Lesbian teacher barred from running for Ontario NDP
ONTARIO ELECTION / Diana Andrews told she cannot run at a raucous nomination meeting in Etobicoke North
Rob Salerno / Toronto / Thursday, August 18, 2011
Share |

A nomination meeting for the provincial New Democrats in Etobicoke North devolved into accusations of corruption and usurpation of the democratic process Wed night when it was announced that former candidate and out lesbian Diana Andrews would not be permitted to stand for the nomination, and that the only approved candidate is Vrind Sharma from nearby Brampton.
 
Andrews had previously carried the NDP banner in the riding during this year's federal election, in which she placed third but brought the party to its best showing there in more than 20 years, capturing 23 percent of the vote.
 
Diana Andrews consults Robert's Rules of Order while challenging the party's decision to keep her off the nomination ballot.
(Rob Salerno)
About 70 people met at the Forum Banquet Hall and Convention Centre on Aug 17 for the nomination meeting only to be told that just one candidate had been approved for the nomination.
 
Party vice-president Scott Piatkowski, who was chairing the meeting, lost control shortly after he made his announcement, as Andrews and her supporters challenged the party’s ruling and attempted to get him to allow her to stand for the nomination.
 
Glyn Wood, a supporter of Andrews, alleged that the party’s decision to bar her violated its constitution, as Andrews was not given official notice or explanation for why her candidacy was rejected by the party.
 
Piatkowski asserted that Andrews did receive an explanation and eventually the party’s provincial secretary Darlene Lawson addressed the crowd to say that she did give Andrews notice and explanation personally. She refused to elaborate on the explanation, citing confidentiality rules.
 
But Andrews insisted that she had not received official explanation or the right to contest the secretary’s decision before the provincial council, as is her right under the party’s constitution. Andrews asked Lawson to tell the crowd why she was barred, even agreeing to waive her right to confidentiality. Lawson stayed silent.
 
Ontario NDP vice president Scott Piatkowski lost control of the nomination meeting early in the evening.
(Rob Salerno)
Andrews tells Xtra that she was blackballed because she is currently pursuing legal action against her employer, the Elementary Teachers’ Federation of Ontario. Andrews would not elaborate on the nature of the action, but says that she had been told in July that her legal issue would be a distraction from the party message.
 
According to articles 6.07 (1-2) of the party constitution available on the Ontario NDP website, the vetting process is supposed to take place after a nomination meeting:
 
“The candidate selected at a nomination meeting must be endorsed by the Provincial Council before he/she becomes the Party’s official candidate,” the constitution reads. “If the Provincial Council decides not to endorse a selected candidate, the Provincial Council shall provide the constituency association and the selected candidate with a full explanation of its reason and, if requested, shall provide the selected candidate and the constituency association with a full hearing before the Provincial Council.”
 
Members shouted at Piatkowski.
 
“I think this whole meeting is defunct. It is not transparent. It is not democratic,” said one man.
 
“I have been an NDP member 40 odd years… You are throwing the party down the drain,” said Aubrey NcNaughton, before storming out of the room.
 
Waving a copy of Robert’s Rules of Order, Andrews then argued with Piatkowski over whether the members gathered could overrule the party decision to bar her nomination. As the argument wore on, members of the audience expressed confusion that they were called to a nomination meeting where there wasn’t a choice of candidates.
 
“I’m only 13, but if there’s only one candidate, this isn’t a nomination. This is an acclamation,” said one girl.
 
26-year-old sales manager Vrind Sharma was acclaimed as the NDP candidate for Etobicoke North after a divisive nomination meeting.
(Rob Salerno)
As Andrews continued questioning the chair’s decision, Piatkowski got visibly annoyed. “Stop interrupting and we’re going to acclaim the candidate.”
 
That prompted federal NDP riding association president Patricia Crooks to exclaim from the back of the room, “If you were in Richmond Hill or downtown Toronto, you could not do this! You’re insulting us! This is not democratic! Cancel the meeting!”
 
Piatkowski pressed on with the meeting asking those present to vote to accept Sharma’s nomination, at which point Andrews shouted, “This is terrible! You don’t care about the community!”
 
Crooks then announced that she had a petition signed by more than 1,000 people from the riding demanding that Andrews have the opportunity to run.
 
Piatkowski did not acknowledge the petition when it was put in front of him. He pressed on and asked members to endorse Sharma by raising a card that had been given to members when they signed in. This may have violated the section of the party constitution that requires a secret ballot.
 
Only four people in the room raised placards endorsing Sharma’s candidacy. Piatkowski then announced that the result confirms Sharma as the party’s candidate, refusing calls from the floor demanding that they be given the right to vote against.
 
Section 6.06 (2) of the party constitution requires that “In an uncontested nomination, in order for a member to become the candidate, he/she must be endorsed by a majority of the members present and voting.”
 
Someone at the back of the room called for a show of hands of people who wanted to give Andrews the right to stand for the nomination. It was impossible to get an accurate count, but many more than four people raised their hands. Piatkowski ignored the display.
 
After the meeting, Crooks’ words were even harsher.
 
“This was elitists coming into a minority community and shoving a candidate down our throats,” she says. “They know many people aren’t educated about the process and won’t question it.”
 
Adil Osobleh, who emigrated to Canada from Saudi Arabia 20 years ago, said the meeting has called her support for the NDP into question.
 
“I thought when I came here I chose a country with a democratic process. Tonight after what I saw, I’m going to find another process, another party,” she said.
 
After receiving the nomination, Sharma told the crowd he hoped for all of their support and even asked for Andrews’ support. The 26-year-old account manager says he grew up in the riding and lives just across its border in Brampton. He says his main priorities as a politician are helping seniors, eradicating poverty, reducing unemployment and crime and improving education.


Share |


Reader Comments


 
Re: Secret Ballot
The article says: "He pressed on and asked members to endorse Sharma by raising a card that had been given to members when they signed in. This may have violated the section of the party constitution that requires a secret ballot." This is not correct. The constitution does not say a secret ballot is required if the meeting is uncontested (which, according to the chair, it was). According to the regulations set by provincial council, a secret ballot for an uncontested nomination is only required if requested by a member. There is no mention of such a request, so the article is inaccurate in this regard.
Paul, Kitchener Ontario
08/18/11 9:17 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Re: Secret Ballot
Hi Paul, Multiple people at the meeting pointed out that a secret ballot was required and requested the right to vote by secret ballot. They also requested the right to vote against the nomination and were denied that. They also wanted the opportunity to question the candidate (Mr. Sharma) and hear him speak before the vote, and the chair denied that as well.
Rob Salerno, Toronto ON
08/18/11 11:05 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Diana Andrews LIED to supporters
Diana lied to the community and her volunteers saying she had not been informed when she was. I've been actively involved in the last three campaigns in Etobicoke North, and actually helped Ms. Andrews on her campaign. I think the party was entirely right refusing her nomination: 1. She was in it for all the wrong reasons, namely self-promotion. On election day, instead of working the polls, she said she had to leave before dinner to get ready for "Jack's party" leaving all her volunteers on their own. 2. She refused any help or direction and basically drove around campaigning for herself with a skeleton crew. It's interesting to me 1000 people signed the petition, and so many showed up at the meeting when only FIVE people helped her full time during her campaign. She is not a motivational or effective candidate. 3. She ran her campaign on a shoestring, not doing fund raising and having almost no signage. She grossly misrepresented her volunteer and fund raising resources to the party when she ran the last time. 4. The amount of votes Ms. Andrews garnished last election was solely due to the NDP wave, and not at all due to her own efforts. 5. She is self-promoting and doesn't care about the good of the party. She openly attacked Vrind at the meeting who himself had nothing to do with the selection process and was an innocent party. Personally, I never saw her helping on any campaign I worked on, until she ran herself. She came out of nowhere professing support and backing that she did not have. She ran a poor campaign, and only lucked out with votes - being in the right place at the right time. Shame on you Diana Andrews for misleading a community and a loyal group of volunteers for your own personal gripes. Shame on you Diana Andrews for throwing an innocent legitimate candidate under the bus because you can't take no for an answer. Shame on you for casting disparagement's on the NDP, when they followed process, and you lied and said th
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/18/11 11:34 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Rob, re: Secret Ballot
Hi Rob, It was impossible to have Vrind speak considering the mob Diana brought with her (who did not help on the campaign, btw) was busy screaming down anyone who had anything to say. They demanded the right to speak, but would not let anyone else speak. They brandished Robert's Rules of Order like it gave them some holy right to soap box and pulpit pound. It was crazy. The correct procedure WAS followed. Diana knew this, lied to everyone, and basically worked up a lynch mob to make trouble for the party. She did not try to follow the proper procedures for dealing with her issues. She was looking for a public scene and that is that. I feel sorry for the candidate, who has been very active for the NDP, grew up in the area, and has mapped out an excellent campaign. I believe he is running for the good of the community, and not on some narcissistic rampage like Andrews. It was shameful how Diana attacked Vrind - screaming for him to talk but then heckling him throughout his speech. Her OWN campaign team who were arguing her point on principle found her self-serving and hard to deal with. Their words, not mine. Diana painted a picture of a conspiracy against her, when there wasn't any. The decision for her not to run wasn't a slight against the neighborhood. In fact, as a resident, I'm looking forward to a candidate who will actually run an effective campaign - instead of what Diana did last time.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/18/11 11:42 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Article title misleading
I know I'm writing a lot here, but I have to add the title of this article -- Lesbian teacher barred from running for Ontario NDP -- is very misleading. The title makes it sound like Diana was barred from running because she is a Lesbian, which simply has NOTHING to do with why she was barred.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/18/11 11:46 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Violated constitution
Section 6.06 (2) of the party constitution requires that “In an uncontested nomination, in order for a member to become the candidate, he/she must be endorsed by a majority of the members present and voting.” It would seem the vote violated this part of the constitution, as majority of voting members means nothing if you don't allow for people to vote against. Those people had their votes taken away and that is against the party constitution. Scott should know better. There is no point to ANY political party if democratic voting means nothing.
sam, toronto onario
08/18/11 2:49 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Vote happened
There was a vote. I distinctly remembered raising my card. I almost missed it because Diana and her mob (most of whom could not vote because they weren't members) were shouting and screaming and causing such confusion. Sharma received the majority of the votes because while some others weirdly voted for Andrews, who was not running, those votes did not count. Yet others who had planned to vote for Sharma missed the chance to vote because the meeting was being bulldozed and disrupted by Andrews lynch mob. People are making this situation into something it wasn't. It was not a parachuted candidate. Sharma is a gentlemen who has lived the majority of his life in Etobicoke North and had a sincere desire, and party's permission to run. I have to say, in all the meetings I've been to in the past, Etobicoke North meetings have been attended by 6-12 people. Suddenly at this meeting a bunch of people showed up to bulldoze Diana Andrews illegal platform through. Think of it as the equivalent of busing in votes. Diana riled up a mob, supplied them with pitchforks, and made the meeting a complete carnival. Too bad she didn't show as much motivation or put in as much work while she was actually running. She might have won. Three cheers for a candidate (Sharma) who is running full time, instead of just putting in a few hours after their full time job.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/18/11 3:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
That's not a vote
If the only votes allowed are for Sharma and any votes for another candidate are disallowed and Scott refused to take votes against Sharma. Again, the constitution says "majority" of votes, but the word majority is meaningless if all that is allowed is yes votes for one candidate. There is zero reason to take vote in such a case - it is a sham. Skip the vote if you don't allow anything but yes votes.
sam, toronto ontario
08/18/11 3:42 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
really?
What does her being a lesbian have to do with this? It sounds like internal party politics.
mike, toronto on
08/18/11 3:59 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Re: Secret Ballot
Rob, thank you for the information. One issue that remains unclear is whether any of these objectors were voting members. The article mentioned a petition with over 1000 signatures on it. However, if these signatures were not from members of the riding association, they have no business "demanding" anything. While nomination meetings are generally open to the public, only members of that riding association are entitled to vote, raise objections, or request a secret ballot. If members requested a secret ballot and/or to vote against the nominee, it would be a violation of the constitution if they were not allowed. But again, it's unclear whether it was members of the public making these demands, or members of the riding association.
Paul, Kitchener Ontario
08/18/11 4:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
dishonest headline
After reading the story it is obvious that this woman was not barred from running because she is Lesbian. It appears that she is being barred because she is suing the teachers union. The NDP is within their rights to bar her since she could do more harm than good. Xtra should change title to "Teacher suing teachers federation barred from running for Ontario NDP".
Kevin Smith, Toronto Ontario
08/18/11 4:05 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Democracy did not happen
First of all Susan, your behavior last night was very upsetting. If you felt that it was a waste of "your time", then you could have left whenever you wanted to. If you wish to mislead people, and really show your true colours, go ahead. Last night was a sad night for the NDP. I felt thst people were not listened to, and we as the residents of the riding should have a larger role in who should be our candidate. We are supposed to be the New DEMOCRATIC Party. If we can't even voice our opinions, then we are just like the others.
Ali Chatur, East York Ontario
08/18/11 5:01 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Re: Democracy did not happen
Ali, please clarify; if you read my previous posts, this is a critical question which has not been answered. When you say, "the residents of the riding should have a larger role in who should be our candidate," are you referring exclusively to NDP members who live within the riding?
Paul, Kitchener Ontario
08/18/11 5:09 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Re Re: Democracy did not happen
Many of those who were on the petition, were not there last night. But, those who did demand a secret ballot, and that the chair should listen to them, were members of the party. They signed in at the registration desk, and entered the hall. The riding association president was one to demand such things, but she was also ignored by the Chair. So, I believe that, because these were all members of the party, that we should have been listening to them, instead of ignoring them.
Ali Chatur, East York Ontario
08/18/11 6:32 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Headline is Fine
Susan and co. The headline is not misleading at all. The title expresses why the article is in this magazine, and why it is of interest to the target audience of this magazine. I should think that is pretty obvious. No where in the title or the body is it suggested that Andrews was booted for being a Lesbian. From what I can see, your list of allegations against Andrews, and her campaign style have nothing to do with the case presented by the NDP. It is a serious concern here that the NDP seems to be proactively judging Andrews on the basis of her complaint against the NDP friendly Elementary School Teachers of Toronto. NDP candidates are not allowed to sue unions? Is that the point? I bet things would be different if she were suing Rob Ford. It might be somewhat different, had the suit gone forward, and it was discovered in court that complaint was spurious. But as it is, it seems like the NDP is taking a side directly in a legal complaint for purely political reasons. If the complaint is upheld? Whoa! Are you trouble there, because the complaint could then be extended to the NDP, as well, for barring her on such a pretext, which would just compound the damages to Andrews reputation. Also, parachuting some poor sucker in from Brampton. What a mess. The ONDP is getting a seriously bad reputation for using ad hoc administrative processes that appear to conflict with the letter of the ONDP constitution, everything from botched elections at ONDPY, to cancelling the party policy convention, to this. Ugly.
Steve, toronto Ontario
08/18/11 7:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The headline is not fine
The headline implies that the fact that she is a lesbian is relevant to her being barred from running. Her being a lesbian isn't even mentioned in the story. And does Xtra plan on covering all nomination meetings for all parties? If not, could someone explain the relevance of this one?
mike, toronto on
08/18/11 11:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Title is entirely accurate
The title is entirely fine. It states precisely why people who read Xtra would find this story interesting. If I ran a medical journal, and wanted to write a story about doctor who was a politician, I might have a title: "Doctor barred from running for Ontario NDP", would that imply that the person was being excluded because they were a doctor? You are just being overly sensitive to the point of paranoia... what is up with that? I actually find this obsession with the title to be vaguely disturbing.
steve, toronto on
08/19/11 2:06 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Democracy?
Did other people have the right to be nominated?
SD, Toronto ON
08/19/11 6:59 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Ethno-cultural politics
My guess is that the South Asian community is larger than the LGBT community in Etobicoke North. The NDP brass wants to win this riding. It will prefer someone's ethnic identification over someone's sexual orientation status in order to win this riding. Voters do have biases, and they can vote against someone because of one's sexual orientation. I also don't think Diana Andrews was denied the right to run because she is suing ETFO. Other people were also denied the right to run; they are not suing ETFO. I do notice that in Andrea Horwath's NDP, the radical social activists are being shunted aside. Instead, moderate NDPers are being presented as candidates. Policy-wise it's hard to tell the difference between the NDP, Liberals, and Conservatives. Martin Cohn of the Toronto Star made that observation noting that the different parties are crossing their ideological boundary lines when presenting their campaign platforms. The NDP campaign will likely be very leader-centric. It doesn't need local candidates saying radical things and upsetting the leader during the campaign.
SD, Toronto ON
08/19/11 7:20 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Candidates can't automatically run again
The NDP is entirely within their power to decide whether or not a certain individual can stand for nomination or not. There is a process - a process decided by elected party officials. The process WAS followed. Just because Diana doesn't like the process, or agree with the party decision - doesn't mean she is right. I think it was unfair that a mob of people bulldozed and bullied party members standing in support of the NDP decision not to let Diana run. I found comments like "fine then, I'll just vote Conservative" to be particularly telling. Most of the people supporting Diana weren't even card carrying members. They screamed down other card carrying members and villainized anyone who did not agree with Diana's position. They screamed about violations of democracy while violating other people's right to the same. They shouted down anyone who supported the party's position. It was ridiculous. Saying a cow is a horse doesn't make the cow a horse. Diana saying the constitution wasn't followed doesn't mean what she's saying is true. There is a POLICY. The policy was FOLLOWED. If people don't like the policy, they should go to provincial council and make a motion to try to amend the policy. However, the policy STANDS, and no amount of bullying can undercut decisions made by representatives of the MAJORITY of NDP's in Ontario. Diana's will doesn't outweigh rules we agreed to follow by becoming members. I feel Diana has shown HER true colors by making a mockery of the NDP's processes and policies. She should have been thrown out of the meeting when she continually refused to acknowledge the authority of the chair. I'm glad a mob-riling bully won't be running in my neighborhood. Congratulations on the political suicide, Diana. It's obvious you are mostly a member of the DIANA PARTY and not the NDP.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 7:30 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Point of Clarification
You vote FOR a person - not against them. People should not have been given the opportunity to vote AGAINST Vrind Sharma. Diana knew for weeks her right for nomination had been denied. If anyone else wanted to also apply for nomination, they could have done so. Then, if there were two or more people AUTHORIZED to be voted on - people could have voted for Vrind OR the other person. Votes for Diana were not counted because she was not AUTHORIZED to run. If people have an issue with the NDP having the right to vet potential nominees - instead letting any Joe off the street rally up a posse and get themselves elected - then so be it ... make it an order of business at the next ONDP policy convention. HOWEVER, Diana Andrews does not have the right to change NDP policies on the fly, no matter how much she disagrees with them. None of us do. There are proper policies to be followed. This IS a democracy not an ANARCHY. Which means, there are rules to be followed, even if we don't always like the rules. People were not allowed to vote for Diana, and if they did their votes did not count because: (I wonder if you'll ever understand this...) SHE WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO RUN. The END. The ONDP decided she could not run. The end. Accept it, and lets move on. Too bad she is more interested in HER running in the election than the NDP winning the election. I honestly think the problem is, her motivation has always been exactly that. Her own self-promotion. Certainly outside issues affect a politician's chance at being allowed to run in an election. However, keep in mind, the party hasn't said this was the reason - DIANA said this was the reason. I don't really know why anybody believes anything that woman says anymore. Democracy doesn't equal mob rule. Sorry folks.
Susan, Etobicoke ONtario
08/19/11 7:37 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
VRIND SHARMA grew up in neighborhood
Vrind Sharma is from Etobicoke North. He recently married and moved, seriously A BLOCK from the most recent electoral boundaries. It's not like he's from Brampton, was raised in Brampton, and was parachuted in. He spent most of his life in North Etobicoke, and still considers himself to be a North Etobican. He went to NACI. He understands Neighborhood issues. Considering Diana just moved to the neighborhood herself recently, he probably understands the neighborhood MORE than her - having grown up here as a kid and for most of his adult life. But why are we comparing Vrind to Diana? The two have nothing to do with each other. ONE: Diana has an issue with the ONDP's decision to not let her run. TWO: Vrind Sharma wanted to run for nomination, and passed the vetting process. Vrind should not be punished, or lose supporters, for the issues Diana Andrews has with the ONDP. If people notice he acted with complete decorum and poise. He did not respond to personal attacks. He went to Diana and asked for her help during the election. He showed himself to be a good man. Pretty impressive since a bunch of people were attacking him, for nothing he did.
Susan, Etobicoke ONtario
08/19/11 7:45 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Andrews actions destructive
I truly believe the NDP followed the proper process in this instance. I also believe, for her own personal reasons, Diana Andrews preyed on the loyalty of volunteers. I believe a whole group of loyal, good, and intelligent people are standing up for Andrews truly believing a wrong has been done. However, a wrong has not been done. Not against Andrews. Not against the community. I love and respect several of the people who were standing up for Andrews at the meeting. However, I believe in this instance, they have been misled, or don't understand the process, or don't know all the facts of the issue - and are wrong. That does not stop me from valuing and respecting these people. Who I do not respect are the people who showed up to support Diana who were not members, and who have never helped the NDP for a minute in their lives. These people bullied members and disrupted my party's democratic process. Shame on you. Loyal NDP supporters in Etobicoke North, I hope you can drop this issue - and let it be dealt with at Ontario NDP where it should be dealt with. Please feel free to go be voted as members to go to ONDP council meetings if you want to change policies. In the meantime, we all have an election to focus on.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 8:04 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Susan is the party constitution nonsensical?
Section 6.06 (2) of the party constitution requires that “In an uncontested nomination, in order for a member to become the candidate, he/she must be endorsed by a majority of the members present and voting.” Are you saying if zero people voted FOR Sharma, he would have been acclaimed because your only choice is to vote for the candidate so a majority of those voting is by definition just whoever votes? Again, the vote is then absolutely meaningless. Why hold it?
sam, toronto ontario
08/19/11 8:58 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Uncontested nomination
Sam, the problem is when the moderator tried to have the vote - Diana and a few other people were yelling so loud that most of the crowd missed the fact that a vote was even going on. THEN someone yelled, who wants to vote for Diana, and a bunch of people put up their hands - several of whom didn't even have the right to vote. Several people DID vote for Vrind - despite the fact they were being yelled at and bullied for doing so. Diana and her crowd didn't give the moderator a chance to count - and the room fell into shambles soon thereafter with people yelling and screaming about Diana not being able to run. It's not right to STOP a process from happening, and then call the process undemocratic. It's also not right to bus in a bunch of people who are not members to disrupt a meeting. There was a miscarriage of democracy, but it wasn't carried out by the ONDP - democracy was disrupted by Diana simply because she was angry she could not run. People were who came specifically to vote for Vrind were stopped from doing so by Diana's commotion. Why aren't they being given the same consideration in this dialogue? The room was scary. People were intimidated by Diana's bullying. I'm reading a bunch of conflicting issues. A bunch of people here are complaining about why there was a vote when Vrind was the only nominee. THEN, another bunch of people are complaining because there wasn't a vote. There was a vote. It was hard to tell because of the commotion Diana caused, but there was a vote. I've been at meetings in the past where only 5 people SHOWED UP to vote. Again, I have to say it's interesting that of all the people who showed up to "support Diana" on Wednesday, only a small handful have EVER BEEN ACTIVE in NDP politics. I'd lay wagers that if she had been allowed to run, and did win, they wouldn't have helped her in the campaign anyway. They didn't last time... This entire issue is about hurt feelings, not injustice.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 9:23 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Rules are not always democratic
I don't know either Ms. Andrews or Mr. Sharma. I am not a member of the NDP. I do think that this nomination meeting was a little suspicious. If a constituency wants to have a nomination meeting, people belonging to that riding association should be able to have the right to run for the nomination during the nomination meeting. No candidate should need to be approved by some Central Party committee before the nomination meeting. Anyone at a nomination meeting should be able to yell, "I nominate Joe Schmoe!" Another person shoud be able to shout, "I second the nomination!" This was not allowed for Ms. Andrews; it was not allowed for anyone else. Even though it may be in the NDP rules, those rules are not democratic. As for non-members shouting during the meeting, it should have been up to the local constituency organization to decide if the meeting should have been open to the public.
SD, Toronto ON
08/19/11 10:24 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Same for all parties
All parties vet potential candidates before they are allowed to be nominated. We're talking about people who could be elected to represent their party and their communities in parliament. This is serious business. You can't just let any wing-nut with a following or a bunch of money walk in, and run for election. You can't even really let a well-meaning individual without the resources to run a successful campaign to run if you have a better choice. It's just the way things are. Otherwise it would too easy for a person to hijack a party seat. Hell, you'd have Conservatives running for NDP, so if they win they could vote with the Conservatives in parliament. See what I mean? I assume anyone who wants to can apply to run as an independent? Not sure about that, but worth checking out for people who really just want to see their name on a sign. But if you want to represent the party, you have to follow the basic precepts, and follow the rules of the party. I know a guy who recently jumped from NDP to Liberal because they felt their was more room for mobility inside the decimated Federal Liberal party. The process seeks to keep out opportunists as well!
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 11:20 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Constitution
6.07 (1) The candidate selected at a nomination meeting must be endorsed by the Provincial Council before he/she becomes the Party’s official candidate. Ms. Andrews was NOT endorsed. How much clearer can it get than that? Really, everything else being discussed here is irrelevant in face of this point.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 12:00 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
re: Article title misleading
That an unacceptable candidate decides to act foolishly in public, lying to her supporters and disrupting a meeting at which she had no business attending as a "candidate" does not seem to be th issue, according to your headline. The fact that Diana Andrews is a lesbian is moot. The NDP has embraced LGBTQI members for decades. Frankly, Diana has embarrassed herself, the party and her aupporters by her antics.
Mike Martin, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 4:24 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Disingenuous
Steve's oft-repeated comment is disingenuous to the point of being dishonest. Any reasonable person, on seeing the headline, would believe that the candidate was rejected BECAUSE she was a lesbian. The headline is strictly truthful (she is a lesbian and she was rejected as a candidate), but it is nonetheless dishonest in that it creates a false impression.
Malcolm, Regina Saskatchewan
08/19/11 4:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Kiss goodbye to this riding
Regardless of what people say about Andrews, the reality is that the NDP is now clearly not competitive in this riding, and will not be able to recapture the momentum it gained in the recent Federal election, where Andrews was the candidate. A very bad show, overall, And very amateur politics here. We have the outsider party VP coming in to manage the locals and clearly over riding the wishes of the riding association president and a block of riding members as well, in a public forum, and numerous apparent procedural questions. Ugly and bad. I really hope the NDP doesn't propose to run the government this way. Etobicoke North is a lost cause. End of story. Good Job!
Steve, Toronto On
08/19/11 4:40 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Any reasonable pwrson...
... who thinks there is something odd or exceptional about Lesbians running for public office because they only read the main stream heterosexist press, would come to that conclusion. But this is not the Toronto Star now, is it? This is Xtra Magazine. What you are proposing borders on suggesting that Xtra should not use the term Lesbian to describe people in their headlines, because the term Lesbian somehow impugns the person? What you have actually done here is evoke the very idea that you believe you are opposing. Yes, the NDP may indeed be rife with homophobia, as it appears now, since so many NDP'rs (some hailing all the way from Regina) get all jittery when the term "Lesbian" appears in the headline of a magazine.
steve, Toronto On
08/19/11 4:52 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@Mike
"That an unacceptable candidate decides to act foolishly in public, lying to her supporters and disrupting a meeting at which she had no business attending as a candidate does not seem to be th issue, according to your headline." Ok Mike, so you are now saying that Andrews had no right to be at the meeting. She is not a member of the riding association, or an NDP member at all now... is that what you are saying? Only some members of the RA, who are invited specifically by the party exec may attend and ask questions, propose candidates?
Steve, toronto On
08/19/11 5:07 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The future of journalism...
Lawson is an out and proud lesbian but "Lesbian teacher barred from running for Ontario NDP by another lesbian" just wouldn't merit the same ad clicks I suppose.
Justin, Toronto Ontario
08/19/11 5:29 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Re- Vote
Susan you have made every effort to demonize not only Diana but members who were trying to get their voices heard. Your refercence to "lynch mob...with pitchforks was desperately inaccurate. The majority were registered members not guests.
Barry Marsh, Etobicoke ontario
08/19/11 6:29 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
The point of embarrassing
Please, allow me to break in, I have an opinion on this string of messages. Because I like to keep things simple let me get right to the points. I don't know Rob Salerno but he did a great job writing this article, the headline he chose grabbed my attention and the article was written well enough I read it through to the end. Good on you Rob Salerno if you wanted to stir up emotions, have people read and comment on your article you have succeeded. - Susan from Etobicoke Ontario, please stop now, you're getting to the point of embarrassing yourself. Just because you repeat your anti-Diana mantra over and over again doesn't mean people are going to buy it. Obviously something was done to Diana which she feels is wrong, she is passionate enough about what was done to stand up for herself. With regard to the articles title, “Diana you go girl” it's nice to see a “lesbian” who happens to be “ethnic” stand up for what she feels is right. Maybe the constituents would find strength in this righteous act and could benefit from such an honorable person. – Please, Susan tell me what credentials do you have to pass judgment on this lady? Who gave you the authority to speak on behalf of the NDP? Who is paying you to put garbage on this post? If she would have won would your complaints about volunteering for her suddenly alter slightly and become bragging? Anyway if you try real hard you could probably find something a bit more productive to do with your time. Hey maybe you can do some volunteer work for the Conservative Party of Canada, oh I see you are doing just that, sorry. Steve, Toronto Ontario, well written, thanks for having seemingly fair, thought process. Maybe if you TYPE IT IN CAPS your points will be “better”, naw forget it just saw it someplace. Well thanks for putting your opinion in here it was refreshing to say the least.
Tad, Ottawa Ontario
08/19/11 7:17 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@Steve
Steve: Diana had every right to be there as a member of the party. What whe did not have was the right to purport herself to be the annointed candidate for the NDP in Etobicoke North. Further, she did not have the right to disrupt a duly-held, constitutionally sanctionned meeting by spouting off Roberts Rules as if it gave her some sort of divine license. If sh feels she can stand for election in the riding, she is welcome to do so, but as an Independent candidate. For reasons, known to Diana, having nothing to do with her sexual identity, and that I will not go into here for privacy issues, she was told that she was not acceptable. Organizing a public temper-tantrum because she didn't like the news was simply not acceptable.
Mike, Etobicoke Ontario
08/19/11 7:18 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@Michael
Is that right? Because I am looking through this story and trying to find the Andrews quote: "I am the candidate". What I see is a member of the RA asking questions about why she is not allowed to run, and why she was not allowed (according to her) appeal the decision. She also, apparently brought a number of supporters with her, many of who were members of the NDP, and Etobicoke North RA. I don't see what the problem with this is. Nor do I see a problem with members of the RA calling into question decisions by the executive about the nomination process, during the nomination process. Frankly, Piatowski and Lawson bungled this whole meeting as far as I can tell. When are members supposed to raise these issues about candidacy, except at nomination meetings? Questions about points of order and process are allowed are they not? Members were obviously confused by this process, and properly speaking it would have made far more sense to postpone the nomination process and to re-track the discussion so that the core issues were properly discussed and understood, as opposed to ramming the candidate through, closing the book, and then packing up and heading of for "executive land", never to be seen in Etobicoke North again. At the very least they should have allowed the riding members an opportunity to nominate and alternate to Andrews. Some sort of charitable concessions would have been appropriate.
Steve, Toronto On
08/19/11 8:19 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Don't just hear us, listen!
Rob, thank you for writing this article. Drama aside I am concern about how the residents of Etobicoke North were handled. The NDP was so busy trying to finish the meeting that it left residents feeling suspicious, tricked, hurt and upset. It was the worse way to introduce Vrind! There was no thought to pause, improvise and deal with the emotions in the room. A number of things could have been done to deal with people shouting and interrupting- BUT because those running the meeting began to get visibly and personally upset, they stuck to the agenda and would not budge. The NDP, and Susan, assumed anyone mad was a follower of Ms. Andrews and therefore anyone that questioned the process was not LISTENED to. Everyone that spoke out against the process was a threat to the agenda. The shouts were not entirely for Ms. Andrews, but about the PROCESS. Why were we not informed at the beginning that the agenda changed from nominating to an appointment? Why wasn't a nay vote taken to have on record? How do 4 people decide for an entire riding? Especially when one of those people (Susan) is voting based on previous beef with Ms. Andrews. NDP cannot treat every riding the same, we have residents who have experienced political unrest in their home countries and when they show up to a nomination meeting with no one to nominate don't be surprised if they are suspicious and lack trust! NDP lost votes, and our nation lost voters. This event will be used as an unfortunate example of how exercising your right to vote does NOT make a difference. No matter who is right and who is wrong NDP needs to follow up with Etobicoke North and show that they care. Susan, instead of being part of the problem be part of a solution. Encourage Vrind to follow up with those at the meeting and show residents even though he was forced on us, we could have chosen him if we had a proper chance.
NR, Etobicoke Ontario
08/20/11 12:09 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Steve - trying discussing honestly
Your suggestion that I am "jittery" about the word "lesbian" is a lie. My point (which was crystal clear to anyone interested in an honest discussion) was that the effect of the headline was to create the false impression that the candidate was rejected BECAUSE OF her sexual orientation - something not supported by the article. The net effect was a headline which, while stricly accurate, was misleading. Your willingness to twist this point with baseless accusations says a lot about you, though.
Malcolm, Regina Saskatchewan
08/20/11 1:16 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Malcolm
And what I see is post after post after post by NDP'rs, making the fact that Andrews is a lesbian an issue, by criticizing Xtra for choosing to point out that Andrews is part of the community that Xtra caters too. You just can't help people some times. You are making her being a lesbian THE issue by constantly bringing it up, over and over again, while attacking Canada's most widely read LGBQT magazine. The fact seems to be that you can not see what it is that you are doing. You are making this issue of Andrews sexuality THE issue. I thought we were over that part and on to policy... but no... some NDP'r type wants to bring up Andrews sexuality as an issue, again and again and again.
Steve, Toronto On
08/20/11 2:12 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Diana Andrews
I don't think Diana Andrews' sexual orientation is at all relevant to this. The NDP's record is unblemished on this account. However, her treatment at the hands of the ONDP brass requires a clear explanation, not a stubborn, high-handed silence. Otherwise, activists like me are going to sit this election out.
John Baglow, Ottawa Ontario
08/21/11 1:51 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Barry...
Barry, I'm sorry you took the posts personally, or thought I was referring to you when I called the room a lynch mob. You have been nothing but a loyal NDP supporter and hard worker. You were very respectful when anyone was speaking. You always conduct yourself with poise and honour. Same goes for Glyn and Patricia. However, the a lot of the people in the room (many of them teenagers brought along as bodies) yelled "we're going to vote Conservative" and boo'd Vrind for no good reason. The only people allowed to talk for prolonged periods of time were Diana supporters. Anyone else was boo'd and heckled to sit down. I think I painted a very valid picture of the room. I think Diana pursued the issue incorrectly. I think she had an issue with ONDP and brought it up at a meeting where nothing could be changed for her. That meeting did not have the authority to address her issue. At that point, her entire disruption was nothing more than soap-boxing for her own benefit. I'm sure she's a nice lady in every day life - I think it was shameful how she acted at the meeting. I'm not going to take that back. However, I'm allowed to have a different opinion than people I consider my friends, and still consider them friends. I'm sorry I'm a villain because I have a different opinion.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/22/11 7:35 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
NR - No previous beef with Andrews
NR, I have no previous beef with Ms. Andrews. My only beef is at her attempt to circumvent proper process, and to disrupt a meeting. She was expecting to put on a show - obviously, she called in media before hand. I also don't like that she called my house a million times and sent me a bunch of emails trying to make me support her side against the ONDP. I don't like that she started personally attacking me via email when I didn't agree with her.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/22/11 7:39 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
My own opinions
Just to make things clear (contrary to some of the above posts) -- I don't speak as an agent of, or on behalf of the ONDP in any way. I never met Vrind before the nomination meeting. What I'm offering up are my OPINIONS. I believe the ONDP followed process before the meeting. For those of you who don't like my comments, or don't agree with my opinions -- keep in mind, I am only speaking for myself.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/22/11 7:44 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Please call an AGM
Obviously, we need to have an AGM to discuss some issues. The ONDP should be invited, so they can explain their decision not to let Andrews run as a nominee, to show how they followed proper process, and how their intent was not to screw over the community (or Andrews). That is the proper format for this sort of discussion - not a nomination meeting. At an AGM people can talk about riding business. Card carrying members only please.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/22/11 7:59 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
New Conservative Directions
The NDP have obviously caught on to the fact that if you want to be more than an "also ran" party, never seeing anything more than 3rd place, you better cozy up to the majority of voters. In this area of TO with a higher and growing immigrant population, which tends to be conservative (why else would the conservative party be so heavily courting the immigrant vote), it's obvious that a straight non-white man would be fast-tracked to run for the NDP. Also, sad as it may be, in Canada if you want a chance at winning the ruling party title, you better be running with a male leader.
Mary, Red Deer Alberta
08/22/11 12:07 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
RE: your own opinion
Thanks for your reply Susan. You can't say you have no previous beef and then state your beef...that doesn't make sense :) It's interesting that you voted for Vrind without ever meeting him before the nomination meeting. You voted and it counted, your voice was heard. But not the voice of others. It's scary that 4 people decided for an entire riding! Not knowing you except from your presence at the nomination meeting and through this site, I have to trust your judgement since you have spoken for me. Now this procedure has probably happened for years and is no big deal in other ridings, but it's a big deal for US. Without having the proper knowledge and background on this- it's just scary and feels unfair to have someone running that I may or may not like, and may or may not have the time to get to know.
NR, Etobcioke Ontario
08/22/11 12:41 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
NR - 4 votes
NR, I guess what you missed in my previous posts was the fact that a lot of people who wanted to vote for Vrind missed doing so because they didn't know a vote was going on BECAUSE Diana's camp was heckling so loudly. Afterwards I heard quite a few people ask why there wasn't a vote. Another person told me they were afraid to vote because they didn't want to attract the ire of the angry group - essentially they were bullied out of voting.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/23/11 7:32 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Will Diana support Vrind?
My opinion about Diana is entirely based on what I saw and heard during the last election, and how she handled her rejection by the ONDP. I hope she proves me wrong by putting aside her personal aspirations and actively supporting Vrind and Etobicoke North NDP in this upcoming election. I'd be willing to eat my words, if I had a reason to do so.
Susan, Etobicoke Ontario
08/25/11 12:18 AM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
comments on mostly Susan's comments
Responses, mostly to Sue. Before I start, a few qualifications and some disclosure. First, my name isn’t really Maj Qapla. Xtra says “name required.” Says nothing about it being my real name. ;-p Second, I wasn’t at the meeting. Pity it wasn’t videotaped. ? Third, I’m not an NDPer, but I am definitely anti-Tory and somewhat anti-Liberal. I’ve never voted for the main three parties. I am, however, a reasonably long time Etobicoke North resident. While most of my postings will be countering some stuff Susan says, it’s in no way out of ill will. I was among the many during the Naqvi campaign who worked with Susan, and her amiability, professionalism, and hard work were admirable. Indeed, it was she who directed me to Diana near the beginning of the election. Okay, so I’m a bit out of the loop, but I didn’t hear about Vrind until after the meeting, second-hand. Susan has my email address, and I was sent nothing about him by her or others. Presumably others with Diana have email addresses that are known. Whatever the technicalities, it didn’t seem to be a fair contest. Is there anyone here that figured that Diana wasn’t running? I mean if she’s this narcissistic self-promoter who only cares about herself, why wouldn’t one assume she wouldn’t run in the nomination? Why didn’t the Vrind tip us to the alternative Vrind alternative? I assure you, neither I, nor likely the several Diana supporters I’ve hung out with, are mindless automatons who wouldn’t give Vrind a fair audition. It smacks of the Vrind faction using technicalities, or worse, to shut out Diana. Such optics maybe base-less or there maybe something to it, but either way, it looks bad, and attacking Diana isn’t going to make Vrind look better—at least after being denied the nomination in the manner she was. Now if she was denied after a decent nomination process with debates where Vrind shone and Diana played some combination of wicked witch of Etobicoke North and clueless Etobicoke N
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:14 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
oops
Oops. I didn't realise that Xtra bunches things up. I wonder if they read non-breaking space codes,           or allow Wikipedia links http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Wikipedia.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:24 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
continuing
and clueless Etobicoke North Tory meatpuppet, then her loss would be almost gratifying.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:28 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Title of the article
As for the title of the article. Okay, it may be a bit much, but there are a few things to consider. First, Xtra is a publication for LGBT, so there may be a bit of sensitivity there. Second, as enlightened as we Torontonians like to think we are, and too an extent are, bigotry still exists. It might be the reason Ford’s mayor. If Smitherman was a straight married man, he might have won. I heard a Rexdale voter or two make a disparaging comment about his orientation. I’ve also heard disparaging comments in my part of Rexdale about lesbians and even women in general, and by those who might have voted NDP. Indeed, I’d almost bet money that one anti-feminist who attacks lesbianism as it’s unbiblical, I know, voting NDP such is his disdain for Tories and Liberals and what they stand for.Don’t think the NDP is at all sexist? ‘splain to me this: why do female leaders of the NDP did so poorly? Audrey McLaughlin and Alexa McDonough seemed decent enough, but it was only when the menfolk ruled (presumably straight WASP men), that the federal NDP did well.I wonder if Vrind says anything positive about LGBTs. Btw, since a lot of NDPers I’ve meet actually went to the Pride parade, has Vrind ever been to one? How about ( http://www.snapbram.com/index.php?option=com_sngevents&id%5B%5D=298769 ) Brampton Pride?
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
As for the “Diana Andrews LIED to supporters”
“Diana lied to the community and her volunteers saying she had not been informed when she was.” If she lied then, then by that rational she must be lying now because she said that she wasn’t informed. “I think the party was entirely right refusing her nomination: 1. She was in it for all the wrong reasons, namely self-promotion...,leaving all her volunteers on their own.” Good attack. Why couldn’t have been used in a fair nomination fight? “She is not a motivational or effective candidate.” The vote results say otherwise of the former. “3. She ran her campaign on a shoestring, not doing fund raising and having almost no signage.” If you base it on the Naqvi campaign, sure. But such has been the case for a number of EN NDP campaigns. “4. The amount of votes Ms. Andrews garnished last election was solely due to the NDP wave, and not at all due to her own efforts.” I’ll have to check that out. Compare results of the past 20 years of the varying federal ridings around EN. Actually Susan, I think if Diana road on any wave, it might have been Naqvi. Pity he didn’t run. I don’t blame him for not doing so, though, given all the work for apparently little.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:34 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
continued
“5. She is self-promoting and doesn't care about the good of the party. She openly attacked Vrind at the meeting who himself had nothing to do with the selection process and was an innocent party.” Such denies Vrind’s volition. Of course he’s part of it, if only tacitly. It’s like Bill Clinton and James Carville ( http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/James_Carville ). Carville attacked, Clinton smiled. Susan might have a point on Diana’s previous inactivity, but, I never heard or saw Vrind before. Now if there was, again, a decent nomination process, both (and perhaps other) candidates could lay their cards on the table. Just what has Diana and Vrind each done for the party? What were the years that they lived in EN? Vrind lives a block away. Is that a 100 meter city block or a kilometre one? Who would win at naming the streets of Etobicoke North contest?
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:38 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
lynchmob with pitchforks
The lynch mob and pitchforks comments are funny and tend to say more about the accuser than the alleged. “It was a lynch mob I tell yas. Pitchforks and torches! Oh the madness! It was a madhouse, a MADHOUSE!! Oh Heavenly Father in Heaven, we beseech thee. Save us from the scourge that is the evil dæmon Diana!”  :-D  "Diana painted a picture of a conspiracy against her, when there wasn't any.” Actually Vrind could have had 3 motives here: pure lambent desire to serve as a candidate, upset Diana, or upset any rival. “In fact, as a resident, I'm looking forward to a candidate who will actually run an effective campaign - instead of what Diana did last time.” Betcha you hope he gets more than 23.7%.  :-D
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:48 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
more
“There was a vote. I distinctly remembered raising my card. I almost missed it because Diana and her mob (most of whom could not vote because they weren't members) were shouting and screaming and causing such confusion.” Presumably you voted for. Would you have been permitted to vote against. “by Andrews lynch mob.” Who got lynched? Was it a real lynching, or something like a Clarence Thomas “High tech lynching?” “Diana riled up a mob, supplied them with pitchforks, and made the meeting a complete carnival.” Shoot, all I got were a few cans of pop and somosas at the proto meetings.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:52 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@others
@Steve, toronto Ontario Here here. Again, if there was a decent nomination campaign, it would have been debated openly. @mike “And does Xtra plan on covering all nomination meetings for all parties?” Why not, given the relatively few out candidates, particularly in the suburbs. @SD, Toronto, ON “My guess is that the South Asian community is larger than the LGBT community in Etobicoke North.” At least apparently so, and they have choices in Liberal and Tory, and might be neglecting the less visible LGBT community.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:55 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
cows and horses
“The NDP is entirely within their power to decide whether or not a certain individual can stand for nomination or not. There is a process - a process decided by elected party officials. The process WAS followed.” Admittedly, I need some edumacation here. Are you saying that there is some sort of NDP central committee that appoints nominees with occasional play-acting of contenders should the party brass desire some more consideration? If so—and I doubt it is—it would seem more Stalinist that democratic. (“Stalinist I tell yas!”    :-D  ) “I found comments like ‘fine then, I'll just vote Conservative’ to be particularly telling.” Say What? No one mentioning Liberals or Green? “Saying a cow is a horse doesn't make the cow a horse.” Saying the horse is the winner when it didn’t run doesn’t make it a winner either. “I'm glad a mob-riling bully won't be running in my neighborhood.” Yeah, you got Crisanti. Others got Doug. :-p “Congratulations on the political suicide, Diana. It's obvious you are mostly a member of the DIANA PARTY and not the NDP.” Cute one Susan. How about The “No Diana Party.” “Diana knew for weeks her right for nomination had been denied.” Which is likely the crux of the issue. She said she wasn’t informed. Was she emailed? Was she sent a registered letter?
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 3:58 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
this site is slow
Folks, I have my questions about this site. I have to post several times, most of the tags don't work, and I have to re-post stuff--and that can lead to duplication. I'm going to call it off for a day, if not completely. Most of you know my email or can get it. If you're interested in getting all my comments, I'll merrily send it you in total. Maybe there's a better forum too. Have a nice weekend everybody.  :-D
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/26/11 4:14 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
I believe the proper term is “ochlocracy”
“This IS a democracy not an ANARCHY.” I believe the proper term is “ochlocracy” (Wikipedia: Ochlocracy (Greek: ??????at?a or okhlokratía; Latin: ochlocratia) or mob rule is government by mob or a mass of people, or the intimidation of legitimate authorities. As a pejorative for majoritarianism, it is akin to the Latin phrase mobile vulgus meaning "the fickle crowd", from which the English term "mob" was originally derived in the 1680s. Ochlocracy ("rule of the general populace") is democracy ("rule of the people") spoiled by demagoguery, "tyranny of the majority" and the rule of passion over reason, just like oligocracy ("rule of a few") is aristocracy ("rule of the best") spoiled by corruption. Ochlocracy is synonymous in meaning and usage to the modern, informal term "Mobocracy," which emerged from a much more recent colloquial etymology. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Mobocracy Mobocracy (literally "rule by the mob") is a layman's neologism for ochlocracy (Greek: ??????at?a), where there is no accepted leadership and disputes are often settled by brute force or the sheer weight of people. It is related to anarchism, but not even anarchy is this anarchistic. Sometimes it is used as a pejorative term used to denigrate the concept of democracy. “You don't mess with the mob. They have beer. And pitchforks.”
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/27/11 3:11 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Vrind the Beneficent
“Which means, there are rules to be followed, even if we don't always like the rules. People were not allowed to vote for Diana, and if they did their votes did not count because: (I wonder if you'll ever understand this...) SHE WAS NOT AUTHORIZED TO RUN. The END. The ONDP decided she could not run. The end. Accept it, and lets move on.” Hmmmm. The way I figure it, organisations as big as the NDP likely have a number of possible alternatives to the verdict of one committee, if one is either willing to really twist things and/or one wants to untwist that which he/she felt got, for some reason or another, seriously twisted. I’m just saying.  “He did not respond to personal attacks.” He doesn’t have too. The way you attack Diana would make James Carville smile. :-p  “Don't get mad. Don't get even. Just get elected, then get even.” “We didn't find the key to the electoral lock...we just picked it.” “When your opponent is drowning, throw the son of a bitch an anvil.” “He went to Diana and asked for her help during the election. He showed himself to be a good man. Pretty impressive since a bunch of people were attacking him, for nothing he did.” Yeah, I can almost hear him say, “Forgive them Heavenly Father, for they know not what they do.” Come on Diana. Let Vrind release you from the hate, the deep-seated resentment that is tearing you up. Step up and bask in his glow, and allow him to forgive you for your impudence.  :-D
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/27/11 3:16 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
We like you too Susan (at least I do)
“I believe a whole group of loyal, good, and intelligent people are standing up for Andrews truly believing a wrong has been done...,I love and respect several of the people who were standing up for Andrews at the meeting...,That does not stop me from valuing and respecting these people.” And I like you too Susan.     ((((Susan)))))    :-D
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/27/11 3:18 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
@ ya
“Same for all parties” Good point, mind you, I understand that one can be both a member of the Communist Party and the Liberal.  Btw, Is there a federal EN Riding association? Is there a provincial EN Riding association?  @ Tad, Ottawa Ontario “Hey maybe you can do some volunteer work for the Conservative Party of Canada, oh I see you are doing just that, sorry.” Now now, Tad, Susan doesn’t deserve such a horrible insult to both her intelligence and morality.  “I'm sorry I'm a villain because I have a different opinion.” Don’t apologize, many of my opinions are so out there I need to use a pseudonym.  :-D   “I don't like that she started personally attacking me via email when I didn't agree with her.” For the record, I got no email from her—or anyone for that matter—attacking you.  @ Mary, Red Deer Alberta “Also, sad as it may be, in Canada if you want a chance at winning the ruling party title, you better be running with a male leader.”  Agreed. Stephen Harper: male WASP; Bob Rae: male WASP; Jack Layton (RIP): male WASP; Elizabeth Mae: female WASP (and American born), and Gilles Duceppe: male W¼ASC. I don’t know if Rob Ford is Catholic given how he coaches at Don Bosco. Federally, NDP and Tories have done poorly with female leaders and Liberals haven’t really tried them.  Compare this to the US with a black president and governors who are of South Asian background (Bobby Jindal’s of Punjabi background), an open atheist (Jesse Ventura), and names as long and weird-sounding as a few Tamil ones (Arnold Schwarzenegger).  NR sez, “It's interesting that you voted for Vrind without ever meeting him before the nomination meeting.”  Susan responds, “NR, I guess what you missed in my previous posts..,”  What post explains why you voted for one you never meet?
Maj Qapla, Eotobicoke Ontario
08/27/11 3:58 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
my last post (for today at least)
“Will Diana support Vrind?” Sure, after he gives a decent explanation for all the shenanigans, real or apparent, that went on. Will he do as well as the previous candidate and the lowest one in votes in the history of the provincial riding? New Democrat   Mohamed Boudjenane 4,112 14.86%    New Democrat Kuldip Singh Sodhi 3,516 11.35% You reading this Vrind? All you need is about 4200 votes in a riding of a little over 100 000 people to not be the worse result EN NDP candidate. Get 17 000 and your campaign might be forgiven—or maybe not. If Diana ran as an independent, I’d help her, at least a little. I’ll likely support Green if they have a chance of some votes (2008 was a good election for them, the last election was bad with whoever that 519’er was—whatsamatter Greens, not enough Toronto candidates, you have to import them from London?    :-D  ). There’s also Mani Singh to support.   I’ll be keeping watch on the results.    Qapla!!
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/27/11 4:27 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Susan
Susan, I will presume that (a) you are an NDPer of good standing, well acquainted with NDP campaigns, particularly those in Etobicoke North; (b) perhaps have lived a decently long time in Etobicoke North; and (c) you have high regards for Barry, Glyn, and Patricia, and Aubrey (I presume that you know him), and maybe even Diana formerly, and with at least some amicability with me, of whom you have known for at least a while; and that you know our mailing and residential addresses, phone numbers, and email addresses, and might have personally meet one or a few of us in the past 2 or so months.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 3:31 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Why didn't I hear about this Vrind before?
That which is mentioned in the above post assumed (not “presumed” as you don’t want to make a “pres” out of “u” or “med”,   :-D   then (1) why didn’t I hear about this Vrind until after the meeting? Okay, let’s say that Diana “LIED” to me. Let’s say that she knew that she was denied the nomination, maybe even explicitly knew that she was unambiguously denied the nomination, and that she knew who the nominee was (and to be truthful, there was some talk about some Indian dude from outside the riding muscling in). Let’s say that she knew all of this, but elected to keep this knowledge from me so that she could continue to use me, to use me in this supposedly hopeless cause of hers, to get me and others to somehow ram her nomination through—despite all odds, and to otherwise boost her ego. Fine. (2) But were the others in her/our circle that were informed of this: if not of her nomination being denied—confidentiality issues perhaps, then at least who the endorsed contender was, or contenders were. (3) If the others weren’t informed, then why weren’t they? If, however, they were informed, if they knew, then why didn’t they tell me? Was it forgetfulness? Was it intentional on their part, maybe even a conspiracy, however minor? Maybe my non-membership of the NDP was a factor. I doubt either possibility.    Here’s the way I figure it. They unlikely would have forgotten to tell me—at least not all of them. As for conspiracy to keep me in the dark: also unlikely. First of all, for what it’s worth, I trust them. But also, Vrind won: why would they maintain the pretense of a pro-Diana nomination stance for the sake of keeping me involved in such, to the detriment of a Vrind campaign, a campaign that they would have mostly likely considered, if not a forgone conclusion, then a very hard to counter one? It doesn’t make sense. It doesn’t make sense.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 3:35 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Why aren't the html tags working here?
Let's see... bold  italic    strike out  & n b s p ; 
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 3:41 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Oh well, back to my regular postings
What’s more likely is that all of us, or nearly all of us, were kept in the dark. Okay, maybe, just maybe, Diana was the exception to this. Maybe, just maybe, Diana was sent and she received, by regular mail, an letter explicitly, and perhaps in detail, stating that she was rejected as a nominee, and Lawson [check above] even personally told Diana that she was rejected. Keep in mind that, again, Diana denies such: a case of she said, she said. It still doesn’t explain why, again, the others were not informed of the list of nominees.----------------Now it could be a case that, indeed, Diana knew all of this, and that she should have informed us, but didn’t. But even that wouldn’t explain our ignorance. After all, if Diana was well known, as this lying, narcissist, incompetent—who had the greatness of 23.7% of those who voted, thrusted upon her by Dionysius-Bacchus, the drunken god, in the form of Orange Crush, without any merit whatsoever on her part, then why, again, didn’t any member of the pro-Vrind faction (which for all I know, might include you and/or Mike) inform us? Why weren’t we warned that Diana was leading us on the hopeless charge?
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 3:46 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
speculations on my part
The way I figure it is that there are at least 4 possibilities. First, there was no list of nominees because there were no official nominees to be listed: at least until the meeting of 17 August. The nomination officially started. Vrind was nominated. Diana was ineligible, because she was rejected earlier, whether or not she was informed of this. No other nominees were heard from, or perhaps more accurately, considered. Four votes were counted. Vrind is elected/acclaimed. Three cheers for Vrind. The Vrind faction had this planned, and others went along, possibly as revenge for Diana suing the teachers’ union and presumably breaking union solidarity—congratulations union, Vrind, for all you know, might not, nor ever have been, a union member. Dissenters were labeled as pitchfork wielders, and maybe the hounds were unleashed (to use another inaccurate analogy. -- -- :-D---).----------------Second, no one was informed of Vrind’s nomination because, golly gee, it wasn’t officially noted. At the night of the meeting, the officials looked at the paper, saw nothing about a Vrind, then for a split second averted their gaze, and then when they looked at the paper again, they saw Vrind’s name, as if by magic. This would explain on one hand their not informing us, but on the other, that one could state at the meeting that he was a nominee. In the meeting his name was mentioned. Four hands went up, perhaps thoughtlessly. As there were no votes for other candidates, or “against” the sole nominee, permitted, he’s elected. ----------------If it’s the first case, then it’s undemocratic. If it’s the second case, it’s so bizarre as to be sinister.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 3:55 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
da rulz
A third possibility was that there were no nominees listed at the nomination meeting. Vrind was nominated there; Diana was refused, because, again, the teachers’ federation had deemed her an Enemy to the Collective; and just before things could go further, before others could be nominated, and votes, however ceremonial, be taken, a mob of mostly non-members-and-maybe-a-few-crypto-Tories, where bused-in, and handed their pitchforks, created a commotion, and the meeting was closed for the sake of safety. ----------------Fine. Simply call another meeting, but with only NDP members. But apparently that’s not going to happen either. (I’m not sure what kind of precedents such set.)----------------No, Vrind’s name was mentioned, four hands went up, he was acclaimed, elected, case closed, go home everybody, nothing to see, otherwise support Vrind. ----------------The 4th possibility is that Diana and Vrind were considered. Diana was rejected—again, they say she was informed of the rejection, she says she wasn’t—rejection was essentially because she did a full frontal attack on the union, but they were too coy, maybe too secretive and clandestine, to mention this, as it would make them look vindictive—and Vrind was accepted as a nominee. However the process of nomination in the ONDP is so Byzantine as to make it difficult to find out who the nominees were. Thirty years ago, I suppose, there would be phone numbers, voicemails, and brochures sent to all members. These days there would be websites: a possible. www.ondp.ca/etobicoke_north that people could access for news, at least an extranet, or extranet-of-sorts, for party members. Maybe even an “app” for the young ‘uns. But in this case, there was neither the old, nor the new. No chance for a member to say, “Goodness gracious me, I see that a Vrind Sharma is on the list, but not Diana Andrews? Why not? She keeps acting as if she will be running. Maybe I should get in touch with the party chair for an explanation.”
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 4:03 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Vrind ain't stupid
Diana shows up, thinking that the nomination occurs at the meeting. Some of the party brass shows up, fecklessly, thinking that with only one nominee, Vrind. He’s acclaimed, and the meeting is part formality, part introduction of the new candidate, part get together. Good people on different sides overreact.----------------If so, then why isn’t the party brass posting in this thread, or sending emails, letters, making phone calls, trying to mend things? Why are they leaving it up to us Susan, to clean the mess they made, on this thread, and maybe a few other places?----------------As for Vrind, he ain’t stupid. I doubt that most 26 year-old sales managers who maintain +4 website accounts are—and I doubt that he’s being lead around by minders in all of those areas either. He either knows what’s going on and approves, or doesn’t care. Either way, he’s unsuitable. If he’s like this in the nomination, what will he be like on other issues?----------------I also reiterate the questions. (1) Susan, why did you vote for Vrind if you never meet him? Perhaps it was a vote against Diana. (2) Did Vrind ever attend a Pride Parade, either marching or watching, in Toronto, Brampton, or maybe elsewhere. After all, you likely went to one, I did (I got pictures of the topless Raelian—film developed at Hy and Zels—to prove it). If not, why not? Is Vrind a closet ‘phobe?
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 4:18 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Jebus Frikin’ Cripes, Susan, why R U part of this?
and for Jebus Frikin’ Cripes, Susan, why are you a part of this?----------------Okay, you so don’t like Diana. You might think that she’s a b-t--h goddess. You might even have a dartboard, with a picture of her glued on it, in your office. (or maybe I exaggerate the magnitude of your feelings. --- :--D---).----------------The point is this: this is beneath a woman of your intelligence and integrity. ----------------You don’t like Diana, fine. Diana ain’t perfect. She has some larnin’ to do. (Much like Nigel Barriffe should memorize his lines when doing Youtube videos and stop glancing at cue cards.) So at least some of your criticisms stated here are valid; but why defend this process? ----------------As I alluded before, if Diana is this evil baby-eating Hecate that even you didn’t accuse her of being, still, let her be part of the nomination process. Let her debate Vrind. Let members judge between them, and perhaps other candidates, and if Vrind is a philosopher-king and Diana is the wicked witch of Etobicoke North, the crowd will likely turn on her—electorally speaking, and Vrind will come out looking even better. Have faith in democracy Susan, you who are, after all, a member of the New DEMOCRATIC (ALL CAPS) Party.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 5:56 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
facepalm
But this process. [Maj Qapla, palm on face, slowly shakes his head.] This process makes Vrind look like Johnny the Weasel, like one of those meatpuppets that Tories often field in this riding. (Vrind wants to eradicate poverty. Oh how nice. I hope he can withstand the formidable pro-poverty lobby :-/). It makes Diana look like the aggrieved one—perhaps correctly—and possible victim of homophobia—however latent (and maybe even a victim of sexism—why has Kirsty Duncan won fewer votes than Roy Cullen, is it because she’s a humaaan feeemale of the Liberal species?). Is this Lawson’s a lesbian?!? Let’s say that she is. Is she running? Does she live in the suburbs: north of Eglinton, west of the Humber, or east of Victoria Park? Diana is (or at least did run and was running). Diana does. She’s the only open LGBTQI that I know of in this riding. I’ve meet several times more Mormon missionaries in Etobicoke North than I meet open LGBTQIs. It makes you look as shrill as any pitchfork wielder (however intelligent, detailed, and praising that you are, of a few critics of the process). Okay maybe “shrill” isn’t the right word. Okay, maybe the word “shrill” isn’t even close to the right word in describing your posts, it’s far too harsh a word, for an otherwise good soul as yours, but people are nonetheless talking about your posts. I’m just saying.
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 5:58 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Qapla!!
Now since this is all likely a fait accompli, it leaves many of those critical of the process, particularly those who supported Diana, feeling left out. I see little reconciliation in this, at least for this election, at least in this riding, at least for the NDP; and certainly not if the Vrind faction acts as if nothing happened and that dissenters should fugedaboutit and move on. I don’t know how NDPers handle this. You guys aren’t known for going independent. No John Nunziata or Chuck Cadman types I can readily think of in your party. Do you all (or most) fall into line, and hold your noses? Do you withdraw support, and in this case help candidates in bordering ridings? Do you vote Liberal or Green, or vote Tory or Communist? (the latter two being equivalently stupid in my view) Will much ink be spilled in appeals processes? I don’t know. ---------------- As for me, my position remains unchanged: again, help Diana if she runs, even as an indy—though she has to decide if it would be worth a likely burning of bridges, help the Greens if they have more than paper candidates (Are you reading this Nigel and Mir? Carmen, are you human, or are you just a paper candidate? Are you capable of assuming corporeal form in Etobicoke North?), maybe help NDPers in other ridings. As I mentioned elsewhere, this is Toronto. Many of the ridings here are less than 40 square kilometers in size. Don’t like what’s going on in one riding, find little worthy of support in it, then hop on another. More important fights might be going on in the 905 area code, which for some of us is a 15 minute walk away. Mani Singh seems like a good guy. Why not support him. Just saying. ----------------Qapla!!
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
08/30/11 6:02 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
meta discussion
BigCityLib Strikes Back---------------- Saturday, August 20, 2011----------------NDP Potential Diana Andrews Not Banned From Running Cuz She's Gay----------------http://bigcitylib.blogspot.com/2011/08/ndp-potential-diana-andrews-not-banned.html
Maj Qala, Etobicoke Ontario
08/31/11 3:36 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
Better switch than fight
That is why people are leaving in droves to join the Socialist Party of Ontario http://www.socialistpartyofontario.ca
Ontario NDP, Toronto Ontario
09/10/11 5:24 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.
and they have a candidate nearby (kinda)
Etobicoke—Lakeshore     Natalie Lochwin  :-D
Maj Qapla, Etobicoke Ontario
09/22/11 1:30 PM EST
Report this comment to moderator.