Christian Conservative Christian "Independent"

I'm an evangelical Christian, member of the CPC, but presently & unjustly exiled to wander the political wilderness.
All opinions expressed here are solely my own.

Monday, April 16, 2007

Dion/May endosement a violation of Liberal Constitution

Figured this one was too good to wait, so I'm passing on my lunchbreak today... some people have suggested that Mr. Dion may be breaking sections of the Liberal Party of Canada's own Constitution by endorsing Ms. May, and not running a candidate in Central Nova.

According to my reading, there may be something to this accusation. I can find at least three sections of the Liberal Constitution where the "rights" (there's that favorite little Liberal buzzword) of Liberal Party members in Central Nova have been violated by Mr. Dion's actions... and these guys say they're the sole trustworth defender of Canadian rights?

(CLARIFICATION: Figured I should make sure I'm not misunderstood here... I am NOT saying that Mr. Dion has violated the Liberal Constitution, but that his actions are violating the Liberal Constitutional RIGHTS of members in Central Nova... they are two very different things)


Chapter 3 – Electoral District Associations
12 Purposes, constitutions and certification of EDAs

(1) Each Electoral District Association (EDA) is responsible to pursue actively the following purposes and activities:

(a) to participate in public affairs by endorsing the person
who is the candidate of the Party for election to the House of
Commons for its electoral district
, by ensuring that the
association has an effective election readiness organization
and plan and by implementing that plan;


Excuse me for jumping in here... but doesn't that mean that the Liberal EDA members in Central Nova are expected to actively endorse the person who is the candidate of the Party? Since when is Elizabeth May a member of the Liberal Party of Canada? Their Constitution restricts members of other federal parties from joining... therefore, according to their Constitution, Ms. May CANNOT be endorsed by the members in Central Nova EDA in the manner that Mr. Dion has done.


Chapter 3 – Electoral District Associations
13 Rights and responsibilities of an Electoral District Association

(3) Each EDA must hold delegate selection meetings and selection meetings as required by this Constitution.


Oops... looks like the Liberal Members in the Central Nova EDA are being told by their leader, Stephane Dion, to violate their own Party Constituion by not holding a Candidate Selection Meeting... is he allowed to do that?


Chapter 15 – Candidate selection meetings
58 Purpose
Each EDA must hold a candidate selection meeting to select a candidate of the Party for election to the House of Commons at the time specified by, and in accordance with, the rules made by the National Election Readiness Committee under Section 60.


Oops again... looks like they're going to have to violate at least two sections of the Constitution. Again, is Mr. Dion allowed to tell them to violate their own Constitution?


Chapter 15 – Candidate selection meetings
59 Right to attend and vote
Every member of the Party has the right to attend a candidate selection meeting of their EDA and has the right to vote at that meeting if that member:
(a) is present at the meeting;
(b) has been a member of the Party for the period established
by the National Election Readiness Committee;
(c) has not voted at another candidate selection meeting
held for the same election (except when the results of a
candidate selection meeting are declared invalid).


Yep... the Liberal Party of Canada's Constitution says that the members in Central Nova have the RIGHT, as granted them by the Constitution of the Liberal Party of Canada, to attend AND VOTE at the meeting where their LIBERAL Party candidate will be selected... therefore, Mr. Dion's actions with Ms. May are a clear violation of the rights of all Liberal members in Central Nova.

Their own party Constitutional rights have been violated... and these guys say they are the sole defenders of the Canadian Charter of Rights? THEY BREAKING THEIR OWN CONSTITUTION HERE... how are we supposed to trust them to defend our national Constitution?

"Party of the Charter"(TM)? RIIIIGHT... and they pull this one right in the middle of the Charter's 25th birthday, no less.

Labels: , ,

8 Comments:

  • At Mon. Apr. 16, 12:25:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Brian Lemon said…

    I went through their constitution last night for an hour or so.
    Came across some comments on a LIbLog suggesting this.
    But I came to the conclusion that Dion wasn't in violation, due to other clauses and built in wiggle room.
    I also looked for records of bylaws, policies, etc. Couldn't find anything damning.
    I suspect previous versions of their constitution might say somethign different.
    Good idea though - have to wonder if excluding specifics was intended to allow something like Ellie May and Jethro getting together.

     
  • At Mon. Apr. 16, 12:28:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Brian, I should clarify... no, Dion has not violated anything per-sae, however, the rights of members in Central Nova have been violated by his actions...

    Chapter 15, section 59: "Every member of the Party has the right to attend a candidate selection
    meeting of their EDA and has the right to vote at that meeting"

     
  • At Mon. Apr. 16, 02:28:00 p.m. EDT, Blogger lance said…

    I' say the first one, 12.3(1)a is a bit of a red herring. All that says is that the Riding Assoc. has to support the _candidate_. No candidate, no need for support. This was born out by the pres stating that he wasn't going to recommend anyone over another and that it was all the members choice.

    The rest are pretty solid though.

    Cheers,
    lance

     
  • At Mon. Apr. 16, 02:35:00 p.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    "Ellie May and Jethro."

    Absolutelya funny moniker!!!

     
  • At Mon. Apr. 23, 02:04:00 p.m. EDT, Anonymous Anonymous said…

    I find it odd that you link to Alberta Ardvark for your link "some people have suggested" and he links to you on the same day. So really you two just are the only ones?

    I also find it humourous that this idea was actually pretty much proposed days before you on Liberal Outsider. True different tints, but surely thats where you picked it up.

     
  • At Tue. Apr. 24, 03:55:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger Ardvark said…

    Just to clarify, my link to CC was added to my post about 1 day after the post went up. I do add links that are relevant when found later, and since CC did such a good job looking at the LPC constitution, it was added.

     
  • At Tue. Apr. 24, 07:43:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Thanks for clearing that up Adrvark.

     
  • At Tue. Apr. 24, 07:45:00 a.m. EDT, Blogger Christian Conservative said…

    Anon@2:40, Lib. Observer may have been the one who inspired the investigation, I don't recall. I remember a couple of people asking the question, but no one had done the legwork... so I did. Now people are linking to me. So?

     

Post a Comment

<< Home