First, thank you for taking the time to attend the Annual General Meeting this past weekend in London. That it was the biggest convention we have ever held as an Opposition party is a testament to your devotion to our Party and to the task of getting ready to win in 2011.
I was very gratified by the success of the initial PAC (Policy Advisory Council) meetings which represent the beginnings of what will be the most grassroots-driven policy development process in the history of the Party. As delegates heard on the weekend, these initial meetings will be followed by both an on-line survey open to all PC Party members this spring and regional policy conferences starting later in the spring.
We also made great progress on the organizational and technology side, receiving valuable input on fixing our database and central membership registry and establishing a new party headquarters which will properly serve the ridings!
We elected an excellent new executive. A perfect blend of new and experienced faces, I know that under the leadership of our energetic new president Ken Zeise, they will get things done! I met with them yesterday afternoon and I have no doubt they will make us proud.
I would like to thank the many hard-working volunteers for their help this weekend. I know it was a challenge to accommodate such an enormous crowd. We strive to make each convention better than the last.
In the months before and during the convention, I heard over and over that those of us here in Toronto, starting with me, listen to the grassroots, on policy, on the organizational needs of ridings and on everything else.
This is a very important point. It is an essential component of leadership to listen to those who have experience and good advice to give. It is vital to consult.
Some say its “indecisive” to listen and consult. But I disagree.
I will never apologize for listening. That’s what leaders do.
And when they’ve listened, they decide and they act quickly as I did on Saturday after you overwhelmingly urged me to stay, which was helpful and gratifying even if it did mean I didn't get a bite of dinner!
In stating my intention to remain as leader, I was listening to the delegates representing the grassroots of our Party who said by a substantial 2-1 margin that they did not want a leadership convention. Those delegates agreed that we are better off using our time, energy and money now to start getting ready to defeat the Liberals and form a new government in 2011.
Leadership reviews produce tensions in a political party because they force people to choose sides in an internal family discussion. I am asking people to put those discussions behind us and move forward to address the many challenges we agreed upon over the weekend:
• The need for the best ever grassroots policy development process.
• Supporting riding associations better.
• Fixing our technology.
• Raising the money we need to do these things.
I have already begun to get on with that work and I am absolutely committed to delivering results. I want your help and I need your support. If you have any comments arising out of the weekend and want to pass them on to me please do not hesitate to email me at: john.tory@pc.ola.org.
Thank you for your continued involvement and dedication to our Party and for your support in the days ahead.
Sincerely,
John Tory
Leader, Ontario PC Party
Tory vows to fight on
Written by Paul Synnott
THE CANADIAN PRESS
Rob Ferguson
Queen's Park Bureau
LONDON, Ont.–John Tory abruptly changed his mind late last night, deciding to stay on as Progressive Conservative party leader less than four hours after telling delegates their 66.9 per cent support might not be enough.
The stunning switch came after Tory was slammed by critics for being indecisive about his future following a leadership review vote and urged by supporters to stay on and make his intentions clear.
"It's one of the oddest events I've seen in political history," said Rueben Devlin, head of Grassroots PC, a group seeking Tory's ouster and a leadership convention.
Tory had told convention delegates at dinnertime he would decide "very soon" whether their support in the review, required after the party's defeat in the Oct. 10 provincial election, was enough to justify staying in his post.
But Tory said his wife, Barbara Hackett, and six of his 26-member caucus of MPPs quickly urged him to stay on and prepare to fight the Liberals in the 2011 election.
Suggesting he had shortchanged party members by not making a firm decision, Tory said he decided the 66.9 per cent support was enough and it was better to announce it immediately.
"The grassroots spoke today," Tory told several hundred delegates in the unexpected announcement.
"This is, I am told, the largest convention this party has had in opposition," he said to thunderous applause. "More than two-thirds said they did not want to have a leadership convention."
Coincidentally, the 66.9 per cent was the same that former federal Progressive Conservative leader Joe Clark hit in 1983 before calling a leadership race that saw Brian Mulroney succeed him.
Devlin said the about-face is further proof Tory – author of the ill-fated election promise to extend taxpayer funding to more religious schools blamed for the party's defeat – is not fit to be leader.
"Three and a half hours ago he said he wasn't sure he wanted to be leader. This is not the quality of a great leader," Devlin, a former party president, told reporters. "This is yet another case where bad judgment has been demonstrated."
The change in Tory's mind came because the 66.9 per cent support was a "grey area," said veteran Conservative MPP Bob Runciman, the party's interim leader in the Legislature since Tory failed to win a seat in the fall election. "It was overwhelming. People wanted him to stay ... it was not a flip-flop."
Earlier in the evening, Tory appeared shocked when he told 1,300 delegates he would let them know "very soon" whether he would quit and call a leadership race or stay on.
It was not the answer party members expected after Tory's four-month campaign to keep his job and that's why the sudden change of heart was "the right thing," Runciman said. "I don't think he's open to criticism for this."
Devlin said the results still show one-third of the party wants Tory gone. "What we've seen today is that a significant number of members have shown dissatisfaction with his leadership and John Tory should resign immediately."
In last fall's election, Premier Dalton McGuinty's Liberals easily cruised to a second majority while the PCs earned a lower share of the popular vote than former premier Ernie Eves did in 2003 after eight years in government.
Yesterday's vote – released hours late after delays in balloting – was 874 in favour of Tory remaining as leader and 433 seeking a review.
Tory was "certainly surprised" by the vote, said John Capobianco, chair of the pro-Tory campaign.
"Whether John Tory stays or goes the one result is the Conservative party is bitterly divided and in chaos," said Labour Minister Brad Duguid, an observer at the convention.
Some MPPs with their eyes on the leadership have been quietly jockeying for position for months.
New Democrat MPP Peter Kormos said Tory remains tarnished by the leadership review experience.
"One of the functions of leadership is having to make judgment calls – wise ones – and then live with them," he said.
In a speech to delegates before the voting, Tory made an impassioned plea for support and fell on his sword over the faith-based schools funding and reached out to all segments of the party, from those with a social justice bent to law and order types. "He gave probably the best speech of his political career," said Paul Nesbitt-Larking, chair of political science at Huron University College at the University of Western Ontario.
Tory described October's election result as "a pretty humbling experience" and pleaded for a second chance. "My father always told me that there are more lessons in your failures than in your successes. He's right but that doesn't change the fact I let you down ... I let the people of Ontario down."
For the 2011 election, he promised a platform with "a clear and concise and conservative alternative to the Liberals, not an echo," a reference to concerns that PC promises were too similar in tone to McGuinty's.
Emotions ran high after the speech. As reporters interviewed an anti-Tory delegate, pro-Tory supporters streamed over and began chanting loudly, prompting one woman to tell them to "shut up" before she started slapping a man.
Eves said dissent is a way of life for people in a job like Tory's.
"There will always be people, I don't care what leader, what party, what time ... that aren't happy with the leader. I know that all too well from personal experience."
From the Toronto Star
Heartbreak Kid is sticking around
Written by Paul Synnott
Sun, February 24, 2008
While clearly devastated by the vote, John Tory put on a brave face and said he 'will always do what is in the best interests of our party.'
By CHRISTINA BLIZZARD, SUN MEDIA
Just call him the Heartbreak Kid.
In a shocking upset last night, John Tory should have fallen from leader of the Progessive Conservatives into a political black hole.
Only 66.9 per cent of delegates supported his bid to stay on as party leader in a review at the party's annual meeting.
As the afternoon wore on and it became apparent something had gone horribly wrong, there was speculation in the backrooms that Tory would quit.
He asked for time to consider his future, then came back within hours to say he was staying.
"I said this afternoon that I will always do what is in the best interests of our party and I will continue to place that standard at the top of my considerations," Tory said.
Earlier, after the results were announced, Tory said it was "reasonable that I would want to take some time to consider what course that may be for me personally as well."
While he put on a brave face, clearly he was devastated by the outcome.
It was another heartbreak in a political life that has had its share of disappointments. He showed so much promise when he took the political world by storm, coming from nowhere to almost win the Toronto mayoralty race in 2003. Last fall, he led the Tories to a disastrous outing in the provincial vote.
Earlier in the day, he'd delivered a barnburner speech -- the best I've heard him give.
He reached out to the right wing of the party, invoking the names of two icons of the right: Prime Minister Stephen Harper and former Ontario premier Mike Harris.
He was conciliatory and apologetic about the election outcome.
Clearly, though, it was too little, too late.
Most delegates had come to the convention with their minds made up.
Ironically, Tory's 66.9 per cent support is identical to Joe Clark's 1983 numbers. Clark declared it was not enough for a leader. He called a leadership convention.
Yesterday's equally wishy-washy result is the worst possible outcome for the party.
Former party president Rueben Devlin said last night Tory should have quit right away.
"What this party needs is strong leadership," Devlin said.
Tory has served the party long and well and this was clearly an emotional day for him.
Going into the vote, his supporters were buoyant and fairly confident.
Tory has restored the party's financial fortunes. He has reached out to various multicultural communities and has toured the province on the rubber chicken fundraising circuit for years.
He has earned the right to call the shots. They should at least allow him the dignity to go on his own terms.
The writing was fairly clear on the wall, though: Tory should have quit, likely within the next week, thus precipitating a leadership convention.
Names were already being whispered in backrooms for a successor before he made his announcement to stay: Tim Hudak from Niagara West-Glanbrook; Christine Elliott from Whitby Oshawa or perhaps even her husband, federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty.
There's also Randy Hillier. The rural activist is a wily campaigner, with strong rural roots.
That's going to be the challenge for the party and Tory as it moves ahead. The PCs have no urban seats and you can't win an election with no seats in the vote-rich cities.
Make no mistake, though. The results signal a right turn for the PC party, a rejection of the Red Tory faction.
And while the grassroots -- and the rural roots -- may yearn for a return to the heady days of Harris's back-to-back majority governments, what worked in 1995 may not be the winning formula for 2011.
THE QUESTION
Delegates at the Ontario Progressive Conservative convention were asked: "Do you wish to have a leadership election?"
In a remarkable bit of dithering, Ontario PC Leader John Tory managed last night to snatch considerable ridicule – and probably some questions about his judgment – from the jaws of victory.
At a leadership review held in the wake of his electoral self-destruction last year, Tory won the backing of 66.9 per cent of the 1,308 voting delegates – an astonishing outcome, coming as it did almost 25 years to the day after former prime minister Joe Clark won an almost identical result at his review.
As history records, Clark promptly surrendered his job and lost the subsequent leadership race to Brian Mulroney.
Whatever his judgment, at least Clark was decisive.
Last night, a sombre Tory took to the stage and said that, while a substantial majority of party members backed him, many didn't and he needed time to consider his future.
His demeanour suggested deep doubts about continuing on in the job with one in three party members opposed to his leadership and the virtual necessity of a constant security detail on his back.
But three hours later, after being told Tory would have nothing further to say last night, that he would probably do no public events today, reporters were summoned back to be told he would stay on the job.
One way or another, Tory is now on course to a fabled place in Ontario's political history.
Either he will rally his disgruntled party, win the premier's job in his second crack come 2011, and become a testament to doggedness and perseverance.
Or he'll spend the next four years fending off saboteurs, lose again and cap with one final defeat a singularly humbling electoral career.
Here, Tory benefited from the obvious risk to the party of a protracted period of rancour, plus the fact there are no obvious heirs, no one with his urbanity, energy and ability to raise money.
Tory's chief problem was that when it came to occupying the Red Tory turf in Ontario that is his natural home, Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty got there first.
On paper, Tory has credentials almost impossible to top. Integrity. Accomplishment. Social conscience. Public service. Work ethic.
But the election that appeared there for the taking last year was squandered, chiefly due to his faith-based school funding proposal that voters abhorred.
It cost him not just the election, but an extended period of self-abasement before his party's grass-roots.
There can't be many speeches in Canadian political history that said in their first 100 words, "this is not where we were supposed to end up," "I let you down," "I'm sorry," "it won't happen again."
As public grovelling goes, it seemed worthy of a guest spot on Dr. Phil.
Tory seemed desperate to appease his critics. "I have to change," he said.
He promised a "clear, concise, conservative alternative to the Liberals, not an echo."
So there was a man who understands, even revels in, complexity, promising simplicity; a man whose moderation is bred in the bone pandering to the right; a man who prides himself on civility agreeing to a tougher edge.
In his defence, the arithmetic of leadership review is curious, requiring a higher standard of support than that necessary to win the job in the first place.
But no less an expert than Mulroney lowered the bar recently, saying it was "lunacy" for Clark to have surrendered his job after winning 66.9 per cent.
Had he won such numbers, Mulroney said in his Memoirs, he would have thanked delegates for such "wonderful validation" of his leadership and partied 'til dawn.
John Tory must not have read the book.
Jim Coyle is the Toronto Star's new provincial affairs columnist. His column will usually appear Monday, Wednesday and Friday.
LONDON, Ont. — Did John Tory change his mind over the salad? Or was it over the dessert?
Whatever happened, the Leader of Ontario's Progressive Conservative Party set a record for the shortest political limbo on Saturday. He's still the party leader but for a few hours there no one was certain.
Mr. Tory's roller-coaster evening began when it was announced about 6 p.m. that he had won the support of 66.9 per cent of the 1,307 Conservative delegates who were reviewing his star-crossed 3 ½ years as party leader.
He characterized it as a “large majority” but apparently it wasn't large enough to persuade him that he had the party's confidence.
Instead, he told the party's annual general meeting that he wanted time to consider his future.
“I will let you know what my decision in this regard is very soon,” he said in a 90-second statement after the vote count was released.
His aides couldn't say what “very soon” is and some talked about a caucus meeting on Wednesday as being essential. No one suggested that “very soon” was about the length of a New York minute.
In fact, it was just a little more than three hours later – at the end of a delegates' dinner – that Mr. Tory said he had changed his mind and that he would be staying on after all.
He said he had talked to his wife, Barbara Hackett, and several members of the Conservative caucus at Queen's Park and had seen the light.
It was an exceedingly odd end to a very bitter political battle between
the Yes side, which wanted a new leadership contest, and the No side, which wanted Mr. Tory to stay on as Leader.
For a time, it appeared that the Maybe side had won and that the leadership skills that Mr. Tory had bragged about had deserted him. It appeared that the party had been plunged into a limbo in which it might limp along with a wounded leader.
As New Democrat MPP Peter Kormos, an observer at the convention, said: “One of the functions of leadership is to make judgment calls, wise ones, and then live with them.”
Mr. Tory's critics within his own party were similarly caustic. Rueben Devlin, chair of the anti-Tory Grassroots PC campaign, said the party Leader should have had an option available for a variety of vote outcomes.
“We've been talking about this for weeks and weeks,” he said. “That decision should have come today. That's what strong leadership means.”
Neither was Mr. Devlin pleased that a decision was finally made.
“It is disappointing and further indicative of his indesiveness and lack of leadership strength that it took him several hours to decide that he wanted to continue to lead the party,” he said.
Before the delegates voted, Mr. Tory made a strong case for staying at his post. His speech to the convention on Saturday didn't threaten Barack Obama for eloquence but it did what it was supposed to.
Right off the top, he took responsibility for the disastrous election campaign. “I let you down,” he said. “You have my solemn promise that it won't happen again.”
But Mr. Tory's initial indecision about how to proceed arose because he was a victim of numbers. He had insisted throughout the leadership review campaign that he would abide by the party constitution, which stipulates that a leader can prevail with the support of 50 per cent plus one of the delegates.
Privately, however, his supporters were saying they were hoping to attract the support of 70 per cent of the 1,307 delegates who cast ballots.
Give the roller-coaster events, it's clear that Mr. Tory never believed he could stay on with 50 per cent plus one. He further defined the box he was in by referring in his speech to other leaders who lost their first election campaigns – notably Mike Harris and Dalton McGuinty. But Mr. Harris got a 92 per cent endorsement after losing the 1990 Ontario vote while Mr. McGuinty won the support of 81 per cent of Liberals in a leadership review after his losing 1999 election.
In the end, Mr. Tory's 66.87 per cent result was nearly identical to what Joe Clark received in 1983 when he put his future to the federal Conservative membership after losing the 1980 election.
The 66.9 per cent support that Mr. Clark received wasn't good enough for him. When the results were announced, he said he would submit to a new contest to pick a party leader.
Mr. Tory has read his results differently. He was decisive, too. It just took him a few hours to get there.
LONDON, Ont. -- In a stunning late-night about-face, John Tory apparently outmanoeuvred his political opponents by announcing he was hanging in as leader.
It was one of the most stunning flip-flops in recent political history. Earlier yesterday, he had said he would consult with family and caucus about his future.
Only 66.9% of delegates supported his bid to stay on as party leader in a review at the party's annual meeting yesterday in London, Ont.
As the afternoon wore on, and it became apparent something had gone horribly wrong, there was speculation in the backrooms that Tory would quit.
At six o'clock, he asked for time to consider his future.
By 10 p.m. he'd decided to stay on.
"We won't have a leadership convention, instead we are going to get going on grassroots policy," he said.
It was a stunning reversal. And, frankly, it's hard to see how he can continue when one-third of the delegates have clearly sent a message that they want a new leader.
Interim PC leader Bob Runciman said yesterday that the vote was in the "grey area," for the party.
"If it had been 61% or 73%, it would have been different," Runciman said.
This is reminiscent of Tory's about-face on faith-based schools. It simply perpetuates the image of him as an indecisive leader.
HASTY MEETING
One minute he's going to consult with family and caucus. The next minute he's staying on. Tory did call a hasty caucus meeting at the London Convention Centre after the vote, but then simply pushed ahead.
Ironically, Tory's 66.9% support is identical to that which Joe Clark declared in 1983 as being not enough for a leader. Clark called a leadership convention. Tory should do the same. If he wants to stay on as leader, he can run in that. But he cannot go forward with the full confidence of the party without a leadership convention.
Former party president Rueben Devlin was fuming after Tory made his about-face.
"He yet again showed bad judgment. He waffled on the issue and has demonstrated again why he should not be leader," Devlin said.
This is, frankly, the last in a series of bad judgment calls by Tory. First, he chose not to run in his safe seat of Dufferin Caledon and lost his seat. Then, he allowed the controversial faith-based school policy to be included in his election platform. And then, in a massive about-face, he climbed down from that with just days to go before the Oct. 10 vote.
MASSIVE SCHISM
What Tory has done here is open up a massive schism within the PC Party. The right wing -- those who see themselves as Stephen Harper or Mike Harris Tories -- are furious with Tory.
At lunchtime, he had made a barnburner speech that reached out to the grassroots of the party, pledging to consult with them on policy. By 9 p.m., he was running roughshod over them.
You can't help thinking the Red Tories fear a coup from someone like rural activist Randy Hillier, the maverick MPP from Lanark-Frontenac-Lennox and Addington.
For Tory, though, his number is up: It is 66.9%. And he should heed the warning from Clark. Heck, Tory doesn't even have a seat in the Legislature, and no one is likely to rush to quit to make way for him.
One third of the party's grassroots sent him a message. He should heed it.
All may look genteel and polite as the province's Progressive Conservatives head to London for their leadership review this weekend.
Make no mistake, though. Behind those prim Tory lace curtains, the knives are being sharpened.
In that true blue Ontario way, few within the party want to be overtly critical of John Tory's leadership. Sure, former party president Reuben Devlin has been outspoken about the party's disastrous election outcome. And my fellow Sun columnist John Snobelen, a former Mike Harris cabinet minister, has been characteristically blunt in his assessment of Tory's leadership.
Until now, though, it's been widely assumed that their views are a minority within the party and Tory will comfortably garner a substantial percentage of delegates tomorrow.
A Sun Media poll released yesterday by Nanos Research suggests otherwise. Pollster Nik Nanos' figures show support for Tory is tepid at best. Less than 56% of those who identified themselves as Tory voters supported him as leader. Almost 31% of Tories supported a leadership convention.
And while Tory says he's consulted with the grassroots of the party since the dismal election showing last October, many in the party's rank and file are doubtful.
Toronto – Progressive Conservative MPPs in Ontario have been given a refresher course on how to be true Conservatives and clearly they are short of role models.
Leader John Tory, whose position is in question after he lost the Oct. 10 election, called his party’s elected members to a retreat so they could be taught what it means to be a Conservative.
The guidance was provided by a team led by Hugh Segal, a longtime backroom adviser in Ontario and later federal politics and now a member of the Senate, and included an author and lobbyist. None of the three has ever been elected to anything, despite several attempts by Segal.
The choice was odd and even offensive, because Segal is the supreme example in a long list of Conservative backroom advisers who could not get elected, but had more influence on the party and its policies than the vast majority of its members who got elected, worked with constituents and had a better understanding of their aims, and are resented for it.
Tory’s choice of him was another example of how the current Conservative leadership, which lost any chance of winning the election because it proposed funding private, faith-based schools, is out of touch with voters.
"Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows not victory or defeat."
- Theodore Roosevelt
Welcome to the grey twilight, John Tory. At the Ontario Progressive Conservative policy convention in London next weekend John Tory will know neither victory nor defeat in the leadership review. But then a leadership review is hardly a mighty thing.
The question before the delegates will be whether the disastrous outcome of the 2007 election requires a leadership race. John Tory has been working hard to convince the delegates the answer is no. Despite the obvious failures of the election, he believes he still has the moral authority to lead the Conservative party.
Even with all the tools available to a party leader, including open access to the delegates and the party machinery that produces the convention, Tory's task is not an easy one.
He is running against his own record. Tory has led the party for four years. He has handpicked his staff. He hired the campaign team. He rejected the Harris method of forming policy with massive input from party members. He produced his own platform, including the ill-fated faith-based schools policy. He even rejected the advice of those who would have talked him out of that political suicide long before it became public.
He owns the election result that saw the Conservatives slip in popular support from the levels of the 2003 election. He owns the falling popularity with women and urban voters. He owns the loss of his own seat.
In London this weekend it will be John Tory against John Tory's record. He will neither win nor lose. He will get more than 50 per cent of the vote; a party leader at a delegated convention is almost guaranteed more than 60 per cent. He will not get anywhere near the 92 per cent Mike Harris received in 1990.
Like I said, welcome to the grey twilight. The London convention will not be a joyous occasion.
It seems to me the notion that the party needs to agonize over whether to conduct a real leadership contest is almost laughable. If the 2007 election results won't prompt a leadership race, what would?
The nonsense blogged around over the past few months is equally twisted. Like the lunatic yelling at the fireplace "give me heat and then I'll give you wood," it seems some people actually believe that there should not be a leadership contest because no one has presented themselves as a leadership candidate.
To quote Bill Clinton, "Give me a break." When the party decides to hold a leadership convention, and someday it will, there will be plenty of very qualified people willing to contest for the privilege of leading the party and the province.
Then there is the complaint that leadership contests are expensive and divisive. It seems that democracy is inconvenient.
A good leadership contest raises money and attention. Check out what Barack Obama's campaign is doing for the Democrats.
A leadership contest does not have to divide people. Sometimes it is the only way to truly unite a party.
I would love to see a debate with several of our best candidates on subjects like how to rid our schools of violence, or the role of black-focused schools. How about an hour or so on how to prevent the deaths recently blamed on hospital waits? Perhaps a few moments on the future plans for energy. I think we could find lots of things to talk about and lots of leadership candidates with good ideas.
It seems to me the leader who has the most to fear from a Conservative leadership race is not John Tory. Dalton McGuinty is the one who should be worried.
But a leadership race might be inconvenient. Best, I suppose, to simply not suffer much nor enjoy much and live in the grey twilight.
From the Owen Sound Sun Times
AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF AGM REGISTRATION
Written by Paul Synnott
AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE ABOUT THE INTEGRITY OF AGM REGISTRATION
On February 20, dozens of Delegates received a Purolator courier package delivered to their door from a Mr. Andrew Brander. The package contained what reads as a "credentials challenge." The tone of this letter is intended to lead the recipient to conclude that their registration as a duly elected Delegate to the PC Party of Ontario Annual General Meeting has been or will be denied. No further information is contained in this correspondence, despite its official tone. Given the number of recipients; the attempt at an official tone in the correspondence; and the timing of this correspondence (received within days of the Convention), we believe the correspondence to be highly suspect in both its origin and its intent. Furthermore, most of the Delegates who received this correspondence are identified "YES" supporters, though some "NO" supporters and indeed numerous undecided Delegates are also affected.
The intent of this action is simple: it is designed to intimidate Delegates into NOT attending the Convention in London, Ontario and presenting for Registration. The purpose, in our view, is to manipulate the Leadership Review Vote and we believe these challenges are "frivolous and vexatious." Further, we are of the opinion that Mr. Brander is not acting alone, nor in his capacity as a candidate for a PCPO Executive position. We believe that this is a deliberate, organized effort to manipulate registration at our Party’s Annual General Meeting. We cannot and will not stand for this.
Anyone who has received this letter allegedly challenging their credentials as a Delegate to the Annual General Meeting this weekend should ignore it and present themselves in London to register as a Delegate. Do not yield to this organized effort of intimidation.
DELEGATES WHOSE CREDENTIALS HAVE BEEN CHALLENGED SHOULD DO THE FOLLOWING:
1. Attend at London as early as possible on Friday February 22nd.
2. Bring photo ID (Driver’s Licence and/or your Passport) with you.
3. Bring a second piece of ID that either has your address on it and/or your photo, or a piece of mail addressed to you at your residence.
4. Contact your Riding President and ensure that you are listed as a Member of the Riding Association for which you are a Delegate. If possible, ask the President of the Riding Association to send you an e:mail confirming that you are a Member of the Riding Association. In some cases Riding Associations issue Membership Cards and if this is the case in your Riding, bring the Membership Card with you.
5. If possible, obtain a copy of your Riding’s Constitution and bring it with you. This is not essential as the Party will likely have all Riding Constitutions available.
6. Be sure that you are Member of the Central Party. If not, you can join on line for $10.00. Bring the confirmation that you receive from your on line registration upon making this payment with you to the Convention.
7. Attend at the Registration Counter in London. We understand that some of the challenges will have been addressed by that point in time in that they will have been dismissed as not being a proper challenge and the individual will be permitted to register as a Delegate.
8. If your credentials have been challenged and the challenge has not yet been dismissed, you will be able to Register as a "participant" and will then be given a time and a location to attend where the Credentials Committee will review the challenge and make a final determination.
We intend to have at least two lawyers (Gina Brannan and Sara Mintz) available to assist you in addressing your credentials challenge. It matters not to us if you are a "YES" vote, a "NO" vote or an "UNDECIDED" delegate. It is the process that must be protected and it is the integrity of our own PC Party that we intend to protect.
-30-
A race for PC leader
Written by Paul Synnott
A race for PC leader
By rights, John Tory ought not to be automatically renewed as leader of the Ontario Progressive Conservative party this weekend. Tory is nice guy and you know what they say about nice guys. Tory proved the rule last October when he blew his party's chance of defeating Dalton McGuinty's Liberals.
Tory's motto in the October 2007 election was "leadership matters." He was right, too. Leadership does matter and Tory didn't provide it.
Although he had three years to prepare for the election - Ontario's first held on a scheduled date - he and his party were not ready.
Tory made two disastrous decisions. He came out early in favour of publicly funding faith-based schools, a policy that was almost universally unpopular, especially with people who traditionally vote Conservative. He even offended the proposal's few supporters by offering to put it to a free vote in the legislature, which would have been unlikely to carry.
He ran in a tough Toronto riding held by Education Minister Kathleen Wynne. He was defeated, so now he has no seat in the legislature.
Tory is strongly identified with the PCs' defeat. He was the whole show. Candidates were called John Tory candidates. John Tory and his candidates handed the Liberals a second straight majority government.
Personally, Tory is exactly the kind of person Ontario needs in public service. He is smart, energetic and a man of integrity. He has sound experience in business as a former president and CEO of Rogers Communications Inc. and as a former commissioner of the Canadian Football League.
And yet he led his party down the electoral path to disaster and should pay the price at this weekend's party convention in London. The party should demand a leadership race in which Tory can face any challengers.
A strong Opposition is needed to keep the Liberals on their toes about health care, education, land claims and the economy.
Maybe John Tory is the best person available to lead the PCs. And maybe not. The best way to find out is a leadership race.
John Tory Avoiding Tough Questions, Accountability at Leadership Review
“I am committed to working with you to deliver real change and that means I need you to continue to ask the tough questions.” – January 23rd 2008 letter from John Tory to PC Party members
Toronto, ON – John Tory is refusing to be accountable to party delegates at this weekend’s leadership review, said Grassroots PC Chair Rueben Devlin.
“When it comes to being held accountable for the disastrous 2007 election campaign, John is talking the talk, but not walking the walk,” said Devlin after party officials recently confirmed that Tory will not take questions from delegates before the leadership review vote.
“If John does not have what it takes to answer questions from grassroots party members about his leadership and the disastrous 2007 election, how can we expect him to perform as Premier in Question Period or in another election campaign,” asked Devlin.
John Tory’s approach to the upcoming leadership review convention has been anything but open and accountable. Specifically:
• With just three days to go, the PC Party has still not released a complete or accurate list of delegates attending the convention, meaning many duly elected delegates could find themselves turned away from voting;
• Tory is refusing to answer questions from grassroots party members before they are asked to vote on his continued leadership;
• The party is not “upgrading” alternates (i.e. replacing delegates who do not actually attend the convention) with duly elected alternate delegates until Saturday night – five hours after the leadership review vote takes place;
• The party has refused to confirm any rules for the leadership review vote, including who will safeguard ballot boxes, count ballots and scrutinize the results to ensure a fair and transparent process.
“Democracy is at the core of our party and accountability should be the core of our party’s leadership,” said Bart Maves, MPP for Niagara from 1995 to 2003 and the 2007 candidate in that riding. “Grassroots members deserve a transparent and accountable review process.“
- 30 -
For more information, contact:
grassrootspc@gmail.com
Grassroots media line: 416-459-1641
Vote on Tory leadership called 'undemocratic' as some delegates left off list
Written by Paul Synnott
Canadian Press Article
TORONTO - The vote to determine the fate of John Tory will be "undemocratic" and will deny delegates the chance to openly debate the Conservative leader's merits, disgruntled party members said Tuesday as his detractors and supporters prepared for a weekend showdown.
Tory himself expressed confidence the vote would be fair and would preserve his leadership following last year's crushing election defeat, but critics alleged that some delegates keen on a leadership review were being left off preliminary official lists for the party's annual meeting.
"I don't know how this is happening," said former party president Rueben Devlin, who is leading the charge for a leadership review.
"It's a bit mystifying to me now why this is so difficult for them to compile an accurate list of those people who have been selected as delegates."
Party officials say some delegates aren't on the official lists for the weekend meeting, which gets underway Friday in London, Ont., because their local riding hasn't yet sent their information to party headquarters.
But even those delegates who are allowed to attend the meeting won't have a chance to openly debate Tory's leadership, Devlin complained. Delegates won't be able to publicly question Tory until after the crucial vote on whether he should be subjected to a leadership review.
"There will be no opportunity for meaningful debate," Devlin said. "It's somewhat undemocratic."
The latest video from the DraftALeader.com team (We've upgraded the sketchy quality of the video).
Holding John Tory to account
Written by Paul Synnott
Feb 19, 2008 04:30 AM
Rob Mitchell
"Leadership Matters" is the slogan next to the picture of John Tory on the PC Ontario website. Leadership will be the focus of this weekend's policy convention in London, where about a thousand Progressive Conservatives will decide whether Tory keeps his job.
Why should this be an issue? The election of 2007 will be remembered as one of the most disastrous campaigns in Ontario since Larry Grossman was reduced to 17 seats by David Peterson in 1987. What made this defeat so spectacular was the fact Tory entered the race running neck and neck in the polls with Dalton McGuinty.
This marked the first time Ontario's three political parties had the luxury of a fixed-date election. Tory had the advantage of being a fresh face, youthful in appearance, telegenic, a good speaker with a sharp mind and no shortage of ambition.
The Liberals fondly refer to the "Harris-Eves" years in the context of Walkerton, Ipperwash, SARS, the blackout, West Nile virus. Tory had none of this baggage, yet he finished the election just two seats ahead of where he started and garnered only 31 per cent of the popular vote, almost four points behind Ernie Eves in 2003.
What went wrong? Poor judgment, stubborn pride, hubris if you like. For sure, faith-based school funding was a dodgy gambit and begs the question: How did Tory pollster John Laschinger frame his research? Fifty-three thousand kids enrolled in faith-based schools against a backdrop of 11 million Ontarians? Not exactly a plurality.
For many Ontario Conservatives, it will be tempting to punish John Tory for last fall's dismal election showing by ousting him at the leadership review to be held next weekend. By any measure, Mr. Tory botched his first campaign as leader -- primarily with his disastrous pledge to expand religious school funding, but also by otherwise failing to lay out a vision for the province that differed from that of the governing Liberals. Even his supporters would have to concede that, if he were being assessed solely on the basis of his performance as leader so far, Mr. Tory would deserve to lose his job.
But for the Conservatives, the review cannot solely be about looking back. It must also be about looking forward to who would best position them to win the next Ontario election, and who would serve as an effective premier if elected. These factors weigh in Mr. Tory's favour.
This weekend in London, Ont., Ontario Progressive Conservatives will gather for a general meeting to, amongst other things, decide whether or not they want John Tory to remain leader. Tory wants to keep the job, but substantial opposition has been mounted against him in the wake of last fall's crushing loss to Dalton McGuinty.
My view is pretty straightforward on this. Tory is a nice man, but he should go. I was actually surprised he didn't resign on election night. I'm aware of the argument that leaders deserve two tries. But consider:
1) He led the party to a worse finish than the 2003 Ernie Eves disaster.
2) He had three years to prepare for the election.
3) The McGuinty government had an abysmal record and was ripe for defeat.
4) He didn't even win his own seat.
Last year Ontario voters overwhelmingly rejected John Tory’s plan and his leadership. The dismal results of that election lead me to believe Mr. Tory has so severely damaged public confidence in his judgment, that it will be impossible for him to recover. This Province and this Party needs a leader who doesn’t make so many mistakes to learn from !
In the past, I have had the privilege of working for Mike Harris, Ernie Eves and Stephen Harper. In every sense of the word, these men are the definition of leaders; unfortunately, I just don’t see John Tory having that extra quality that turns a good leader into a great one. As a delegate I will be voting Yes and I encourage you to do the same.
Robert Stark
ONPC Party Regional Organizer 2001 –03
CPC Regional Organizer 2004 –07
ONPC Party Regional Vice President North East 2005-06
His first one was not in choosing public support of faith-based schools for his electoral platform. No. His first mistake was in choosing what was promoted as a "less contentious issue."
How can a wanna-be-leader expect to succeed when he chooses second rate issues?
It's like setting your sight on becoming the Opposition. Ah! There's the irony.
Tory's second huge error was not in apologizing for the blunder. No. It was his avoidance of accepting full responsibility - "I took bad advice" - which not only points the finger at someone else, it also renews the hard feelings between those who pushed the advice and those who strongly objected to it.
The pain of losing the election because of the blunder will not be slight. Total acceptance of the blunder by Tory was an absolute necessity.
Now John Tory is likely to make a third huge mistake: Having opened the can of worms, he seems intent on ignoring the problem of publicly funded religious schools, ie Roman Catholic, hoping perhaps that it will go away.
The Agenda with Steve Paikin - Steve interviews John Tory and the moderates a debate with Tory Supporters John Capibianco and Joyce Savoline versus YES supporters John Snobelen and Reuben Devlin
Landowners set to challenge PC leader's remake of party
Written by Paul Synnott
'We don't need a nanny state,' Randy Hillier says before convention
Lee Greenberg, The Ottawa Citizen
Published: Wednesday, February 13, 2008
TORONTO - A large block of rural delegates will attend an Ontario Progressive Conservative convention in just more than a week, says the group's co-founder, Randy Hillier, a move that adds intrigue to a showdown between party leader John Tory and his detractors.
Members of the Ontario Landowners Association, a libertarian group that rails against excessive government interference, will assert their agenda by involving themselves in the party's policy process, says president Jack MacLaren.
At a minimum, the group will challenge Mr. Tory's moderate remake of the party. "I think the party has to come out and define itself as a Conservative alternative to the Liberals," said Mr. Hillier.
"We have to try not to be someone else. This comes down to respecting the freedoms and responsibilities of individuals to a greater degree. We don't need a nanny state over our shoulders," said Mr. Hillier.
But the group's unanticipated presence at the London convention adds another intriguing layer to the event. It is unknown how landowners association delegates will affect a key vote on the future of Mr. Tory.
Neither Mr. Hillier, now a Conservative MPP, nor Mr. MacLaren would publicly back Mr. Tory when asked yesterday.
"I'm not in a position to support or not support (Mr. Tory)," Mr. Hillier, who still wields significant influence in the organization, said in an interview. "I'm not taking a position right at the moment."
Mr. MacLaren said he would wait to hear what Mr. Tory says in his address to party delegates at the Feb. 22-24 London convention.
Mr. Hillier pegs the number of the group's delegates travelling to London as high as 200, or one-fifth of the estimated 1,000 voters expected.
Ontario's Progressive Conservatives have been conducting a supposed debate for four months on whether they should keep their leader who was defeated in the October election, but they must feel as uninformed and uncertain as when they started.
The process has produced no proposals for new policies, strategies or ideas of any sort, except the incumbent leader, John Tory, if retained, will never again suggest funding private, faith-based schools, which cost the party any chance of winning the October election.
Nor has it put forward any possible alternative leader who could be measured against the existing one and the process is beginning to look a waste of time.
The exercise the Conservatives are going through is not a full-fledged leadership race, but a debate on whether to vote for one at a meeting of delegates that starts Feb. 22.
Polls by newspapers and claims by Tory and some of the MPPs who support him, not totally reliable, suggest most of the party's caucus and executive its establishment, influential in selecting delegates and shaping their views are backing him and the outcome is almost wrapped up.
The process has consisted mainly of Tory saying he will change his ways on funding religious schools and listen more to others in the party.
A brief attempt was made to introduce policy discussions by supporters of former premier Mike Harris, who feel it should return to the philosophies that won him two elections in the 1990s, but this quickly ran out of steam.
A rapid succession of university political science professors, whom political reporters consult more often than they do their doctors, has pronounced Tory as deserving another chance.
Some of the praise for Tory is understandable, because he is charming, mannerly, well-bred, relatively non-partisan, often too fair-minded for his own good, capable in questioning in the legislature, more effective than Liberal Premier Dalton McGuinty in the TV debate between leaders in the election, when it mattered, and highly intelligent, but lacking in political cunning.
The academics say they are impressed by the way Tory has taken the blame for the election loss, although he still can be heard insisting the problem was the party did not clearly define itself, when it defined itself so clearly it convinced many residents not to vote for it.
Tory also has complained some would blame him for the bad weather and remains extraordinarily reluctant to accept when he announced a program that cost his party an election, he deserves the blame.
.jpg)
