Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Monday internal Liberal politicking on OMOV.

The Young Liberals of Canada successfully got the Liberal Executive to overturn the changes in the voting order for amendments and sub-amendments at the upcoming Liberal Convention. It was first mentioned over at Fresh Meat, and which Dan remarked about briefly. The gist of it is that the YLC’s sub-amendment asking for a 25% quota be included in any weighted One-Member-One-Vote voting system for picking new leadership of the Liberal Party will be voted on first, and then after being approved or voted down, the OMOV amendment measure then gets voted on. I’ve done some poking around to find out why the sudden reversal back to the original way of voting for amendments/sub-amendments, and I’m not impressed with what I’ve heard from either side (the YLC or the Liberal executive). Unfortunately, I can’t say much about it on this blog or publicly without getting another source to confirm what I was told.

If it was felt that reversing back to original voting procedures would save the LPC some headaches at the Convention, so be it. My thoughts on this remain more or less the same:

1) I still think this is a sub-amendment that is meant – at the very minimum – to protect the YLC’s power base within the Liberal Party of choosing new leaders, rather then the more pious pronouncements of ensuring a continued voice for youth, as some of the supporters of this YLC sub-amendment have been proclaiming.

2) I’m still not convinced it isn’t meant as a poison-pill to try and kill the OMOV measure, regardless of whether the YLC sub-amendment passes or fails. (I’m aware of more then a few delegates who have said if the YLC sub-amendment passes, they will withdraw their support for the OMOV measure).

3) It’s very clear (to me, anyhow) a loud portion of the YLC will not vote for OMOV if their amendment for a quota fails to pass. Changing the order of voting will not change that.

That’s fine; I’m willing to let the chips fall where they may, but after hearing some of the background of the internal goings-on this past weekend, it makes me even more certain that giving a quota that sets up a disproportionate amount of power to the YLC is a very bad idea, and I will continue to advocate the defeat of the YLC’s sub-amendment on it getting that quota.


6 comments to Monday internal Liberal politicking on OMOV.

  • Well said Dana. Well said.

  • I will support equality and OMOV is the only equal distribution of power amongst members of the LPC. The YLC desire for power amendment will sour the spirit of equality and spoil the founding principles of liberalism.

    Liberalism was created during the Era of Enlightenment (or Era of Reason) after 300 years of war between nations battling for resources and for hierarchy, citizens desired change. Liberalism offered freedom of trade and expression. In Canada, we live in a liberal democracy founded upon an equal voice for every adult. The YLC strike at the heart of our Canadian liberal democracy with their elitist, entitlement, attitude and brazen desire for power amendment.

    Some of the YLC have attempted to suggest they ought be credited for advancing the most progressive policies to the forefront of the LPC. Yet, the segments of our population that know their issues personally often research, write, lobby and present to government, opposition or their preferred political parties without the assistance of the YLC.

    As I said, we live in a liberal democracy in Canada. OMOV is fair, equal, liberal, democratic and supports the spirit of inclusion within the LPC. Red like our nation, that ought to be our focus, our slogan, our vision, instead the LPC may run the risk of red in the face, if at the 2009 convention, the LPC accepts the YLC amendment. If so, perhaps a sense of entitlement runs rampant like a disease and the elders of politics need to think long and hard on who created such a possible culture amongst political youth.

    Honesty is rarely appreciated in politics,

    D L Miller

  • Karem Allen

    Whatever is going on is what causes others to use the term “typical Liberal” I hate having to defend “my” party!

    I am going to make a blanket statement that will offend some but is not meant to because not all YL’s are like that – The YLC’s want to hold onto their power no matter what because they aspire to be those backroom boys and girls who run the party down the road.

    Is being power hungry “typical liberal”?

  • Although the YLC is taking credit for having the rules of order decision reversed, there were also a number of us from the ‘anti-amendment’ side – including myself and Jeff Jedras – who were very much opposed to this change, and who wrote to various people on the Executive telling them so. In fact, I specifically encouraged everyone on En Famille to do the same, and was working out some way to get support for a motion from the floor to get it reversed for this specific vote.

    I suspect the main reason why the decision was reversed was a realization that, as much as some YLC members were making noises about voting against OMOV if they didn’t get their amendment, there were even more who were planning to vote against if the rules of order weren’t restored. They were that outraged, and frankly so was I.

    No matter what our position on this issue (and mine is softening, frankly), such a blatant gaming of the system is NOT the answer.

  • Scott Templeton

    Seems to me they want to move the amendament up so that the 15 percent of youth in our party can get the admendment through…the question should be what time will the voting be at? Is this the old dog Liberals running the show again?

    • @Scott Templeton, You’re giving them a bit too much credit – current membership for the YLC is currently at less then 10% members… although they’ll have a slightly higher amount of delegates at the Convention then your 15% number.

      And I can say on good authority that’s not the reason why the Liberal Executive reversed the decision.

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.