But despite their bold rhetoric, Ontario Liberals are stuck firmly in the past with a leadership selection process complete with an old-fashioned delegate convention that is an affront to modern democracy and a throwback to an era when elite “old boys clubs” ruled our politics.
That’s because the party has refused to heed appeals to change and will instead allow barely 2,000 people to vote at the party’s Jan. 25-27 leadership convention to elect McGuinty’s successor — and Ontario’s next premier.
Indeed, the provincial Liberals are the last major party in North America that refuses to let all of its members vote directly for its leader through a one-person, one-vote selection system.
Except for the Liberals, parties across Canada and the U.S. have realized in recent years that opening up their voting system promotes democracy within their own ranks and results in more voter interest, more party members and a greater sense of inclusiveness and transparency.
Even their federal Liberal counterparts have adopted a modified one-member, one-vote system, which will be used in April when the party elects its new leader.
In Ontario, the Conservatives have employed a version of the one-person, one-vote system in its last two leadership contests. Some 25,429 out of 43,000 eligible party members voted in the 2009 Conservative leadership contest won by Tim Hudak. At the same time, the NDP used a somewhat similar system in its 2009 leadership race won by Andrea Horwath.
In those contests, party members could vote over the Internet, by phone or by casting ballots at party offices in their riding. Their conventions were primarily staged for candidate speeches and partying.
Barely four weeks ago, the Liberals wasted a perfect opportunity at their annual general meeting to amend their party constitution to allow for wide-open voting. The idea was discussed, but that’s all.
Two weeks later, McGuinty resigned, leaving the party stuck with a selection process akin to that of a private country club appointing its next president.
Why are the Liberals sticking with their elitist system, in which delegates to the provincial convention are chosen at leadership election meetings Jan. 12-13 in each riding?
Ontario Liberal party president Yasir Naqvi insisted in a telephone interview this week that the party is working toward a more open system, but was caught by surprise by McGuinty’s resignation.
He insisted the Liberals are not a closed club, noting anyone can join for $10 and vote for delegates to the leadership convention.
But Naqvi admitted the search for a more democratic system is “on pause.”
That’s regrettable because there is still time before the late January vote to develop a one-person, one-vote system — if the party really wants to move in that direction. If the province can organize a full-scale election in just six weeks, then surely the party can modernize its voting system in less than three months.
Clearly, though, there is little pressure from the party bosses to give up their elite voting status.
What the Ontario Liberals should do is listen to their federal cousins on the need to change, albeit the national Liberals made the move only after suffering a humiliating defeat in the last election.
Federal Liberal president Mike Crawley said in May when the party formally agreed to allow non-members to vote directly for the next leader that the Liberals “decided that the party had to fundamentally change in order to grow, in order to rebound. Members of the party decided also that politics in Canada had to fundamentally change.”
Today, the Ontario Liberals have just over 13,000 paid members. That’s a dismal number for a party that has ruled Ontario for the past nine years — and that faces an uphill battle in the next election, expected as early as May.
No voting system is perfect, but the Liberal party could generate widespread, grassroots interest by opening itself up, letting in some light and adopting a more democratic one-person, one-vote system.
That would be a true way to move forward and to change, rather than merely uttering hollow words about “renewal” and “transformation.”
Original Article
Source: the star
Author: Bob Hepburn
No comments:
Post a Comment