NDP Select Team to Review Election Loss
Friday, July 19, 2013 @ 3:26 PM
Prince George, B.C.- The BC NDP Provincial Executive has appointed 5 people to a panel that will review what went wrong in the 2013 Provincial Election. With pollsters predicting an easy NDP win, the Party and it’s supporters were shocked with the Liberal majority victory.
The five panel members are:
· Eugene Kostyra, former Manitoba cabinet minister and senior advisor to Premier Gary Doer
· Cindy Oliver, President of the Federation of Post-Secondary Educators of BC
· Andy Ross, former President of Canadian Office and Professional Employees Union Local 378
· Pam Sihota, student at law in Terrace, BC
· Jinny Sims, Member of Parliament for Newton-North Delta
The terms of reference for the review are broad as there will be no stone left unturned. The five will be tasked with:
· Evaluating the 2013 campaign with a view to determining the reasons for the loss including a review and assessment of the strategies and tactics of the BC NDP 2013 campaign.
· Identifying the successes that should be built upon.
· Recommend steps to make improvements and prepare a winning strategy in 2017.
· Include constituency preparation, technical and logistical preparations, communications, fundraising, central campaign decision making, selection of campaign leadership, advertising and media relations, ethnic outreach, voter contact, candidate selection, relationship between the central and local campaigns, platform and policy development, role of the leader, stakeholder relations including with community leaders, business, social movement, ethnic communities, environmental movement, affiliated unions, and labour movement.
· Review and assess the BC NDP’s broader relationship with the voters of British Columbia including an examination of the BC NDP’s base of support compared to the changing demographics of the population and the impact of vote splitting with other parties.
The panel is expected to start meeting soon to develop their plans for the review including providing opportunities for NDP members and supporters to participate.
Comments
reasons for the loss
The answer is: Dix
Identifying the successes that should be built upon:
The answer is: see above
Recommend steps to make improvements and prepare a winning strategy in 2017
The answer is: In BC, really?
Include constituency preparation
The answer is: Well duh.
Review and assess the BC NDPâs broader relationship with the voters
The answer is: You have to have a positive relationship, not an antagonizing one.
IMHO
Cheese
“no stone left unturned”
The reason is as plain as the nose on their face-if their nose bears a slight resemblance to a member of the genus Mustela family of furry critters:P
genus Mustela family
+++++++++++++++++++++
HAHA!!
It is only reporters from the lower mainland that can refer to Dix as a “greased weasel” …comment gets deleted if done here:D
Keep up the great work N D P
If you really want to know why you lost, take a good hard look at the 5 people on the panel. Seriously, is this your target market?
Rockin: Right. Great work.
The list of people on the panel makes me thin k of the movie “Dumb and Dumber”.
If they want to know what went wrong, well it’s quite simple:
1. Same old NDP (thankfully)
2. Same old unions supporting the same old NDP.
3. Adrian Dix
4. Ha ha ha!
I guess they gotta find some work for these wonks. Could it be they were promised great jobs immediately following the “election win”?
Dix accuses the Liberals of cheating…HAH!
Is Pam related to Moe?
reasons for the loss
The answer is: MSM and their anti NDP bias.
I very much agree with the comments about the poor panel seletion.
I think they will bring an internal mindset rather than the mindset of the voters who did not vote NDP and especially those who voted for the BCLiberals rather than the NDP.
Having an internal NDP mindset will not promote any meaningful disussion.
If they were to find some members who voted BCLiberal but have not consistently voted to the right of centre in their life, they could have some good debates from which some objective informaion can be obtained which should help structure future campaigns.
Once they have determined how they may have a better chance to win more ridings, they should test their thory before the next provncial election.
How? Pick a riding where the NDP barely won the seat, have the member resign, and run the party’s best candidate at the time and use the newly developed campaign strategy.
If the seat is lost, repeat another iteration of the improvement process until a seat is regained with a better % majority than the one in the 2013 provncial election.
Hopefully they will find the correct formula before they lose all their seats …..
;-)
Agree the panel selection is same old, same old. Many people were pissed with the Libs but couldn’t get over the same old NDP crew, and looks like that’ll be the majority of the panel.
I don’t think the Media picked on the NDP at all this election. However, the fact is the media never mentions the poor fiscal management, the IPP’s, the gutting of BC Hydro, the scandals, and the rest of the damage the Libs have done.
I’m hopeful The party will get back to its centrist origins. Hopeful, but doubtful.
By the way….nice balanced budget.Pffft!
IPPs are ‘green’ energy, who is against green energy? Water, solar, wind, etc.
IPPs which are subsidized should not be considered green.
As they all are.
First off you can not expect to get elected if you can not show that you will hold a bad government to account. If you give them a pass on everything, then how can you show you would be any different or better. I want to know what I don’t already know and be informed from a responsible opposition about things I should know about the current government. The opposition should be the first line of transparency in any government and that includes airing out the dirty laundry and reminding voters of it at election time. Ndp failed to inform and thus showed they were not ready to govern.
Next is the issue with selecting candidates. It does their party no good to appoint partisan candidates and removes the will of the locals to work on behalf of the candidacy. They need a more democratic and inclusive selection process.
Comments for this article are closed.