•  

•  

Laurel and Hardy or Jonathan Swift

By DERMOD TRAVIS – communications consultant

There’s something virtually vaudevillian about the online chatter regarding the upcoming Green party convention, because at any moment you expect Oliver Hardy will pop onto stage and snort out "here's another nice mess you've gotten me into."

Because right now the various competing motions on the leadership question and their countless interpretations are nicely setting up that very climax from one of those classic Laurel and Hardy skits.

And the cast of this one-time only summer revue, if you believe the self-anointed and not so self-anointed spinmeisters, is divided into the pur et dur constitutionalists, those who allegedly refuse to accept the overwhelming result of the 2006 leadership race, those who worked for the victor of that race but have since changed their mind, and those who still believe the current leader is simply the cat's meow.

Now chances are this would not have become the mess that it promises to be if these matters had been dealt with at the 2009 bi-annual meeting. The constitutional four-year leadership term can hardly be described as a surprise to anyone who attended the 2006 convention least of all the leader who cited it herself following the 2008 election.

So instead of the no fuss, no muss opportunity lost, we have the let’s wash the party’s dirty laundry in public.

Since this site’s last proposal regarding the leadership question resoundingly fell on deaf ears, perhaps it’s time to look to Jonathan Swift for a modest proposal.

One of the notable and common features of the debate to date from all sides has been references to Elections Canada opinions, the Elections Act and possible partisan interpretations of both by the various cast members.

But there’s one thing you can usually count on with Elections Canada, they put most everything down in writing regarding their official relations with political parties. And the Elections Act, well, that’s already written down.

So, the modest proposal? Release all correspondence from Elections Canada that pertains to the various motions before party members. Verbatim. Release all relevant sections of the Elections Act.

Let the members read them and decide for themselves.

There’s nothing like an informed decision.

And for what it’s worth, the innovation of commentary on the motions themselves is a good idea. It would be an even better idea if the mover of each motion had the chance to sign off on them first though.

Dermod Travis is former Director of Communications for the Green Party of Canada and organized the Green Party's 2006 National Convention