I am not happy with the Progressive Conservative Party nomination of Craig Chandler in Calgary Egmont. If you are Ed Stelmach, you only need to go to the Craig Chandler website and watch the video to see what kind of "candidate" you are dealing with.
Really listen to him and you have to be concerned about his intentions and attitudes and look at the record of what he says and what he has done.
I am glad the Premier is meeting with Mr. Chandler to discuss his intentions and to assess his ability to be a team player. The results of that meeting should be a foregone conclusion based on the Chandler website video. The Premier should refuse to sign this person’s nomination papers as an Alberta Progressive Conservative candidate.
In the website video Mr. Chandler says, “Do you think in a Caucus meeting I’m going to roll over?” He and columnist Paul Jackson of the Calgary Sun say Mr. Chandler will not “toe the party line.” Mr. Chandler himself makes the point that he believes he must represent “his constituents” and he…”won’t toe the party line and any of you think I will don’t know me very well.”
I admire an independent streak and have one myself, and that does not preclude one from being a team player. You don’t have to "toe the party line" in Caucus during what is often a rigorous debate. But you have to accept the ultimate and final decision of Caucus. That is when the MLAs in any government must "toe the party line" or else nothing will get done or even be finally decided.
If you disagree with a Caucus decision Mr. Chandler you have a few options. Suck it up and shut up. Quit or cross the floor. Speaking out against the party line or the party principles will likely see you quickly kicked out of Caucus. Don’t fool yourself, sir it happens. Just ask Dr. Oberg
The problem I have with Mr. Chandler is not that he is independent. He is also oppressive and dogmatic. He strikes me as a person who chooses not to see nuances on issues. Kind of like George Bush. If you are not for us, you are deemed to be against us. Can Mr. Chandler accept and reconcile differences of opinion in ways that seek effective solutions to complex governance problems?
He comes across as the kind of person who is often wrong but never in doubt. He has expectations that everyone else should adapt to his version of “reality and truth” because he sure isn’t going to “toe any party line.”
He doesn’t come across as being able to accept that he has blind spots. We all have blind spots and that is why we get better judgments and wiser decisions when our politicians listen and learn from a wide rage of perspectives. Does he have the right stuff to be effective in a representative democracy that is based on principles of being inclusive and valuing diversity? Those are core qualities of modern democratic political representation.
He makes a strong point of saying he represents his constituents before he owes any party or Caucus allegiances. That may be true but it is going to be interesting to see if he can be representative of all of his constituents, especially if they disagree with him. Given he has such a dogmatic attitude, ask yourself how well he will represent the concerns of his Gay constituent? I think it is a pretty sure bet Calgary Egmont has gay residents and they would be Mr. Chandler's "constituents" should he be a PC candidate and win in the next election.
Premier Stelmach, take a minute and read the Statement of Principles of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta. Then make a personal leadership statement based on those principles and refuse to sign this gentleman’s nomination papers.
I am glad the Premier is meeting with Mr. Chandler to discuss his intentions and to assess his ability to be a team player. The results of that meeting should be a foregone conclusion based on the Chandler website video. The Premier should refuse to sign this person’s nomination papers as an Alberta Progressive Conservative candidate.
In the website video Mr. Chandler says, “Do you think in a Caucus meeting I’m going to roll over?” He and columnist Paul Jackson of the Calgary Sun say Mr. Chandler will not “toe the party line.” Mr. Chandler himself makes the point that he believes he must represent “his constituents” and he…”won’t toe the party line and any of you think I will don’t know me very well.”
I admire an independent streak and have one myself, and that does not preclude one from being a team player. You don’t have to "toe the party line" in Caucus during what is often a rigorous debate. But you have to accept the ultimate and final decision of Caucus. That is when the MLAs in any government must "toe the party line" or else nothing will get done or even be finally decided.
If you disagree with a Caucus decision Mr. Chandler you have a few options. Suck it up and shut up. Quit or cross the floor. Speaking out against the party line or the party principles will likely see you quickly kicked out of Caucus. Don’t fool yourself, sir it happens. Just ask Dr. Oberg
The problem I have with Mr. Chandler is not that he is independent. He is also oppressive and dogmatic. He strikes me as a person who chooses not to see nuances on issues. Kind of like George Bush. If you are not for us, you are deemed to be against us. Can Mr. Chandler accept and reconcile differences of opinion in ways that seek effective solutions to complex governance problems?
He comes across as the kind of person who is often wrong but never in doubt. He has expectations that everyone else should adapt to his version of “reality and truth” because he sure isn’t going to “toe any party line.”
He doesn’t come across as being able to accept that he has blind spots. We all have blind spots and that is why we get better judgments and wiser decisions when our politicians listen and learn from a wide rage of perspectives. Does he have the right stuff to be effective in a representative democracy that is based on principles of being inclusive and valuing diversity? Those are core qualities of modern democratic political representation.
He makes a strong point of saying he represents his constituents before he owes any party or Caucus allegiances. That may be true but it is going to be interesting to see if he can be representative of all of his constituents, especially if they disagree with him. Given he has such a dogmatic attitude, ask yourself how well he will represent the concerns of his Gay constituent? I think it is a pretty sure bet Calgary Egmont has gay residents and they would be Mr. Chandler's "constituents" should he be a PC candidate and win in the next election.
Premier Stelmach, take a minute and read the Statement of Principles of the Progressive Conservative Association of Alberta. Then make a personal leadership statement based on those principles and refuse to sign this gentleman’s nomination papers.
Mr. Harper has taken this leadership step on more than one occasion recently. You will get some heat but refusing this candidate is the proper thing to do under the circumstances.
Ken: Well said, and I couldn't agree more.
ReplyDeleteThe PC Party of Alberta is a "big tent", open to many... and Denis Herard won Egmont with barely 50% of the vote last election - the Alliance candidate took 20%, which would surely go to Chandler as the PC candidate.
HOWEVER, increasing the likelihood of holding the seat at the cost of the party's centrist image sets a dangerous precedent. The fact is that many on the social right bought memberships in the party last year to support Dr. Morton's leadership bid. The Leader of the party put Dr. Morton in cabinet, in large part to appease these new party members. He should not, however, hitch the PC Party or its reputation to Craig Chandler, just to appease that same fringe.
We have room in this party for people who share Chandler's beliefs and attitudes. However, by signing off on Chandler's nomination, the Premier will be in effect saying that Craig Chandler does, in fact, speak for this party.
A very dangerous blank cheque indeed.
It also should also be noted that there is precedent for rejecting a provincial nomination... see Calgary West in 1997 and Calgary McCall in 2000/01.
ReplyDeleteI don't think this can be tied to Dr. Morton, though. There were a great many of Morton's supporters who were behind other candidates. And, to be fair, I think Dr. Morton has shown himself to be a good Minister and a team player in the new government.
We wouldn't be in this mess, though, if the party took a more proactive role in screening candidates BEFORE nominations.
The new folks on the party's executive committee need to understand that they were elected to bring change, not the same old complacent style of governance.
Gentlemen, I must respectfully disagree. While I am disappointed that Craig Chandler won the nomination, you do not so easily set aside the will of the local constituency association. Like it or not (I don't), it would appear that Chandler won the nomination fairly (innuendo about free membership and busing aside).
ReplyDeleteThe fact we must face is he won... and by a significant margin. This was not a squeaker. Those people who vote PC regularly and live in Calgary-Egmont should look to themselves for blame, if they don't like what they've got.
I don't like what I have seen of the candidate to date. He has a recurring penchant for foot-in-mouth disease that I find a little disturbing, irrespective of his personal views. I don't agree with some people on the other end of the spectrum that reside in this party either, but I have never advocating tossing them out.
The party is a big tent. It remains to be seen whether Chandler fits within it. But it is awfully presumptuous of us to arbitrarily decide to toss him out.
Put him on a short leash, I say. Have him publicly pledge to abide by the protocols and rules of the party and support the leadership team. And if he steps out of line, take him behind the barn and pull an 'Ole Yeller' on him.
I hope the Alberta Liberals get their come-uppance with respect to this issue. Their bloggers joke about how much of a fool he is, and how much of a pinch the PC Party is in for having him as a candidate. Fine. But they should also acknowledge their own failings. After all, how many of their nominations are even contested? And do they even allow sitting Liberal MLAs to have their nominations challenged by another aspirant? [It has happened for us: Tony Abbott lost to the Mayor of Drayton Valley.] Within the Liberal ranks is where the democratic deficit lies. Let's try not to stoop to their level.
P.S. The Liberal candidate in Calgary-Egmont has some explaining to do of her own. She dropped out of the municipal race for school trustee at the very last moment in order to run for the nomination. Since she was courted by the Liberals (uncontested, yes?), this was not a last minute decision on her part, just a last minute announcement. Who knows who would have run as school trustee if she had done the honourable thing and not put her name forward for something which she knew with significant certainty she was not going to compete?
HI BR Thx for the comment, the information and the insight. I agree with you on Dr. Morton's quality handling of his portfolio. I too believe he has shown himself to be a team player.
ReplyDeleteMany decisions get made in Caucus and Cabinet and I am sure they are not often unanimous...so people have to "toe the line." Dr. Morton has shown he can deal with this reality, disagree and still be a team player.
Anon @ 3:15- while I constantly bemoan Anonymous commenters, yours is not in that category. Thank you to for a great comment. You have added greatly to the conversation.
This is such a hypocritical post. You only want this individual out of the party because he is on the right of the party.
ReplyDeleteWhat if I said I don't want federal Liberals in the PC Party of Alberta? You would disagree and rightly so.
This is not the federal Liberal Party of Canada - MLAs should have the right to actually represent their constituents.
"He makes a strong point of saying he represents his constituents before he owes any party or Caucus allegiances. That may be true but it is going to be interesting to see if he can be representative of all of his constituents, especially if they disagree with him. Given he has such a dogmatic attitude, ask yourself how well he will represent the concerns of his Gay constituent? I think it is a pretty sure bet Calgary Egmont has gay residents and they would be Mr. Chandler's "constituents" should he be a PC candidate and win in the next election."
If the gay community did not want him to win the PC nomination, they can simply buy a PC membership and vote for someone else. If they don't want to buy a membership, go and support their liberal candidate or better yet win.
Sorry Ken, but the members of the PC Party decide who they nominate - NOT non-members. If I was a member of that riding and Stelmach intervened, I would instantly tear up my membership.
This Chandler nomination is problematic indeed. Chandler himself can barely (hardly) be called a PC Member, beyond opportunity. The Constituency Board was "taken over" in the most recent AGM by Chandler's supporters and backers - also hardly PC Members, and these far right wing religious whackos are who they mobilized for the GOTV, not PC Members.
ReplyDeleteThese people are so far right they aren't part of the PC Spectrum, even if it is a big tent. Dr. Morton and his supporters are of a much higher class of people than Chandler and his and should not be lumped up with them. I have the highest respect for Dr. Morton and believe his voice is important and respectful in the PC Party.
Chandler on the other hand, is a hateful, biased, racist, homophobic bigot who is dangerously un-controllable, loud mouthed and prone to saying the most terrible things (and believing in them) in public. He is a nightmare, and not one the PC Party, or the people of Alberta deserve.
Just because you think your a "Conservative" doesn't mean that you are a Progressive Conservative.
Just because you win a PC nomination doesn't guareentee that you get to run for the PC Party in an election. The PC Party has standards, principles and a general understanding of values. Chandler falls ouside the range of the PC Party's Statement of Principles and frankly, the values of the members themselves. The Premier should NOT sign his nomination.
Let Chandler run as an independant instead of using the PC Party banner to ensure a win. I would bet money in that case he would find very little support among the voters.
- Concerned.
I blame the neglect of the PC party for this nomination result in Calgary Egmont as much as anything. The political party system is not working effectively in Alberta today...in any of the parties from what I gather.
ReplyDeletePolitical parties are very powerful organizations and since I understand only about 3% of Canadian citizens actually belong to all the political parties combined, you can see the power they have.
They have a tradition of influence and action on setting political and public policy agendas. They decide the content of the contests we call elections. They decide the quality of the litter of candidates we get to choose from in elections.
They get to decide who will be in the pool of potential Premiers and Prime Ministers and dictate much about the choices we have to make.
When we citizens grant our consent to be governed it is a very shallow pool of citizens engaged in political parties who set the stage for the optoins and the quality of characters from which we get to choose.
No wonder we have to be careful about who we elect.
"After all, how many of their [Alberta Liberal] nominations are even contested?"
ReplyDeleteNot many, but some. That's a consequence of a huge imbalance of politial power as much as it is a failing of the Liberal party, though.
"And do they even allow sitting Liberal MLAs to have their nominations challenged by another aspirant?"
They do.