Relevant Links




Your Ad Here

Bob Rae's delegate troubles and the Liberal Party rules

From the Toronto Star:

Liberal leadership hopeful Bob Rae's campaign manager in British Columbia has resigned over problems with delegate forms for the party's upcoming convention.

Mason Loh, a former Liberal party candidate and well-known political operative in the province, took the fall Friday after it was discovered that at least 37 nominated Rae delegates had not personally signed their own candidacy forms — a breach of party rules.

All of those forms had been handled by Loh or his operatives, said Bryan Baynham, legal counsel for the Rae campaign in B.C., and irregularities were also found in a "significantly larger" numbers of forms. As a result the Liberal party and the Rae camp decided to reject all candidate forms that were handled by Loh.

The problem is that this is against the rules:

9.3 Challenges. If a person entitled to vote or be elected as a delegate at the Meeting or any other interested party (who is a member of the Liberal Party of Canada) wishes to challenge any individual’s right to vote or to be elected as a delegate, then the member must do so before 5:00 p.m., local time, on Friday, September 22, 2006. Challenges may be made with respect to:

(a) whether the member has provided proof that he or she or a member of their immediate family has paid for their membership8 and whether that membership has otherwise been paid in accordance with the Constitution of the Relevant PTA or Relevant Commission;

(b) if the Constitution of the Relevant PTA or Relevant Commission provide for the signing of an application for membership, whether the member has signed an application for membership;

(c) whether the address shown on the membership list is accurate;

(d) whether the member resides at such address;

(e) where relevant to the class of membership, whether the age or birth date indicated on the membership list is correct;

(f) whether the member is a member of another federal political party; and

(g) whether any other qualifications under the Constitution of the Relevant PTA or Relevant Commission have been satisfied.

The deadline for challenges passed over two weeks ago.

Now there is the issue of the replacements:

None of those delegates will be allowed to attend next month's convention. However, there are Rae alternates to replace them in all but a couple of ridings so the immediate impact on the race may be negligible.

But according to the rules:

13.2 Promotion of alternates before the Convention. Where any delegate notifies the General Secretary in writing signed by the delegate on or before 5:00 p.m., Ottawa time, on November 23, 2006, that the delegate does not intend to attend the convention, then the General Secretary or their designate may, if practicable prior to the opening of

registration:

(a) cancel the delegate’s certificate of election;

(b) determine the identity of the person who:
(i) sought election from the same body;
(ii) was not elected as a delegate and has not already been promoted to delegate;
(iii) declared in their “Notice of Intention to Stand” support for the same Leadership Contestant as the delegate they are replacing;
(iv) satisfies all the following criteria:
(A) is a youth, if the delegate position was for a youth;
(B) is a senior, if the delegate position was for a senior;
(C) is a woman, if the delegate position was for a woman;
(D) is a man, if the delegate position was for a man;
(E) received more votes than any other person in the same demographic category who sought election from the same body but was not elected as a delegate and has not already been promoted to delegate;

(c) declare such person elected as a delegate and issue a certificate of election; and

(d) forthwith make reasonable efforts to notify him or her of this change of status.

The key thing is that alternates are there to replace legitimate delegates who are not able to make it to the convention, not bogus delegates.

That makes sense -- alternates are not an insurance policy for cheaters. If Bob Rae's delegates have to be thrown out, those votes are gone.

So what happens if, after the deadline for challenges has passed, it is discovered that some of the delegates were ineligible. By my reading, the Appeals Procedures applies:

14.1 Decisions made in the delegate election process, including the results of a Meeting, may be appealed to the Permanent Appeal Committee in accordance with its rules.

14.2 An appeal to the Permanent Appeal Committee may only be commenced by notice of appeal in writing received not later than 72 hours after the time fixed for the commencement of a Meeting (or such longer time as the rules of the Permanent Appeals Committee may allow) or, if a decision is made outside a Meeting context, not later than 72 hours after the decision requiring review has been made (or such longer time as the rules of the Permanent Appeals Committee may allow).

14.3 Decisions of the Permanent Appeal Committee are final and not subject to appeal.

14.4 The Permanent Appeal Committee has all the powers necessary to give effect to its decisions, including, without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the powers to postpone a Meeting, declare a Meeting void, order a new Meeting, declare persons ineligible to vote at a Meeting and declare a nominee duly elected at a Meeting.

Notice that according 14.4, the Permanent Appeals Committee does not have the power to appoint alternates. A nominee delegate is either declared elected, or not. Or a whole new meeting might be called.

By my reading of the rules, the most likely outcome for Bob Rae is that he will lose these delegates altogether. Now 37 delegates might not seem like a lot. But where there are 37 problems, there may very well be many more.

More interesting, though, is that the rules are very explicit. That suggest one of three possibilities:

  1. I've completely confused the rules, and Bob Rae's alternate delegates can step in.
  2. The report is wrong, and Bob Rae is in deeper trouble than we think.
  3. The report is right, but so am I. That would mean that the Liberal Party is changing the rules to give Bob Rae a pass.
Your Ad Here
Relevant Links




Your Ad Here

Create Commons License 2.5
Angry in the Great White North by Steve Janke is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Canada License. Based on a work at stevejanke.com.
Valid XHTML 1.0 Strict
[Valid Atom 1.0]
Valid CSS!