A Roadmap to Renewal
The Liberal Roadmap to Renewal has been released and can be read here. There are several longer drafts floating around I've put on my weekend reading list, but at 80-100 pages, I may just wait for the movie version.
While the process feels a little too top-down for my liking, we've been talking about renewal for years so I'm glad something is being done and that members have concrete proposals before them to debate and vote on at January's Biennial convention.
As for the proposals themselves, some are unnecessary, some are flowery, and some skate around the real issues. Why we need to affirm the policy process is beyond me - I'd much rather see it reformed and made meaningful.
At the same time, there is some real meat in this document. The most visible and flashiest change would be moving leadership and nomination races to the primary-style system I blogged about earlier this week. This, coupled with the end of protected nominations for incumbents and the end of leader's ability to appoint candidates would be a significant leap towards creating a more open and grassroots party.
I won't go into detail on some of the bookkeeping changes being discussed, because if I do you'll never visit this blog again. It's not exciting stuff, but I will say that the move towards streamlining and centralizing accounting, fundraising, and operations will save money. And raise money too, come to think of it.
Fundraising to defend the new leader and buy more technology doesn't require constitutional amendments, but those are worthy initiatives I'd be willing to open my chequebook for. The party needs to adopt a culture of data collection, so good on them for moving into the 21st Century.
The document is rather quiet on what must be done to engage existing members, but those kind of initiatives don't require constitutional change - just a willingness by people in positions of power to make things happen.
While the process feels a little too top-down for my liking, we've been talking about renewal for years so I'm glad something is being done and that members have concrete proposals before them to debate and vote on at January's Biennial convention.
As for the proposals themselves, some are unnecessary, some are flowery, and some skate around the real issues. Why we need to affirm the policy process is beyond me - I'd much rather see it reformed and made meaningful.
At the same time, there is some real meat in this document. The most visible and flashiest change would be moving leadership and nomination races to the primary-style system I blogged about earlier this week. This, coupled with the end of protected nominations for incumbents and the end of leader's ability to appoint candidates would be a significant leap towards creating a more open and grassroots party.
I won't go into detail on some of the bookkeeping changes being discussed, because if I do you'll never visit this blog again. It's not exciting stuff, but I will say that the move towards streamlining and centralizing accounting, fundraising, and operations will save money. And raise money too, come to think of it.
Fundraising to defend the new leader and buy more technology doesn't require constitutional amendments, but those are worthy initiatives I'd be willing to open my chequebook for. The party needs to adopt a culture of data collection, so good on them for moving into the 21st Century.
The document is rather quiet on what must be done to engage existing members, but those kind of initiatives don't require constitutional change - just a willingness by people in positions of power to make things happen.
Labels: Boring internal Liberal Party matters, Liberal Renewal
posted by calgarygrit at
1:00 p.m.
5 Comments:
What the party needs is a reason for past liberal supporters to come back.A collection of back room dealing hacks,nostalgia and carpetbagger leaders and MP's is less than appealing.While the same people are in charge it will be a long time before I open my wallet again.
By
Anonymous, at 6:17 p.m.
In the past, I was a member of the Liberal Party (briefly) and I've helped in numerous campaigns.
I don't see ever joining the LPC again. Not now, because at the moment, the Conservatives are a better party, and probably not ever, because I prefer to keep my political options open.
But I wish the Liberal Party well and if the option were open, I might possibly fork over $10 to vote on the next leader, and if my candidate won, I'd feel obliged to vote for him and most likely campaign for him.
But if my candidate lost the leadership, I'd most likely vote Conservative again.
I think I might be typical of many who might take advantage of a primary style leadership contest. And I think attracting this sort of wider but tentative buy-in is exactly what the proposed change in rules is designed to attract.
So here's the question for committed Liberals: Is this a good thing or a bad thing?
By
Brian Henry, at 10:58 a.m.
I said it right away and I'm saying it again. Despite all the talk of just being an interim leader, Bob Rae will attempt to make his leadership more permanent.
I'd be willing to bet that Rae leads the Liberals into the next Federal election.
By
Michael Fox, at 10:59 a.m.
Michael,
Considering the talent pool, are you sure that would be a bad thing?
I mean I hope a shining star emerges to lead you back into opposition, and admittedly Rae is a poor choice, but he's better than the last two leaders by a country mile.
By
Brian Henry, at 7:17 a.m.
@Annon.... agreed. I was a part of past fund-raising in Calgary SW and was disappointed that we did not have control of our own money. It appears that it was used for Ontario? Typical of the East milking the West, I felt.
With money being scarcer, I want to be more "selective" about my donations. Ontario doesn't quite fit that perspective.
By
Anonymous, at 1:22 p.m.
Post a Comment
<< Home