May clinches Saanich–Gulf Islands nomination
It will surprise no one to learn that Elizabeth May handily won the Saanich–Gulf Islands nomination contest on Saturday, against a (bizarre? amusing?) challenge by a man named Stuart Hertzog. I had been wondering if Hertzog would end up in second or third place in this race, as Green Party ballots generally include the option “none of the above,” but I’m not sure in this case, so a distant second place it is. At any rate, a contested nomination actually ended up generating far more media coverage for May than there might have been otherwise, including a story on The National Friday night and one in the National Post on Saturday. So despite his best efforts, Hertzog did us a favour.
May’s landslide victory is a tremendous vote of confidence. It’s great to have the nomination contest over with so she can focus 100% on the only race that really matters — the race to become the next MP for SGI. As I’ve explained in past posts, the Greens will run our most focused, most ambitious, and best-organized campaign ever, and I’m confident it will be enough to send May to Parliament.
Nearly one million Canadians who voted Green in the last election are currently without representation — they are completely shut out from the conversation in the House of Commons. And it’s not only Greens who are frustrated by the absence of Green representation in Parliament — voters of all political stripes recognize the unfairness of the situation. According to Harris/Decima, an overwhelming percentage of Canadians — 41% — want to see a Green voice in Parliament.
It will be May’s job to reach out to these voters, who have traditionally supported other parties, and convince them to make history in SGI by electing the first Green MP. I believe May is up to this task, as attracting support from across the political spectrum is exactly what propelled her to strong second place finishes in both London North Centre and Central Nova. Many voters in SGI have been trying to rid themselves of Gary Lunn for sometime, but the progressive vote has been split among the Greens, NDP and Liberals. (Note that I am not calling the Liberals a progressive party… maybe sort of progressive-ish once under Dion, but not now.) Even though the Liberals ran their worst campaign ever in 2008, their candidate Briony Penn, whom I’ve heard isn’t terribly inspiring despite her background as a former Green, came close to knocking him off. This indicates that Lunn is vulnerable, and voters will rally around a progressive who has a real shot at winning in SGI. But beyond the excitement about a chance to vote out Gary Lunn, I don’t doubt that voters in SGI will be even more enthusiastic about the positive action of voting for Elizabeth May, a federal party leader and one of the most inspiring, hard-working, pragmatic, and down-to-earth candidates SGI will ever see.
So, to my readers in Saanich–Gulf Islands, I hope you will consider doing something a little different in the next election — I hope you will vote Green this time. You have the power to give a voice to all of the Green voters who are currently unrepresented, but you’ll also elect one of the best MPs SGI will ever have.
I hardly think that this bparachuting into SGI and the challenge by Hertzog has been as positive as you spin it.
First off, the Macleans article that you took such delight in quoting yourself about her efforts to run in SGI never made it into the print magazine = the editors apparently thinking it was not newsworthy – so hardly seen by anyone.
The coverage on the National, a late Friday night feature was hardly positive. A few residents were lukewarm at best about her running there.
And have a look at some of the comments attached to the G&M story about her nomination win. Almost all are negative (even though valiant efforts by suppporters like her brother Geoffrey)
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/may-wins-green-party-nomination-in-bc-riding/article1294469/
May will finish no better than third, or if all the stars line up, second at best. This is the start of the end of the GPC as we know it – very stupid move by the Leader and the GPC’s compliant counsil.
Whooee! As always, I wish Elizabeth the best and congrats to the team on the nomination. I’m interested in some numbers — or approximate numbers. How many at the nomination meeting? What were the results other than Herzog was a distant second? Any votes for “none of the above”?
JB
Sorry, but it will be a waste of time and energy here in this riding.
She won’t win. She will be a close third in the final reults.
Geez! The negativity! Well, even I blogged that she’d be second or third.
However, given who she is, she can be a spoiler, but a few stars have to align. Better get those boots on the ground, fast. Better hammer away at Lunn and the Liberals. So what if the Liberals have an environmentalist running (Renee Hetherington). The Liberals, with Dion not even in the shadow cabinet, and with Iggy promoting the tar sands, will never make good use of her. She needs to elected based on the need to send a clear message to whatever government we get. That means ruthlessly tearing down everyone’s platform.
When Joe Clark parachuted and ran in Calgary, ‘they’ said it was a gutsy move that would fail. Well, he got in. Of course, that was Joe Clark, who is a good parliamentarian. May, meanwhile, has never been in Parliament.
Still, now that she’s made this choice, best of luck.
Not sure, not sure… Radio-Canada http://www.radio-canada.ca/nouvelles/Politique/2009/09/20/001-Elizabeth-May.shtml reports that Hertzog has lodged a complaint with Elections Canada (it is probably unfounded but still generates negative publicity) and all that the people comemnt say it “yeah so the Green party is just like the others”. Hardly positive.
Mark makes some good points. Every candidate will have some baggage. For the Libs, Ignatieff’s environmental intransigence will be serious baggage for small-g green voters. He’s on record supporting nukes, too. His militaristic support for Bush’s Iraq invasion/fiasco doesn’t really speak well for his international savvy, either, and won’t play well with the stereotypical west coast flower children. Hetherington will be saddled heavily with her un-green leader.
Lunn is vulnerable on Chalk River. As Minister of Natural Resources, he was the guy who fired Linda Keen so ignominiously in the middle of the night. He was responsible for restarting the limping reactor that is now giving Canada an international black eye in the medical isotope department. So hapless was Lunn that he was relieved of that portfolio and it was handed off to the even more hapless Lisa Raitt.
Elizabeth May’s biggest piece of baggage seems to be the parachute label. If she can wrap herself in SGI issues and make herself visible enough between now and whenever the Cons get too unpalatable for Layton, she may be able to shake that off. Her environmental credentials and those of the GPC are impeccable. For small-g green voters, she should be able to capitalize on the Liberal leader’s poor environmental stance.
The Herzog flair-up will be seen by most as a sour grapes thing; internal, riding-level party power politics: no worse, better or different than what happens with every party. Elections Canada will not find anything amiss with the riding funding plan and despite some valid concerns regarding top-down party management, Herzog’s complaints will not continue to play a significant part in an election campaign.
Have the NDP nominated anyone? BC voters have the advantage of having had a provincial NDP government by which to judge the NDP’s commitment to the environment. Sure, federal NDP does not equal provincial NDP… except when the NDP wants it to.
I’m a longtime GPC member and EDA exec. I wasn’t too keen on the SGI choice but now that it is a done deal, I’ll be putting my support behind Elizabeth. The decision to run her wherever she is most electable wasn’t a top down decision but was endorsed by the rank and file. My biggest concern centres around the availability of SGI foot soldiers. When Elizabeth ran in London, the foot soldiers flocked in from Toronto and elsewhere in densely populated southern Ontario to knock on doors. I fear that sort of feet-on-the-ground support will be much more difficult to muster in SGI where the doors are further apart and the population nearby is sparser.
JB
The Gulf Islands had a paracute candaidate, Tommy Douglas 1972-1978 (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands), and very proud they were of him. If Tommy Douglas could make it, why not Elizabeth May?
The Gulf Islands had a parachute candidate, Tommy Douglas 1972-1978 (Nanaimo-Cowichan-The Islands), and were proud to do so. Elizabeth May might a;so do as well.
If Tommy Douglas could make it, why not Elizabeth May?
Here’s the difference:
Tommy Douglas was elected MP for Weyburn, Sask in 1935 and 1940.
Then, as Provincial leader of the Sask CCF, he became Premier in 1944, a position he held until 1961, at which point he became the Leader of the Fed NDP that had seats in Parliament.
He won a byelection in Burnaby-Coquitlam in 1962, and was re-elected in 1963 and 1965.
He then ran in the by-electon in 1968 after a fellow NDP member, Colin Cameron, who had held the seat for 15 years, died. Douglas held that riding until his retirement in 1979.
Elizabeth May has never been elected to any public office of any kind. The Green Party has never elected a member to Parliament. The seat has been held by the Reform/Alliance/Conservative Party since, what, 1994?, and is currently held by Gary Lunn, elected four times and for the last 12 years.
There is nothing even remotely similar to Tommy Douglas’s parachute into that riding, nor to his background in politics in Elizabeth May’s ill fated effort.
The seat has been held by the Reform/Alliance/Conservative Party since, what, 1994?, and is currently held by Gary Lunn, elected four times and for the last 12 years.
Even though we don’t have term limits, the voters often know when it’s time for a change. That Alberta Legislature seat that the upstart Wildrose Alliance took last week had been in Conservative hands since 1968. “Always has been” doesn’t mean “always will be.”
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by jimbobbysez and Cindy. Cindy said: Off BC coast in Gulf Islands: RT @CamilleLabchuk New blog: @ElizabethMay clinches SGI nomination – http://ow.ly/q9Dh #gpc #cdnpoli [...]
Yeah, you’re right – it could go NDP, or maybe even Liberal – not likely though with all the vote splitting.
And if Elizabeth thinks she can win over voters from the Conservatives by bringing up events related to Chalk River of a number of years ago, it seems to me that issue was well addressed in the last election, where Lunn’s percentage of votes went up.
The shit didn’t hit the fan on Chalk River until this year — May 2009 — after the last election. In case you somehow aren’t aware of it, there is currently a worldwide shortage of medical isotopes which was entirely brought about by the Chalk River fiasco.
Two entirely different issues (Linda Keen and what happened earlier this year). If you don’t know the difference, I’m not going to bother explaining it.
Keen shut down an unreliable reactor. Lunn fired Keen and restarted the unreliable reactor. A year later, the reactor broke down completely leaving thousands without needed isotopes and blackening Canada’s international reputation in both supply reliability and nuclear safety. The leaks that were discovered and are causing teh current shutdown are the result of long term corrosion and may well have been found earlier during the shutdown and inspection that Keen was demanding.
The duplicitous responses from the Cons are a matter of public record. When a so-called Liberal appointee shut down the reactor, it was tantamount to bloody murder. When the Con appointee shut it down, it was responsible nuclear safety management. If you don’t think the public can see through the double-talk, you have little respect for the public.
Different issues? Yes. “Entirely” different? Hardly.
I am very happy to hear about the outcome in SGI, having largely taken the weekend off from political blogging and organizing (except for attending the International rally hosted by the United Steelworkers here in Sudbury in support of Vale Inco workers, on strike now for 10 weeks).
That being said, Camille, I find it extremely ironic that you take the first part of your blog to question the motivations of Stuart Hertzog’s seeking the SGI nomination, characterizing his right to do so as being “bizarre” or, presumably at best, “amusing”. With the second part of your blog, you go on to write about how almost a million of Canadians are essentially disenfranchised from the “conversation” in the House of Commons. Don’t you see the irony here? Hertzog represents a growing movement within the Green Party, which demands reform, yet you’ve completely dismissed him as a crank, just as the “mainstream” parties dismiss the Green Party.
Those who have taken the time to listen to or read Hertzog will quickly realize that Hertzog is anything but a crank. He has real values which are completely in agreement with the values of the Party. I read the text of the speech that he gave at the SGI Nomination meeting this past Saturday, and I found little in it to quibble with. The man is a Green, through and through. His issues which I believe you, and others, take exception to, have more to do with the nature of the Party structure itself than his policy orientation. But because he has been critical of structure, you and others have been dismissive of him.
Trust me on this: Hertzog doesn’t stand alone here. It’s best for us not to burn our bridges to the Reform side of the party, and not just because they are increasing in numbers; but because the right thing for the Party to do is to welcome constructive criticism and to talk amongst ourselves about ways of resolving old and new issues which could, potentially, divide us rather than unite.
Being dismissive of the Reform side does not assist, and is frankly at odds with what I understood this Party to be about.
To Mark F. – Joe Clark wasn’t much of a parachute candidate when he ran in Calgary Centre. He’s originally from High River which is about 30kms south from Calgary.
Jim Bobby,
Look, I’ll try to explain it in laymen’s terms. Keen wanted an extra level of protection – auxillary back up emergency power supplies for the two main circulation pumps. They had been operating since 1958 thereabouts with a number of backup systems- standard for the day, and perfectly adequate.
Although the additional auxillary power supply would be installed for the one pump during the regularly scheduled maintenace shut down, she insisted on both – thereby delaying start up for 2-3 months. Additional inspection, as you suggest, WAS NOT what she was pushing for.
The current shutdown is due to corrosion problems in an aging reactor. It had nothing whatsoever to do with what Keen was advocating. Nothing. NADA.
You know not of what you write. Go back to hillbilly mode.
How sad it is to survey the strategic political ground where the Greens now find themselves. A noble party, mostly populated by good citizens, trying to have a much needed impact on Canada’s political system, but led by a leader of little political sense and maturity. With the outcome in SGI, she has now been nominated in three provinces in three years more or less. It is an unflattering record for any federal politician to hold, much less a leader, but is that doing politics differently, as she is fond of saying? Is that the sum total of the supposedly new strategy for 2009? It does make for an appropriate follow-up on the 2008 strategic voting fiasco and the “Central Nova is my home” mantra, but what is Ms. May going to say to the first journalist who asks her if she will run again in SGI if she loses. And to add insult to injury, she has already mused to Vancouver papers that she would accept the Environment Minister’s portfolio in a Liberal minority government, so has strategic voting popped up yet again? Are Greens across the country once more going to be blind-sided by Ms. May’s very confusing message? The media ceased to treat her with kid gloves once she disingenuously blamed them for creating the strategic voting “misunderstanding” and now she’s engaged in yet another “no hope” campaign in a riding she can’t win, and they know it. Greg Morrow’s numbers prove that beyond doubt. And at the very moment when the party should be devoting its scarce resources to building its grass roots and looking for every vote it can get, the leader decides that it’s all about her in a constituency she simply will not win. The Green Party is therefore in danger of seeing its national vote actually decline in the next election, and that would be wrong. Many people have identified the danger of being a one issue environment party, but in reality the greater peril resides in having the brilliant but politically erratic E. May become that very single issue, something she seems determined to do no matter how much it costs the Green party of Canada.
The corrosion in NRU has been building up for a long time and did not just happen after Lunn and Harper restarted the reactor. After discovering the main leak, they’ve found quite a few more problems. While there is no guarantee those problems would have been found during Keen’s recommended shutdown time, the corrosion issues did exist at that time and it was Lunn’s portfolio. Lunn and Harper insisted that the reactor was in great shape. Harper to Parliament: “There will be no accidents.” Harper and Lunn were wrong as the leaks and shutdown have shown. The reactor is, as you correctly note, aging and on its last legs. Many in the field think it will never be restarted. Any concerns about its safe operation should have been left to CNSC and not made into a political football with midnight firings and emergency House session where Harper and Lunn declare they know more than the regulatory agency.
You know not of what you write. Go back to hillbilly mode.
Silent Majority, go back to silent mode.
Lunn and Harper insisted that the reactor was in great shape.
JB – Linda Keen was a certified agrologist. She was not a nuclear physicist, nor engineer. In two appearances – one before parliament, the other before Committee,her as well as professional engineers- those responsible for running Chalk River and outside consultants with specific enginnering experience in running nuclear facilities refuted Linda Keen’s testimony. It was, in fact, on that basis that Parliament (all parties) unanimously overruled Linda Keen and ordered the reactors to start-up.
When sometime later, leaks were found, it was the unanimous opinion of AECL, CNSC, outside consultant engineers that the facility must remain shutdown and repaired.
If you take issue with the start-up (overruling Keen) you can file a complaint with the Association of Professional Engineers of Ontario against those responsible for safety – the engineers (not Keen). You would therefore be claiming professional negligence. Are you willing to put up? If not, stop the professional smears and shut up.
Now, go back to the still and brew us up some more hootch
If I ain’t mistaken, a big part of Keen’s problem with the operators at NRU was that they deliberately lied in their written report. They filed reports saying that certain work had been completed when, in fact, it had not even been started. That work wasn’t Linda Keen’s idea, btw. It had been mandated by professional engineers and nuke experts.
Filing false reports that have to do with nuclear safety should be considered a serious issue. I know a car mechanic who was dragged through the courts on accounta he issued a safety certificate for a car and some shyster lawyer took issue with his assessment. The culprits who filed a false report to CNSC were essentially exonerated by Lunn and Harper. The regulator, to whom the false report was submitted, got canned.
There’s no doubt that the Keen affair turned into a pissin’ match between Keen and AECL. The fact that Harper and crew were looking for excuses to sell AECL played into there decision to hobble the pesky regulator. Lunn is on record saying how he came into the Nat resources ministry with the plan to get rid of regulators.
You may be right that SGI voter will have short memories wrt to Lunn’s part in Chalk River Fiasco, Part One. His neglect of his constituents wrt to the tanker traffic moratorium or his lavish expense account charges to taxpayers may have more traction. His support for the hugely unpopular RoR projects might bite him in the ass, too. Or maybe his enthusiasm for using nuclear energy to power the tar sands could strike the wrong chord with treehuggin’ SGI voters. His support for whole log exports might be a problem with sawmill workers.
When it comes to baggage, the incumbent usually has the most and Lunn’s no exception.
Or maybe his enthusiasm for using nuclear energy to power the tar sands could strike the wrong chord with treehuggin’ SGI voters.
Provincial jurisdiction. Alberta.
All the rest is hearsay.
In fact, since Elizabeth May is , I assume, a member of the Law Society of Ontario, should she continue on smearing the reputations of professional engineers without a factual basis, she herself could be subject to a professional complaint. Something for her to think about, perhaps, eh Camille? Ask around the faculty.
Don’t start puttin’ my words into Elizabeth May’s mouth. She speaks for herself an’ so do I.
Camille, echoing Steve May’s comments..
Stuart Herzog was active in the Green Party and similar movements before you were born.
If you continue as a Green activist for twenty-five years, you may earn the right to call him “bizarre” or “amusing”. But by then you will have become an adult and learned better manners
JB,
Oh, I just assumed you got your spin from her. She’s said worse, in fact, in a press release at that time. Claiming the consulting engineers were in the bag due to political affiliations with the Conservatives etc etc etc.
Anyhoo…
Can I truly believe my eyes? Did John Ogilvie really just tell someone to become an adult and learn better manners? Now *this* is what I call bizarre and amusing, because you are notoriously rude and abusive to others, John. And this isn’t the first time you have thrown ageist insults at me, which I find very distasteful. Give it up.
I’ll address the substance of this comment and Steve’s comment later on, as Steve makes many good points, but I must run to an International Peace Day event hosted by Toronto-area Green candidates.
I’m not criticizing your age. I’m criticizing your rudeness.
It will take you many more Peace Day meetings before you have accomplished as much for the Green movement as Herzog, who over twenty-five years, has participated in many local campaigns, run three times as a Green candidate, and earned 20% in one race. Show some respect for people who have the same values as yourself, and have invested more time.
I have nothing but respect for what Hertzog and others in the Green movement have accomplished over the years, and I have never said otherwise. I merely take issue with his current actions and some behaviour that is particularly un-Green. There’s nothing rude about stating this opinion.
Camille, I’ve just been reading some of the comments posted on Stuart Hertzog’s blog regarding the vote in SGI. Stuart writes that the numbers for the votes were never released publicly, yet it seems that maybe you have additional information about the numbers, as you indicate that Elizabeth “handily won” the contest. Do you have further information to share with the rest of us on this? I’ve been trying to find out what the results were for some time now today, but have been unable to do so. Any assistance that you can provide would be great.
Hi Steve, I haven’t heard anything official as to the SGI nomination vote numbers – I believe the EDA chose not to release that information. The only thing I did see is a comment someone posted a comment on one of my previous posts (http://www.camillelabchuk.ca/2009/08/26/stuart-hertzog/#comments). No idea if it’s accurate!
Is Mary Griffin (the one spreading rumours) employed or assoiated with the GPC in any way?
Camille, thank you for that information about the EDA not releasing the numbers. Certainly it is completely within the EDA’s purview to choose not to do so. Here in Sudbury we did not release the vote totals at our own nomination meeting (which was a bit of a wash anyway, as one of the candidates had withdrawn on the night of the meeting).
That being said, how is it that you are able to conclude that Elizabeth May won handily? I note that the GPC’s news release refers to a “landslide”. Statements like these, which can not be supported, are problematic for the Party. Many will believe that this is just “spin”, given that no numbers were released. Maybe the vote total was a heck of a lot closer than we’re being led to believe. Maybe not. The fact is, we’ll never know, but unsubstantiated statements will make many think that something fishy is likely going on. We should be above this.
I think it’s the EDA’s decision on whether the specific numbers will officially be released by them. For strategic reasons, for example, they may not wish for that info to be known as it could indicate how many active members are in the riding. That said, I believe it’s fair game to comment in general terms on the results of the vote.
Camille, I guess the question people are asking is how you would know what the results were, since you could describe it as a landslide? Your brief, Ontario, is a long way form SGI.
I agree that you probably do have inside info, given that your mom is GPC’s Director of Organizing, and Elizabeth’s 2006 leadership campaign manager.
In case you didn’t notice, the press release on this topic is titled “Elizabeth May Wins Nomination in Landslide”. That’s how I know it can be described as a “landslide”.
Anne McLellan (from wiki):
Her first foray into politics was as the Liberal candidate for the riding of Edmonton Northwest in the 1993 general election, when she won her seat by 12 votes. She is nicknamed “Landslide Annie” for her string of narrow electoral victories. All four election victories from 1993 to 2004 were by narrow margins, as she was twice declared defeated by the national news though she emerged victorious the next day. She was defeated in the 2006 federal election.
Just media spin (though it makes you wonder – if it is up to the EDA to withhold actual results, why were they released to the national office and referenced in a press release?)
It’s like saying “According to Harris/Decima, an overwhelming percentage of Canadians — 41% — want to see a Green voice in Parliament.” Objectively, it would be more truthful to say “According to Harris/Decima, an overwhelming percentage of Canadians — 59% — don’t want to see a Green voice in Parliament.”
Truth in advertising. Elusive. Even for a party that claims to do things differently.
Just one quick clarification here regarding the EDA’s decision to release vote totals: it is completely up to the EDA whether to release vote counts or not; and it is not at all unusual for the EDA to decide NOT to release vote totals, for the reason Camille referenced above. Plus, if only a dozen people cast ballots, and that was reported in the local morning paper, it might make a party look a little rinky-dink.
Well, I read somewhere (maybe it was a blog comment) that 54 people voted. Could be just somebody physically counting the number of bodies that got up to vote.
“It’s like saying “According to Harris/Decima, an overwhelming percentage of Canadians — 41% — want to see a Green voice in Parliament.” Objectively, it would be more truthful to say “According to Harris/Decima, an overwhelming percentage of Canadians — 59% — don’t want to see a Green voice in Parliament.””
According to Canadians when they voted last, an overwhelming percentage — 62% — didn’t want a Conservative elected.
Just saying.
Yeah, I agree. So, best not to go there if you’re trying to convince someone as to the merits of your position.
Journalists/politicos/people who read these blogs have seen it all and are not so easily spinned. So just tell the truth. It’ll payoff in the long term.
John O., you mention “Herzog, who … has … run three times as a Green candidate”
Yeah, except that one of those three times it was actually as an NDP. (Darn facts, they keep confusing things.) So Camille has only one more campaign needed to have run as a Green as many times (twice) as Hertzog.