant, Ian Reid has done more for this party than you can ever hope to. He’s entitled to his opinions as you are yours.
Be careful what you wish for because if the likes of Ian leave this party the NDP the party will have even less of a chance at winning the next election. Besides, that would leave a party filled with people like you and no one wants to belong to a party filled with cranks.
BC did not want Carol James? Lets start with the fact that no NDP leader has ever been supported by a majority of BC voters. Aside from one anomaly the NDP vote is pretty consistent at around 40%. Now consider Carol pulls more votes from British Columbians then can typically be counted on in a BC election.
Wow, don’t let facts get in the way of good spin!! Is it going to be your contention that anyone who stands up for integrity and honesty (is that not what the group of 13 said they were doing) will be harpooned as not-loyal to the party and advancement of social democratic principles…. that is really rich.
I heard a interview with Jenny from her constituency office yesterday. Very proud to say that only 1 in 10 of supporters calls were negative. I think she should listen to the will of the minority in her riding and step down.
Lets vilify the messenger so we can discount the message… These Jenny supporters arguments are filled with emotion and conjecture but hold little in the way of facts (passion has its place and is admirable when used in constructive way but I fail to see it in most of their posts).
I still have not read much about the alternatives they put forward for moving forward…(except that we should all just fall into place/step with fact that Carol is gone and we should just “get over it” – the fact that the 13 did nothing really wrong in context of this blood sport of politics).
Please tell me about some of their differences in policy positions with Carol that justify their actions? Maybe we should we hold Jenny accountable for the fact the BC Media have refused to cover these substantive differences (Carol was of course responsible for the fact “The BC NDP has been unable for the past 5 years to expose what the BC Liberals are doing to this province”) . What changes do they suggest? Can we debate them? Oh wait a minute don’t we have a democratic process for that sort of thing?
I would like to see the Party stand up for its constitution and associated processes. Let the party do that through reductions of $$ transfers to constituencies where an MLA can not be counted on to be a team member. I think 90% of Jenny’s election funds came from party in last election. I don’t know if that will be any more damaging to election prospects then what is happening now… However, I would certainly feel better about my donations knowing they were going only to “team” members.
Ian? Why are doing this? I have a lot of respect for you so please ask yourself who you are helping with these blog posts. What Jenny and the others did was stupid and reckless so why are you and others meeting her actions with your own stupid and reckless moves?
We can’t further tear our party apart just because it’s uncomfortable to be in the room with some of the dissenters. I know you are angry and that you spent a lot of your time and energy working on something you believed in only to see it destroyed by a handful of people. That must really suck.
But too many people are counting on us. This has to stop. Only our real opponents, the BC Liberals, benefit from these kinds of blog posts.
And why would you put the future of our party in the hands of Jenny Kwan? New Democrats are more than just one leader or a couple caucus members. We are movement of people who desperately want change. And we won’t let Jenny or your negativity stop us from working our asses off for that change in the next election, whenever that may be.
Finger pointing, naval gazing and self flagellation are not going to win the next election. We have a democratic system in lace within the party that should be allowed to work. Perhaps, in the future, we will have to resort to signed contracts – like miscreant schoolchildren – where each MLA must sign agreeing to follow the will of the majority. I think caucus meetings should be used to resolve differences, not the press. To be fair to the 13, they were forcibly ‘outed’ by the yellow scarf tactic. This was a poor idea that opened the laundry basket to the media. To be fair to Carole, the 13 responded poorly. I too would like to know the bases on which the 13 acted. Perhaps there were justifiable reasons but they failed to make the case and then rejected the will of the majority. I, like many New Democrats, am questioning what has happened to this, and successive NDP caucuses, that makes us repeatedly immolate our leaders. Due process people and if that’s not working revise the process in an ordered and civilized way. I am proud to be a New Democrat based on the party’s principles but, I am embarassed for the party. Let’s move on.
I wish I could agree with you CND. Here’s the problem that you don’t address. The genie’s out of the bottle and wishing it weren’t so won’t make that go away. My solution isn’t taken lightly. I just don’t see another way of moving forward. And it’s not about not “being uncomfortable in the room”. It’s about not being able to trust a single thing that happens in the room. Nobody posting here to say let’s blow by this is answering that. As a senior MLA told me ten minutes ago about Jenny “I won’t be in the same room as her. She just lies to your face.”
I completely agree with you Ian. And I appreciate your comments Concerned New Democrat, but what kind of a party allows a woman leader to be taken down so carelessly and rewards the people holding the knife. I fear these 13 MLAs being part of a government, and that they would act with the same absence of integrity in office. That does nothing for the people we care about. It does nothing for the cause.
I full-heartedly agree with you Ian. The actions of Jenny speak to a lack of respect for members, the party and the values of democracy she wrapped herself in, then proceeded to walk all over.
Sending continued (anti-Carole) messages/emails to her constituency – when she was supposed to be in the midst of working toward a possible solution – show how uncooperative and destructive she was. And that doesn’t just go away.
At no point have the 13 ever put forward ideas about policy they wanted to see enacted or about ideas of what their larger strategy was. I have also seen no sign of working in good faith (with continued media interviews, letters, press leaks, etc). They violated party policy, our constitution and general ethical codes of caucus. And in so doing, they have attacked and damaged all of us who want a better future for this province.
Jenny needs to accept her role in our party’s recent devastation and take responsibility for the morally defunct actions she has taken. As the saying goes, she has been weighed, measured and found lacking. She now has 2 choices: resign or be forced out.
The only way to rebuild is to deal with the violations, reestablish the collective (and united) direction/expectations we need to have, then move forward and deal with what we should have been all this time: the Liberals.
I’ve about had a bellyfull of the “in a democracy, all voices are heard” defense – the notion being the dissidents had every right to publicly challenge Carole’s leadership. Yes we all have a right to be heard, but that does not mean our view will prevail, and it certainly does not mean it’s either democratic or responsible to have your voice “heard” on the front page of the Vancouver Sun.
Ever been involved in, or observed, a labour dispute where you heartily disagree with your union? You believe their decision to strike, for instance, is ill-advised, even downright stupid. You go to the meetings, you organize the like-minded, your speak and vote against. But in the end, let’s say — oh, I’ll just pluck a number out of thin air — 84% of your fellow members support said stupid decision. What do you do? Do you suck it up and join your co-workers on the line? Do you shut the fuck up, but perhaps work behind the scenes to try to affect change? Or do you cross the picket line?
Jenny crossed the picket line. But not before inviting the media. An act that is lethal to the struggle. An act that will reverberate for years. An act that will nurture, as Ian has said, distrust and bitterness and will ultimately profoundly undermine or even destroy the organization.
Democracy is complex. It involves not just the freedom to speak, but in equal measure discipline and responsibility.
If Jenny had an ounce of personal integrity, if she comprehended for a nano-second what it means to put the Party first, she would announce her retirement today.
@MrsPremise … Also very well said: Jenny Kwan, Political Scab.
An interesting (self-inflicted) title with some lasting ramifications.
Trust is lost and rebuilt all the time in politics. And caucuses manage to go on even when people really hate each other. Our politicians need to remember why they are there in the first place.
Call me naive but I’d like to believe that New Democrats, even the dissenters, don’t get involved for personal reasons. They get involved because they want to help people. Of course there are egos involved but I sincerely believe that if everyone just chilled out for a bit and put their mind to winning the next election, all sorts of good ideas on how to move forward would come to light.
Maybe those ideas would include a process to hold accountable dissenters who come out publicly like Jenny did. I’m of the view that she should be held accountable somehow.
But I’m also of the view that we need to bring all this stuff indoors again and tone down the public debate about our internal matters. We need to start looking like we care about British Columbians’ issues more than our own.
“. . . the 13, they were forcibly ‘outed’ by the yellow scarf tactic. This was a poor idea that opened the laundry basket to the media. ”
Apparently, no harm, no foul for the months-long organized campaign of leaked records and anonymous comments, fed to cooperative journalists to undermine Carole James.
Kwan can not resign now. Her next move must be to create a new constitution for the party, one her group can abide by, and they must decide who is acceptable as the new leader, if indeed there is to be one.
I read Broken Trust’s comments in a previous thread. I have to agree. It all comes back to trust. And for me, it is about way more than Carole. The rules of the NDP weren’t developed overnight, they were developed democratically over dozens of painful floor debates in convention. These rules are the framework of how we work together and how we trust each other, despite knowing we don’t agree on everything. Jenny, Harry, Lana (who apparently is an MLA, who knew?) and the rest of the crew created a false urgency and used that false urgency to justify their complete disregard for the party constitution and, with it, the respect of their colleagues.
How can anyone sit in a room with them now and believe that the confidentiality and mutual respect required to develop and execute strategy exists?
That’s why Jenny and Harry and Lana must go. With them in the room, the party is paralyzed. If they care just half as much about the party as they pretend, they will quit and quit soon.
But, if any truly cared about NDP objectives, they would not have been part of a small group issuing ultimatums and pretending that is done in a spirit of democracy. There was a time and a place for members to seek changes to rules or leadership. The BC NDP even publishes their constitution online for all to read. Kwan and the others pretend it has no authority, for them. No free group of diverse points of view can exist if one segment sets its opinions above all others.
The right wing will have a wonderful time with this because they love to imply that lefties are potential totalitarians with too little respect for democracy. Voters will be reluctant to consider a future NDP platform to be trustworthy. A substantial portion of its members don’t feel bound by the party’s stated principles. If they are unwilling to follow the party’s constitution, they are unlikely to follow any other document or commitment.
Sorry Grant G. You can trash commentators on my site on your own, not here.
Art: contested nominations will simply prolong the divisiveness.
Grant: did it ever occur to you that this is Ian’s site and you are a guest? You don’t like his rules, go troll elsewhere.
Overall, I agree Jenny Kwan needs to resign. She won’t, but she should.