This is not ok.

Article: "Times Colonist: NDP's draft gag order could limit public dissent on party positions." (link)

There is a time for internal confidentiality and there's a time for public debate. A healthy political party knows the difference and isn't afraid of the latter.

So, with that, I oppose any gag order placed on party officials. I didn't join this party in 1995 to watch this party become an organization of yes-men.

It is fundamental to the health of a democratic organization that it listen to voices of dissent and disagreement to help a course correction if drifting off path too far.

So now what? Should a local party official (read: activist and volunteer) speak against a govt policy that runs opposite of party philosophy, is that person going to be stripped of their role?

Let's be honest. If you're a member of a party, in this case the NDP, chances are that you're onside for probably 90-95% of what the govt is doing. That's what puts us all in the same room, makes us volunteer, fundraise and hit the bricks during campaign seasons.

But to those who disagree with the 5-10% of what govt does, is that going to cost us?

I spoke out against siteC. If I ever put my name forward for a party position, is that going to cost me? I can defend my position, and I don't agree with the government on theirs.

Is the party's "green light" committee going to veto any effort to run for the nomination of an elected position under the party's banner for my dissent (if I chose to run)? 

Because that would be very unfortunate.

My 2 bits.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Predictable, but sickening nonetheless: BC Liberals tap dance on fuel price.

Lauren Semple - for the future we need

No Keith. Do not play the #bothsides card