News from the ALP Convention: Resolution on Cooperation
Author: David | Date: May 18, 2010 | Please Comment!The biggest news out of this weekend’s Alberta Liberal Party convention and annual general meeting was the passing of a resolution on “Cooperation with Other Political Parties.” I watched with a great deal of interest as both sides of the debate made their points and counterpoints. It was a very passionate and fascinating discussion. Contrary to some media reports, I abstained from the vote, as I wanted this question to be decided by the members of our party. I will follow the wisdom of the majority, who decided in favour of the motion.
What the resolution actually says, is not very specific. The contentious part of the resolution that laid out specific instructions was removed following an amendment by one of our longtime Liberal members. The resulting amended resolution was clearly more palatable to the majority of our members in attendance and this is what we will be working with in the coming weeks and months as we prepare for the election.
This is clearly a COOPERATION resolution calling for us to work with progressive parties and voters, including progressive Tories who are leaving the Progressive Conservative party of Alberta in droves, seeking an alternative.
We ARE that alternative. We ARE the ONLY centrist party in Alberta with policies in place and a structure out there in all 83 ridings across the province. It only makes sense that we would be the party to extend a hand and offer to work together.
It’s often said that I’m not a typical politician. I would like to suggest to you that this makes me the ideal person to introduce a new way of doing politics in Alberta, as urged by the resolution this weekend. It is a less confrontational kind of politics, one that puts the interests of the citizens of this province ahead of narrow partisan interests.
The Alberta Liberal Party under my leadership will work in earnest and with the full and open involvement of our membership, to bring people together so that we can form a new kind of government for this province, one we can all be proud of. This is what cooperation means and this is what any good government does.
11:11 am on May 20th, 2010
Indeed,you are an atypical politican, David. I’m tired of reading in the media that you are not a good politician because you are too decent and honest to be a real politician. I think that there is a hunger among voters for leaders whom they can trust, and that people will start to see past the pundits who say he’s “TOO nice,” as if what we really want for leaders are cold-hearted manipulators and ultra-partisans.
You’ve made Liberal policies clear and the party has indicated an openness to discussing working understandings with other progressive forces for the 2012 election. The need for change in the province is too great for anyone to write off new ideas and ways of working together.
Keep the faith!
11:14 am on May 20th, 2010
Funny that everyone seems to believe the NDP will agree not to run in a majority of constituencies to the benefit of liberals. There is also the notion that policies of the NDP and liberals differ in details, not in substance.
Why, if this is true, do so many liberals fear uniting with the NDP to form a new party?
Form the party via renewed memberships over the summer, talk to those NDP people and agree to allow democracy be done.
Let Albertans have a real opposition!
12:13 pm on May 20th, 2010
I echo what has been said here – Dr. Swann is precisely the kind of leader/politician we need for these times. Courage, and compassion, wisdom and sensibilities from a deep humanistic well/world view and a good sense of political pragmatism; I value these very much.
I also attended the Alberta Liberal Party 2010 convention this past weekend and was delighted to witness the reaffirmation of core-progressive and centrist Liberal values that speak to the best of its distinguished history in this province.
With a large number of other attending Liberals and several former and currently serving MLAs, I voted in support of a resolution on interparty dialogue and cooperation put forward by the Edmonton Glenora & Edmonton Mill Woods constituencies. The resolution passed.
It’s a friendly resolution asking for the Alberta Liberals to find common grounds with other progressive parties and explore the possibility of interparty collaboration in future provincial elections; the resolution demonstrates a mature sense of political pragmatism.
You know, my young adults kids (voters now) are delighted to see such a imaginative move – in fact, they kept asking me, “dad, why hasn’t this be done before?” – I hope party leaders from other compatible political platforms will show the good will & wisdom that such a dialogue and interparty collaboration requires.
Leo Campos Aldunez
1:29 pm on May 20th, 2010
The passage of the DRP motion for progressive parties to collaborate in the next election is a progressive step towards strengthening democracy in the Alberta legislature. While I recognize that many members of the NDP and ALP are strongly opposed to this initiative, I hope the DRP can persuade reasonable (but undecided) center and center-left leaning Albertans that the only way we can bring about political change is by suspending our own entrenched loyalties to party ideology. The larger ideology at stake here is the preservation and reinforcement of democracy. Given that political analysts have compared the Liberal and NDP policy platforms and found about a 95% overlap, surely we can provisionally put the 5% differences aside so that both parties can form a viable opposition in 2012 and put an end to the Conservative juggernaut. After that success, we can all return to our parties of choice. This is a temporary solution, without which Albertans will have an ongoing, long-term problem–one that might well move this province even further to the right.
A common argument against the DRP initiative is that it’s undemocratic. That is not how I understand the DRP initiative. The project intends to have level-headed, moderate members of the NDP and ALP democratically decide the form and process of cooperation. What unites NDs and Liberals in the DRP is their belief that by dogmatically adhering to the same strategy we ensure that the governance of this province remains undemocratic. To prevent that, the DRP is committed to building a path to proportionate representation, which can only come about through a strong, viable opposition or a new, centrist government. Toward that end, the DRP has some suggestions that can jump-start discussions on the process of cooperation and democratic renewal–a win-win process for each party, for the people, and for the province.
I wish the DRP much success; spread your message far and wide. Hopefully progressive Albertans will visit the DRP website and become part of this dynamic team.
Judy J. Johnson
Calgary, AB
8:08 pm on May 20th, 2010
Kudos for the courageous and far-sighted initiative, Dr. Swann and ALP. We need more unity and not more sqaubbling amongst the progressive forces in AB if there was to be any change ever. Please know that despite the confusing media take on this resolution, there are far more people who are likely to support cooperation amongst the progressive forces, rather than the tired continuation of the Tory game and governance.
Hopeful citizen
8:52 am on May 21st, 2010
JJ Johnson claims 95% of our policy is the same, but she doesn’t seem to want to merge with the NDP. Why is that?
The DRP want the milk (want the NDP to stand down in a majority of constituencies so liberals can win) but the DRP don’t want to buy the cow (create one party where the constituency organisations will elect one MLA candidate via democratic vote).
Maybe the NDP will be dumb enough to go along with this DRP proposal, but I think that Brian Mason and his crew are smart enough to hold out for the ceremonial ring.
2:23 pm on May 22nd, 2010
Hello hgdreams. I’m open to cooperating with all Albertans to determine the best approach for progressive change and democratic renewal–whatever that might be. The ultimate strategy should, in my opinion, be determined by the people.
Judy J. Johnson
8:35 am on May 25th, 2010
OK, the DRP ultimate strategy of the best approach for progressive change…
Let us examine how eliminating the better NDP candidates in specific constituencies, just because they are NDP and the libs got more votes in the last election, is the best approach to progressive change.
First thing to consider is how this DRP proposal is skewing the potential re-election of same liberals. The incumbant always has the advantage of the House recognition, and the media always covers the incumbant more intensively, so why do DRPs suggest that the NDP should give up their better candidates for this disadvantage in this and any future elections?
Why should any NDP members allow their better candidate a lesser chance of becoming MLs?
This DRP proposal is a non-starter, let us go forward and amalgamate the two parties and let democracy work!
9:04 am on May 25th, 2010
JJJ,
I am concerned about your (and others) support and co-operation with the DRPs because focusing energy on a proposal which is non-functional leads to despair and eventual surrender.
If you are truely interested in assisting Albertans to regain control of their province, then the DRP proposal to apporportion the constituency seats based on backward looking historical data must be quickly exposed for the biased project that it is.
The incumbants (in the next election) always have a superior position from which to fight the election following.
Why would the NDP do that to their loyal candidates, even if (especially if) no truce were agreed to for the following election. The NDP are not fools, and the DRP seems to be treating them as such.
If , however, the libs and NDP merge, then the best candidates, best organizations, best policies, and best for Albertans, could all be constructed and presented in the next election, and be strengthened in all the elections following!
All it will take is the proper focus on what is realistically possible, on what true sacrifices democratic renewal requires, from the Liberals as well as the NDP, in order to be functional.
But this DRP proposal for “everyone to just get along” is a child’s fantasy, and does but disperse the energy necessary to evolve a viable government option for Albertans.
7:44 pm on May 29th, 2010
I think some clarity on this point is required: the DRP does not advocate a merger among the ALP/ANDP – it has never done so. Better to take a moment to visit our website and you will know exactly where we stand on this and other matters.
What we do advocate however, as a good starting point, is interparty cooperation, and/or strategic electoral agreements determined by the parties themselves. If the DRP can assist in such dialogue, it would be honoured to do so.
And if at some point in the future the members of these parties decide that the wish to merge or form a new political entity, a larger & inclusive tent that will tap in to the talents, skills, abilities and yearnings for regime change in Alberta, well, that would be a bonus.
For the time being however, we see electoral cooperation/collaboration as the beginning of a long and no doubts arduous process to get to the promised land, in our lifetime ? LCA
2:31 pm on May 31st, 2010
Some clarity IS necessary!
The DRP cannot answer the question, why should the NDP suffer from giving the liberals a bonus in the next election by not running against them?
The liberal incumbant ( if helped into office by an NDP not running ) would have name recognition and media access by simply being an MLA. Where is the benefit for the NDP?
The DRP should stand for “Don’t Really Percieve” because you tell the NDP to fall on their swords but you want them to do it for the benefit of their political enemies.
No one, especially me, needs to be reminded that the DRP do not advocate for the merger of the NDP and the Liberals, because a merger would be a good, responsible, intelligent response to 40 years of Cons. It give the NDP a reason to participate.
The DRP coalition is foolish.
3:57 pm on June 3rd, 2010
Guess what ?
Clarity is not your forte.
The DRP advocation of building a bridge and being told it is not possible unless certain engineering constraints are met, and then the DRP continuing to advocate building the same bridge which does not meet the engineering requirements is not vision, it is blindness.
How to build the bridge has been outlined for the DRP. People who insist on building something which will collapse are consuming time and effort which is better spent on a functional project. The DRP is supporting a disfunctional idea and ignoring the possible.
8:32 am on June 18th, 2010
Has anyone reviewed Mr. Elder’s projections for the 2012 or 2016 combined election results under the DRPs proposal?
3:47 pm on July 29th, 2010
Hey Dave!
Check out the funny business that is going on at Alberta Works:
1. Alberta Employment and Immigation;
2. Income Support;
3. Other parts of the Alberta Works Program.