Former Little Bow Riding Executive Responds to Wild Rose Alliance Statement

There are a number of discrepancies with the statement provided by Hal Walker, President of the Provincial Executive for the Wildrose Party (bolded in parentheses).  Below is a rebuttal by Kevin Van Lagen, former Chair of the Little Bow Nomination Committee tasked with running the Wildrose nomination contest:

Hal Walker: “At three nomination events on Saturday November 20th, 414 Wildrose Alliance members in Little Bow cast ballots to select their candidate in the next provincial election.”

True, although only 406 have been verified by the Returning Officer, and there were at least 7 other paid members who were not allowed to vote due to some type of error at the central office. In fact at least two of these had their credit cards charged prior to the cutoff date, but were not on the list.

What do the rules say?

7.6.1 A membership is effective on the date that a legible, complete and acceptable membership application and the membership fee arrive at party headquarters.

Hal Walker: “The nomination process was run in accordance with the candidate nomination rules and procedures as approved by the Party.”

The nomination committee attempted to follow the rules and procedures but was met with resistance by the Provincial Executive on a number of key issues.  Firstly, it was discovered that candidate Ian Donovan had purchased memberships for individuals thus making those memberships invalid.  There were a number of people that tried to pay poll clerks for their memberships hoping that the poll clerks would give the money to Mr. Donovan on their behalf.  This was witnessed by the party official present. Others witnessed Mr. Donovan taking money from individuals outside the voting station in Vulcan.

What do the rules say?

11.1 The following offences will be reported to the PCSC, will be investigated, and may result in the disqualification of an Applicant, Nomination Contestant, or Candidate as the case may be:

11.1.4 Buying of Party memberships for individuals who are not immediate family members;

The party’s response was that Mr. Donovan was simply providing these individuals with a loan.  There is a reason memberships cannot be purchased by anyone other than family members.  It is to prevent abuse and it blurs the clear lines of open, honest, transparent democracy.  Regardless of the intent, Mr. Donovan clearly violated this rule when he purchased memberships for “friends”, to which the Provincial Candidate Selection Committee ignored.

So once again, who is breaking the rules?

There was an issue with the eight (8) mail in ballots that were mysteriously left in Calgary.  As the Returning Officer, I have yet to see these ballots or supporting identification, therefore it was impossible for me to declare them valid and include them in the count.

What do the rules say?

7.8.2 The RO shall supervise the voting and vote count and declare the winner.

7.8.3 The RO shall retain possession and custody of the ballots for fourteen (14) calendar days for delivery, if requested, to the Party. If not so requested, the ballots shall be fully and completely destroyed after the expiration of the fourteen (14) calendar day period. If so requested, confirmation of destruction shall be provided by the RO.

As the RO, it was my responsibility to ensure that the ballots counted were valid.  It would not have been responsible for me to take the word of a staff member from Calgary that he had mail in ballots in his possession.  Further, the staff member was not authorized to validate the mail in ballots.  Those ballots were required to be at the “designated location before the close of voting”.  This did not happen therefore, those ballots could not be counted as they did not meet the requirements as set out in the rules.

7.14 An eligible voter who will be unable to attend the nomination meeting(s) may, by personal individual application to the Party headquarters, request an absentee mail – back ballot.

7.14.1 The signed request must be made no later than fourteen (14) calendar days before the first nomination meeting and must be accompanied by photocopies of the accrediting identification specified in subsection 7.8.1.

7.14.2 The Executive Director shall forward concerns about possible abuse of the absentee mail – back ballots to the Chair of the LCNC, the President, and the PCSC.

7.14.3 The voter must mail back the ballot package (Outer envelope and form, inner privacy envelope with ballot, and photocopies of the accrediting identification specified in subsection 7.8.1) to the designated location before the close of voting.

7.14.4 The Party shall provide supplementary rules and instructions for absentee ballots.

Hal Walker: “The Little Bow Local Candidate Nominating Committee (LCNC), in many instances, failed to follow these rules or maintain neutrality in the race.”

Here is where they go after locally elected volunteers. On multiple occasions the decisions made by the local nomination committee were overruled by the Provincial committee.  It was the local nomination committee’s decision to hold one (1) vote in a central location (Nobleford) and have a convention style vote.  After a complaint by Mr. Donovan we were overruled by the PCSC and forced to have three (3) voting stations throughout the riding.  This was still fair but forced a greater expense and more volunteer time.

Further to this, the LCNC did not want to have a nomination event this fall as it was not prepared to hold a nomination contest at this time.  We did not feel that we could meet many of the party requirements to have such an event on such short notice.  Once again, that recommendation was disregarded by the Provincial committee and a nomination contest date was determined for us.

Lastly there were some issues regarding communication of the Provincial committee’s interpretation of some of the rules.  One thing was said to the Nomination committee while different information was given directly to a candidate.  ALL communication regarding rules and procedures for the nomination process should have been filtered through the LCNC ONLY.  Any concerns or questions by any of the candidates should be asked directly to nomination committee.  Otherwise, why have a local nomination committee?

Hal Walker: “Party staff attended the nomination events in Little Bow to ensure that a fair and unbiased nomination process was run, despite the actions of the LCNC.”

This is conjecture and if there had been a concern about the neutrality of the LCNC, it was not addressed by the Provincial committee during their “thorough investigation” or by either of the candidates.

Hal Walker: “After a thorough review by the Provincial Candidate Selection Committee (PCSC), the PCSC unanimously upheld the results of Saturday’s nomination event which saw Ian Donovan elected as our candidate in Little Bow.”

The LCNC seriously questions how “thorough” the review was and what criteria they based their final decision on.

Hal Walker: “The provision for absentee ballots is specifically written into the candidate nomination rules and procedures in order to ensure that any grassroots member who wishes to vote in the nomination race will have the opportunity to do so – both nomination contestants and the Little Bow LCNC were made aware of this provision”

The LCNC is not questioning whether absentee ballots should be allowed at this time.  However, it is necessary that the proper procedure as outlined in the rules be followed when counting these ballots.  Declaring ballots left in an office somewhere as admissible does not fall within the guidelines.

Hal Walker: “It is regrettable that members of the Little Bow CA and the LCNC do not accept the decision of the grassroots members in this nomination process.”

The LCNC believes in grassroots as we are unpaid volunteers that supported the supposed principals the Wildrose claims to represent.  Local boards ARE grassroots and the election of our representative is fundamental to the democratic process.  This process should not be dictated and manipulated by a few paid employees that are disconnected from the local constituency.  If Danielle Smith wants to lead a party that allows this type of manipulation which shakes the very core of everything the Wildrose purports to believe, than that is a party the executive of the Little Bow Constituency Association cannot stand by.

On behalf of the former executive of the Little Bow Constituency Association, thank you for having this conversation with us.

Little Bow Wildrose Alliance Constituency Association Resigns

I just received this letter outlining some serious allegations against the Alberta Wildrose Alliance Party concerning the local nomination for the provincial riding of Little Bow:

We are writing this letter in response to the decision of the Wildrose Alliance to allow Ian Donovan as candidate for the Wildrose Alliance in Little Bow.

We became members of this party because we believed that it stood for something different. We saw the policies of the Wildrose Alliance as exciting ideas that would change the nature of politics in this province. We particularly liked the open and transparent message that came from the party. This being said, we have now discovered how wrong we were.

As members of the constituency association we have experienced that the leadership of the Wildrose Alliance has systematically demonstrated incompetence in regards to the nomination process. Not only this, we have also experienced that this party is not a grassroots party, but a party run by a few paid employees that are not willing to work with local officials. Most significantly, the party central, with the leader Danielle Smith in awareness, flagrantly ignored its own procedures and rules by carefully interpreting the rules to favour a specific candidate. Two violations that we point to is the buying of memberships for people other than direct family members in clear contravention of the established guidelines of the party; we also point to the fact that eight mail-in ballots were never verified by the Returning Officer, but were mysteriously left in an office in Calgary.

It does not bode well for a party to make a statement in the public about open, transparent government on the same day that a locally elected executive was being squashed by the party central. As such, we are prepared to release the following statement to the presidents and to the local and national press by 10 a.m. Thursday, November 25, 2010 if our voices are continued to be ignored:

“The Provincial Executive of the Wildrose Alliance has declared Ian Donovan the winner of the nomination contest in Little Bow, contrary to the conclusion and declaration of the local Returning Officer based on the ballots in his possession. To this end, all but one member of the executive of Little Bow are resigning immediately. These resignations are based on the fact that flagrant irregularities occurred in the nomination process that were acknowledged but disregarded by the provincial executive, including the leader of the party. As such, the directors have lost faith in a party that supposedly espouses transparency and grassroots democracy.”

Sincerely,

Kevin Van Lagen, President
Jack Derksen, CFO
Lee De Boer, Secretary
John Voorhorst, VP Fundraising
Robert Laing, VP Policy
Bill Harding, Director at Large Kerry
Nabozniak, Director at Large

It appears that in a rush to jump start the party and it’s chances against the Alberta Progressive Conservative Party, the fledgling upstart “grassroots” Wildrose Alliance Party of Alberta is tramping on the very grassroots they claim are the heart of the party.

This shouldn’t really come as a surprise, Danielle Smith is a rookie in the game of politics – she clearly does not understand the vital role of the grassroots in an upstart party. Nor can we expect the Wildrose Alliance’s new Executive Director, Victor Marciano – fresh from a tenure with the federal Conservative Party of Canada, to honor and recognize the grassroots of any party. Since the merger of the PC Party and the Canadian Alliance, Victor Marciano and the other party elites on Conservative National Council have successful purged most of the grassroots elements out of the Conservative Party of Canada.

Perhaps this is the new reality of party politics in Canada.

Update: Former Little Bow Riding Executive Responds to Wild Rose Alliance Statement

Bringing Bison Back to Banff (Who Doesn’t Love Alliteration?)

I never thought this would be a top story in a major newspaper, but the first item on National Post‘s website details Parks Canada’s plan to re-introduce bison to Banff National Park.

Parks Canada wants a home where buffalo can roam. They’ve got their eyes on scenic Banff, Alta., but the Alberta government is cool to the idea.

The recently released draft of the Banff National Park Management Plan calls for the reintroduction of a breeding herd of plains bison into the front ranges of the park.

Park officials say the idea essentially is to complete efforts to bring back large species native to the Banff region, which was home ground for massive herds of bison for thousands of years following the end of the last ice age.

The province of Alberta isn’t so bullish:

Dave Ealey, spokesman for Alberta Sustainable Resource Development, said the province is concerned bison would wander out of the national park.

“Bison, of course, would not end up confining themselves to a national park and that would create fairly significant management issues for us,” he said.

Mr. Ealey said reintroducing bison into Banff would have impacts on the province’s elk population, raise concerns for public safety and affect outdoor recreation.

I’m not exactly sure where to come down on this, so I thought I’d throw this out to the readers of ThePolitic; I know a lot of you are from Alberta.  Personally, I’m inclined to think it’s a well intentioned but ultimately misguided idea… that will no doubt waste a lot of money.

Of course, if we’re not going to be wasting it on the gun registry any longer, we might as well waste it on Bison.

What Jarome Iginla and Gay Marriage Have in Common

They both get people fired*.

Alberta’s health board sacked one staffer Wednesday and said more punishment may be on the way for those who let Calgary Flames players, management and family members jump the H1N1 vaccine queue.

We’ve had our own little debate here at ThePolitic regarding the H1N1 vaccine, but opinions matter not a whit compared to hard science.  So, can’t we just agree that if the Flames win the cup, the vaccine worked and saved us from the rapture, but if they get bounced in the first round, the whole thing was a giant scam cooked up by the CIA and Jenny McCarthy to sell DVDs of Things to do in Denver When You’re Dead?

(*.)

Perhaps Spending like Drunken Sailors isn’t Sound Fiscal Policy

Did the the Progressive Conservative Party of Canada just give fiscal conservatives in the province $852-million reasons not to vote for them next election?.

Fifteen years of surplus budgets had put Alberta in the enviable position of being debt-free. But now, rocked by a double whammy of a recession and falling energy prices, the debts are piling up again.

Correction, the recession and falling energy prices was (and still is) only part of the problem – the real problem with the Progressive Conservative Party of Alberta is their out of control spending and complete mismanagement of the provincial energy resources. Dating back to the Peter “every dinky town needs a hospital” Lougheed and right up to Ed “fix what isn’t broke” Stelmach, the PC Party of Alberta just can’t seem to say no to anyone.

With the Alberta Alliance on the cusp of electing a new leader, many provincial conservatives I’ve spoken too are asking themselves – what’s the point of electing the Progressive Conservatives again?

Ralph Klein Interview – Submit Your Questions!

I’m scheduled to do an interview with Ralph Klein, former Premier of Alberta, for Maple Leaf Web. If you’re interested in submitting a question to the former Premier, you can head on over to Maple Leaf Web forums, or email me your questions directly.

You can also post your questions in the comments below – but I’ll remove disrespectful comments or questions without warning.