Ousted MP Turner Prepares To Ruffle Some Feathers

Garth's take on things:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.garth.ca/weblog/">http://www.garth.ca/weblog/</a><br />

I posted this extract on the forum shortly before the subject poped up here, perhaps we can continue the discussion here.

From Garth Turners comments at his press conference Tues Nov 14th. Like him or hate him he is correct in saying that this is an affront to democracy.

...................................... Here is what the leader of the Conservative Party, its top officials and the National Caucus chair, have determined:

1. I have been disqualified as a party candidate for in the next election. I am a card-carrying member of the party, and yet denied the right to be a candidate.

2. That decision came in a closed meeting by the Party's national executive. No reason given.

3. The national president of the party says I will not be permitted to seek a Conservative nomination again.

4. My suspension from caucus is indefinite, no reason will be given for it. No evidence will be provided to my electors. And I don't know what indefinite means...

5. National caucus chair Rahim Jaffer tells the local riding all of these matters are all internal.

Let me summarize:

* The party has removed an MP nominated by the local party members and elected by the voters.

* The party will not explain this to those folks.

* The candidate they selected for the next election is being set aside. No explanation.

* All of these actions were taken in secret, without any input or appeal, and yet materially affect the voters of a large electoral district.

* This raises more questions - about the role average Canadians actually have in the political system, and their ability to choose their own representatives - and about this government's commitment to transparency, openness and accountability in the political system.

............................ My own experience has proven that not only is dissention unwelcome, but that the party poohbahs of all colours have made themselves more important than millions of voters and tens of thousands volunteers.

If this can happen to one MP, it can happen to any MP.

Seven hundred members of the Conservative Party in Halton nominated a guy as their candidate - twice. And yet a few party officials, accountable to nobody and meeting in secret, deny their actions. How is this democratic?

At the same time, this is the party that took an MP elected by a majority of people as a Liberal in Vancouver, and made him a member of the Conservative government. It makes you wonder. Sure makes me wonder.

The fight here is not to get me back into the caucus. Forget that. It's done.

The true fight is for democratic principle. Either we have a bottom-up system in which people select those we send to Ottawa, or not. The people who citizens decide to send may end up being party cheerleaders and supporters, or they might end up, like me, being a pain in the ass of the leader.

But regardless, the people sent them, and unless that MP ends up voting against a budget or publicly opposing a major policy or calling for the leader to resign, they should serve their term as the people wanted.




---
When you are up to your ass in alligators it is difficult to remember that the initial objective was to drain the swamp

"The party has removed an MP nominated by the local party members and elected by the voters."

The party is obviously only accountable to its members and the special interest groups that put them in office, not to the electorate they pretend to serve."

"The candidate they selected for the next election is being set aside. No explanation."

I don't think this party feels it has to explain anything to anyone outside of their private members' inner circle.

"All of these actions were taken in secret, without any input or appeal, and yet materially affect the voters of a large electoral district."

Since when in the history of mankind have arrogant self-serving elitests felt the need to get input from the dregs of society (voters)?

"This raises more questions - about the role average Canadians actually have in the political system, and their ability to choose their own representatives - and about this government's commitment to transparency, openness and accountability in the political system."

As stated by a few posters on this board, the average Canadian plays absolutely no role in the political system - they are just duped into believing they do.

Like a factory machine, the average Canadian is a piece of capital that is expected to produce at a low overhead cost and with minimum maintenance. Another word for this is SLAVERY.

As for this government's commitment to transparency, openness and accountability, promises are made to be broken. When you hear there are tons of cherries ripe for picking, make sure you bring very few baskets.

"My own experience has proven that not only is dissention unwelcome, but that the party poohbahs of all colours have made themselves more important than millions of voters and tens of thousands volunteers."

No, THEY haven't made themselves more important than the masses, the corporate self-interest groups have made them more important. Money talks and BS walks.

"If this can happen to one MP, it can happen to any MP."

In order to avoid dissent (which is usually used to uncover corruption and lies), this Government has officially outlawed speaking your mind. If you are not an ass kissing lemming, no need to apply to this party.

"Seven hundred members of the Conservative Party in Halton nominated a guy as their candidate - twice. And yet a few party officials, accountable to nobody and meeting in secret, deny their actions. How is this democratic?"

Which genuinely CREDIBLE and well-informed person ever said we are living in a democratic society?

"At the same time, this is the party that took an MP elected by a majority of people as a Liberal in Vancouver, and made him a member of the Conservative government. It makes you wonder."

Makes you wonder what? That this is a party run by a bunch of hypocrites that continues to blatantly ignore the wishes of the people? What % of the population supports the Government supported Afghan War? What % of the population supports Kyoto, which is opposed by the party?

"The true fight is for democratic principle. Either we have a bottom-up system in which people select those we send to Ottawa, or not."

Since most of the people are completely in the dark about what is going on around them, they do not have the ability or time to successfully participate in the democratic process. Most are content, bought off and distracted by politicians throwing them a few insignficant scraps (1% GST tax cut anyone?).

"But regardless, the people sent them, and unless that MP ends up voting against a budget or publicly opposing a major policy or calling for the leader to resign, they should serve their term as the people wanted."

This would be the case if you were dealing with a party that did not have the ultimate intention to disguise ugly misguided ideological corporate facism with a pretty democratic mask. Let's hope most Canadians see through this disguise before it is too late.

Props to Garth for being one of the few politicans to show some balls and take a stand for the lowly plebs.

Garth Turner has been around politics for a long time. Although the neo-cons scream and shout about him "not being a team player" he was enough of a team player to be a Progressive Conservative MP and to be even given a cabinet seat. The question I would really like Mr. Turner to answer is whether he was really surprised that the new Conservative Party would tolerate no internal opposition.

I asked him the question in a personal e-mail and although I received a reply it did not address that issue.

Those of us who were involved on the opposing side of the PC and CA merger know how opponents were treated. Did he expect to somehow receive different treatment then we did in opposing their ideological positions?

If he did then it was arrogance that led him to the position he is in now. On the other hand, the whole issue has helped reveal the new Conservative Party for what it was from the very beginning: ideologically dogmatic.

While I may not agree with Turner on many issues, I can agree on what he has to say about the current political system.

The Stephen Harper Leadership Methodology

To staff: Shut up and do what you're told.

To Consevative MP's: Shut up and do what your told.

To Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition: Shut up and do what you're told.

To the media: Shut up and do what you're told.

To the voters of Canada: Shut up and do what you're told.

To the well monied special interests he owes everything to:

Slurp slurp gobble gobble slurp


I hope this clears up any confusion.

Deacon

---
"and the knowledge they fear is a weapon to be used against them"

"The Weapon" - Rush

I hope this clears up any confusion<<

Seems to have come from the Reform party and the Liberals as well. Harper is open about it. It's nice to know when you get buggered, who the bugger is. Turner appears to not want to bend over for the "G" party either.

Nah! It's still confusing. Who is Turner trying to bugger now?

---
Expect little from life and get more from it.

"At the same time, this is the party that took an MP elected by a majority of people as a Liberal in Vancouver, and made him a member of the Conservative government. It makes you wonder."<<

It's not the first time a member has crossed the floor. A by-election would determine if it is the party or the member themself, that got them in on the inital vote. A Party decide who their leader is and consequently PM. That same person returns the favour by deciding whom in the party will have a portfolio. We must be electing the party because we have no say beyond that. A "party system" allows no input.


---
Expect little from life and get more from it.