Assorted content for your afternoon reading.
- pogge rightly questions the Cons' continued efforts to have decisions made by ministerial fiat rather than through public debate.
- Glen McGregor eviscerates Brian Lilley's thoroughly inaccurate attack on Canada's Chief Electoral Officer Marc Mayrand.
- Murray Mandryk suggests that Saskatchewan's New Democratic Party needs to remove the "democratic" part of its identity in choosing a new leader. But I'm not sure how the concept of a top-down "leadership vetting process" is supposed to be seen as an improvement from a vote among members, especially as a response to a leadership campaign where the establishment favourite was able to clear the field in large part thanks to the impression of impenetrable institutional support.
- Finally, in the good news department, CBC reports that at least one person who arrived at Occupy Saskatoon mostly out of a need for temporary housing found along the way that it's worth working for the group's cause of greater equality.
Murray's reference to a vetting process is a minor part of the piece. The bulk of the column makes the case (that I and others have been making) that it is utter madness for the Saskatchewan NDP to rush into a leadership selection process without first taking the time for some self-examination and reflection. In that, he is spot on.
ReplyDeleteMurray's reference to a vetting process is a minor part of the piece. The bulk of the column makes the case (that I and others have been making) that it is utter madness for the Saskatchewan NDP to rush into a leadership selection process without first taking the time for some self-examination and reflection. In that, he is spot on.
ReplyDeleteMurray's reference to a vetting process is a minor part of the piece. The bulk of the column makes the case (that I and others have been making) that it is utter madness for the Saskatchewan NDP to rush into a leadership selection process without first taking the time for some self-examination and reflection. In that, he is spot on.
ReplyDeleteFair enough, and I'm not particularly opposed to that take. But I do think we need to be careful what direction our self-examination and reflection takes - and the vetting process (which is the one substantive proposal Mandryk makes) sounds like a step in exactly the wrong direction.
ReplyDeleteSo far I have heard of no New emocrat pushing for a vetting process as Murray proposes. I have, however, heard too many who seem to think that the quick election of a new leader is all we need to correct what ails us.
ReplyDelete