This is a follow up to my post Calling out mainstream media for their coverage of Anjali’s disqualification.
To some this may be considered old news, because of the fast-pace nature of the news cycle. However, I am still left confused, seeking answers and looking for a path forward as a newly joined “NDP member”. Thankfully, the Breach Media took a courageous step to uncover some of the foul play in Anjali’s investigation and filled in some of the gaps left by other media sources.
The Breach Media article discusses at length the numerous actions and redirections Elizabeth Cull, the NDP’s Executive Electoral Chief and someone with ties to the fossil fuel lobby, took to justify Anjali’s disqualification. This may sound drastic but I genuinely wonder how it is fair that executives like Cull got the final say in the leadership race. What kind of backstops do we have in our political and legal systems to do an investigation into these NDP insiders? I didn’t vote for these people to have the final say, did you?
The article mentions how a normal “movement meeting” that took place before Anjali’s campaign began acted as the basis for Anjali’s disqualification. To me, this indicates our electoral system is broken and leans in favour of those with financial power in our province. How much happens behind closed doors on a regular basis to keep the provincial government subsidizing fossil fuels? If an organization like Dogwood cannot be a part of a public, community based brainstorming session that encouraged a community member with shared values to step up and run in the leadership race, then how is it justified for fossil fuel lobbyists to have private access to our local politicians before, during and after their campaigning and while they sit in office? Not to mention the clear contradictions in condemning Anjali for having supporters from Dogwood, compared to the pass that her competitor got for having support and endorsement from the United Steelworkers Union and the Canadian Union of Public Employees.
The Breach reveals that the party race rules were changed half way through the race. It is immensely frustrating that Cull would decide to “clarify” such rules in the middle of the race and to go out of her way to make sure that the clarified guidelines described something that would get Anjali in trouble. This is a trick I have seen often in politics. If rules and policies are created using vague language and flexible implementation in the first place, then officials can decide to exercise or clarify the terms when it serves them, and ignore them when it doesn’t (for example, look at how the Ford government in Ontario is using the notwithstanding clause to silence teachers unions – I am certain this sort of unconstitutional exercise of power wasn’t the clause’s intended use). The truth of the matter is that it seems every person involved in politics likes to interpret rules and policies in a different way. Some consistency would be nice.
The Breach also draws attention to the way that new members were called by a third party canvassing and fundraising agency and questioned about their motives for joining. I found this interesting because I actually was one of the new party members who received one of these calls. I missed the initial call, and a few days later I tried calling back multiple times without an answer. I was annoyed and concerned – Why did they try to call me? Did I do something wrong? Did this mean my membership isn’t official until I could get a hold of them? I’m sure I wasn’t the only new member who felt a sense of confusion about the state of my membership. Reading that this happened to other people, and that this was likely a voter intimidation tactic, made something click in my head. Apparently, the party I recently decided to support would rather make me feel like my membership was invalid in hopes that I skip the leadership vote, than welcome me and make me feel like I can actually trust the direction the party is going in.
These are just my thoughts as a somewhat disillusioned new NDP member (assuming my membership still counts…) and I would encourage you to read the Breach’s article yourself. Since I joined the BC NDP under what now feels like false pretenses, I have received a handful of emails from the BC NDP. These emails say that the NDP isn’t reaching fundraising targets, include some BC Liberals slander, and talk about some of the work they are doing (specifically the new doctor payment model). To be honest I am at a point where I don’t know what to do with my membership. I am not sure if I want to keep my NDP membership given the way that they handled this situation. What I do know is that I am not ready to give up. Like many others who are angry about how this all turned out, I will continue following Anjali and will continue to support my community of climate activists who want to see a better future for Vancouver, Victoria, BC, Canada and the world.
Read the Breach Media full article here: https://breachmedia.ca/how-the-ndp-establishment-stole-the-b-c-leadership-race/