Revolving doors at the Green Party of Canada. ANOTHER resignation higher up the food chain

Jacques Rivard Elizabeth May and Adriane Carr, the putative successor

Well this will be a great disappointment for the remaining Green Party activists in Quebec. I really and seriously hope it isn’t the last straw for the Parti Vert du Canada in Quebec. I was down in Montreal, last year, and I met with a number of Greens there. They were by and large pretty disappointed with the Green Party and how it fails to relate to Quebec. And I am being very generous with their sentiments here. Frankly, I thought they were going to flip out, and they were almost desperately eager to see new leadership. There were barely any French language resources available to them during the election, and they quite rightly felt that they were a sideshow to the Green Party of Canada in the last general election.

Then last fall, Jacques Rivard was recruited by Elizabeth May as the brand new Quebec Deputy Leader. He is pretty well known in Quebec, and his appointment was well received by those Quebecois that I know. That is with the exception of Claude William Genest, who found out he was being replaced as Deputy Leader by reading the public notice of Jacques Appointment. Well last week, Jacques Rivard cut and ran from the Party. Actually, that sounds bad, and I do not mean to say that he is a quitter. It`s just that he bailed so fast, that you could see the smoking trail all the way from Toronto. There was quite a fanfare when he was recruited, but I am afraid that his departure was very quiet indeed. He basically announced on Facebook that he was outa there last week, and today our Dear Leader put an unusually brief and cryptic note out to announce it. I daresay that the current, and soon to be former leadership of the Party is having trouble keeping up with all the departures. They might want to save some time and make boilerplate resignation notices, so all they have to do is change the name, then it will not take them a full week to let the rest of the world know. I mean, this year has seen the national Campaign manager go, (Catherine Johanson), the Executive Director, and the SGI campaign manager (John Fryer). Who is left minding the shop?

I just won`t bother going into the monotonously long list of people like Greg Morrow, and oh so many more who have quit, been fired, or resigned to `spend more time with their families` prior to this years exodus. In my opinion, almost every departure announcement was spinning the fact that Elizabeth May doesn`t play well with others. Now the Party has but a small handful of people left, and they are still being shuffled out the door in a kind of revolving lineup of temporary saviours. The new saviours wear pretty thin when there is no substance to our mangement team, and the only concrete observable, and objective fact is that there has been no continuity in the management of the Party. Mr. Rivard is but the latest in a chain of dozens of people who came in to great fanfare, and left very shortly therafter quietly through the side door. Elizabeth May is the common denominator in all this, and the revolving door, and indeed everything that has happened revolves around her.

Why is it that I am one of the few people who dares to publicly point, and ask, WHY ARE WE PUTTING UP WITH THIS GONG SHOW! I mean, I am far from the only person who has put thousands of hours, and a lot of care and thought into supporting the Green Party of Canada. Why does this culture exist of refusing to recognise that the emperor has no clothes? I have heard it again and again from GPC activists all across Canada. They are not happy with the leadership, but they do not want to appear disloyal by expressing their doubts openly.  Well, in my humble opinion, loyalty is a two way street. It is earned, not gifted in perpetuity. To me, when Elizabeth May publicly called on Canadians to vote strategically. she not only broke her solemn promise NOT to take such a position when she was running for the Leadership. She betrayed the trust that we had collectively placed in her to lead us through a general election.

A handpicked core of Elizabeth May loyalists have run the party into the ground. I mean, Sharon Labchuk is now the Quebec organiser! Is there something wrong with me? Is it not strange that there not a single Elizabeth May loyalist who actually lives in Quebec, and speaks the language? WHY are PEI, and Central Nova Greens the only `talent` left for the Party to draw upon? We have a Central Nova campaign hand replacing the well regarded John Fryer as Campaign manager in SGI. Now tell me what great lessons were learned in Central Nova that need to be transferred bodily from the extreme east coast to the opposite end of the country. The Party has decided, under Elizabeth May`s direction, that the one and only priority is to elect Elizabeth. Every penny that can be scraped up has been siphoned off to SGI. The odds are very long, and got longer when the `team`could not find anybody in one of the biggest Electoral District Associations the Green Party of Canada has, who could, or would run the campaign.  I feel a sinking feeling, like it was a bad bet. Could the dismal track record have something to do with why I am doubtful? Why oh why can I not convince myself one more time that THIS time, things will be different?

Well, I have something a little less gloomy to report. It is cards on the table time for the GPC this summer. There is a directive motion on the table to initiate an immediate leadership race at this summers General Meeting in Toronto. You can find the text in the members zone on the website. Yes the members zone is still there, and at last check, literally DOZENS of people were deciding our fate in that oft forgotten corner of the internet. There are multiple leadership candidates lined up on the one hand, and on the other there is an embattled leader, pulling every trick out of her bag to eliminate leadership races, and have tidy little reviews, or what I would characterise as confirmation hearings every so often.

A leadership win at this time will be a mixed blessing for the next leader of the Party. There will be an unholy mess to clean up. Broken finances, membership numbers collapsing, EDA`s collapsing, (There have been 7 EDA`s decertified in May and June of this year alone), and long time activists and old campaign hands are hanging up their gloves. Close to zero employee retention,…. It will take someone with genuine, and PROVEN mangement expertise. A conciliator, who demonstrates command of the fundamental political skills of dialogue, and accomodation. I would sure like it to be a Francophone voice, to make sure that we are able to seize an historic opportunity with the Quebec electorate. It needs to be a person who will listen , rather than tell. Someone who is capable of recruiting the skills to plan, and deliver a message that is actually targetted, and supported by the electorate that we seek to win over. And you will meet that someone in Toronto this summer.

If you haven`t already purchased your ticket for the BGM this summer in August, perhaps you ought to now. There will be a fundamental choice to make, and you can test your loyalty to the Party you have served over the loyalty you owe to Elizabeth May. I only hope that the Party survives until August, and my faith in the democratic process informs me that THIS party is ready to put a failed experiment behind it.


44 Responses

  1. From Kelly’s Heroes (paraphrased):

    Donald Sutherland: “Now, why’d you go and hit me with those negative waves first thing in the morning? The birds are singing, the bees are being. Can’t you just say something righteous?”

    Well, thanks for sharing this with the rest of us. I missed the press release.

  2. Quick question: What are you doing to help?

    Also, why should anyone trust your analysis to be in the best interest of the party (not to mention honest) when you have publicly announced you are working on the campaign of a leadership hopeful? Isn’t there an inherent conflict of interest?

    On a related note it’s sad that your hatred of May has lead you to throw in with the gang of four. Especially now that they are pushing an anti-choice and prohibition stance.

  3. Well, Dave leaves no doubt what he’s doing to help.

    He’s getting really quick with the smear campaign hits.

  4. @steve, that was a great movie wasn’t it? I cannot think of any other role Clint Eastwood ever played in a comedy movie.

    @Bagler, who the hell are the gang of four? Why not a coven of 6. Last week, I joined a Perty of 6 at a restaurant, is that significant? And what interests precisely are you imagining are in conflict? There is no conflict, when there is no interest. And why am I bothering to respond to you? Could it be because you are so easy to get riled up? Now, if you want to talk about actual conflicts of iinterest, there is Dave Bagler, who commented so frequently about how luverly everything was at head office, while his girlfriend was an employee there. I do not hide what I have to say, and I do not hide my true interests. Why did we have to find out why Dave Bagler was so rabidly pro-elizabeth through people other than Dave Bagler? You can insist all you want that I hate Elizabeth May, but the facts are coming in a never ending stream. I do not have to hate somebody to want to see them replaced. It’s about the Party, not Elizabeth per se, and certainly not about toadying up to anybody on my girlfriends behalf….

  5. @bluegreenblogger, re: Kelly’s Heroes…I just watched “Inglorious Basterds” for the first time on DVD a few weeks ago, and I was impressed that Tarantino used part of the Kelly Heroes soundtrack to build tension in a scene near the end of the movie…a great hommage for sure!

    @bluegreenblogger, re: the Gang of 4…I believe Dave is referring to the group of 4 Ottawa EDA’s who have in the past advanced policy for consideration at BGM’s. His reference to anti-choice comes from a discussion led by Paul Maillet (I believe) of the Gang of 4, regarding Free Votes, which was hotly discussed on the GPC blogs at this link:

    I believe that Dave is trying to build the link between your stated aims to assist another, un-specified, leadership hopeful with this Ottawa-based group. I believe. I’m sure that Dave will correct me if I’m wrong.

    Anyway, I really do appreciate the information. I’m not sure how the free flow of information is ever a detriment to those involved in the Party. This is the sort of thing which we need to know about — how can it not be? One of our two deputy leaders has resigned. I’m not at all upset that the Party hasn’t drawn this issue to the attention of everyone, but as CEO of an EDA, it would be nice to be kept in the loop. Having said that, I’m not sure that his resignation will lead to significant impacts on our day-to-day operation, even if this Deputy was francophone (and here in Sudbury, we do have a number of francophone members).

    Again, it’s unfortunate that some equate cheerleading with Party support, and criticism with trying to tear the Party down. That’s not the way it is, and that’s certainly not the way I see it. If we’re not critical, how can we continue to move forward? If we don’t acknowledge the issues, how can we ever address them?

  6. Well then listen to this then
    baby bagler

    All of you know of my fight or should have if we were open as we pretend
    But get this I have a July 11 conference call just to fight to stay in this party …and have now decided..what for???
    I know it is a waste of time as council are too cowardly and already helped slit my throat as an innocent anti semite
    Anyone who could read knows I did not even say the quote attributed to me in 2008 the australian did yet ….now this latest LIE !!!!

    I am responsible for 1400 members signed up by my team and how am I treated?

    Heres how…….

    On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 4:28 PM, Michael Moreau wrote:
    Dear Ms. Shavluk,

    We have been informed by both the RCMP and the Saskatoon Police that the charge for which JS was jailed was not cannabis related.
    If you dispute this, we are of course willing to examine the criminal record to which JS has access. We have accepted the verbal report of the RCMP and Saskatoon police.
    Once again, as stated in the letter I sent, time has been allotted in the July 11th meeting to hear from John. I would also invite him to reply in writing through me to council should that be his preference.


    Michael Moreau
    Chair, Federal Council


    Never mind just the obvious breach of just my rights with so called verbal information from police !!!!!!!!!!!!

    No one can get verbal anything on other people unless you are dealing with corrupt cops !!!!!

    But I say right here and right now I am suing again !!!

    as I was jailed for cannabis

    and not for VIOLENCE as the green party now says in emails to me !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    If you thought me upset and mad as an innocent man labeled anti semite you have seen nothing yet !!!

    This is above any sane persons tolerance level

    This is the dirtiest thing I have ever seen !!!!!!!!!!!!

    I already have a national rcmp investigation going against lizzy may for her lies which brought us this shakedown Feb 5

    and now I again have to fight LIES !!!!

    Imagine receiving emails saying you lied on your forms and were actually jailed for violence when you have been fighting to clear your name for nearly 20 years over a cannabis conviction?????

    How many times do I need to sue????

    A corrupt judiciary is already with holding the first verdict because they know I proved lizzy may a liar and some one with the same name as the judge is a life time member of the Sierra club !!!!!!

    (just wait till I appeal if they try to find against us!!)

    But this latest LIE ???


    I have seen my rap sheet and there is no such evidence for any cops to bullshit the greens this way

    So are they setting the greens up for another big lawsuit award and the greens stupidly playing a part ??


    I …..because of this attempt to keep me away from Toronto ….now have very many just quitting

    or going to destroy whats left of the lizzy may party

    ITS OVER PEOPLE !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    IT IS NOW A WAR !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  7. And clint eastwood has done lots of comedy
    or attempted comedy
    what about that one “every which way but loose”
    him and a monkey

    kinda like me now
    “john fights a pig”

    the gloves are definitely very far OFF !!!

    I will be going to national media on july 12th and already have given statements that will destroy whats left of the lizzy may borden party


  8. Katie is a PhD student at the University of Ottawa, she doesn’t work at the GPC office, nor has she ever. So did you just pull that (like so much else that say) directly from your ass?

    And yeah Steve’s right about the gang of 4 reference.

  9. So Ken let me get this straight, it’s only a smear campaign if you disagree with it? right? Yeah I think that’s it.

  10. Actually Dave, identifying smears is something thats often very easy to do, and often you can step into a situation knowing nothing about the issues at hand and idenfify the person engaging in smear just by comparing form and content of what they say, to the form and content of the person they attack.

    And you have given us a really clear illustration of that.

    Someone who knows nothing about the situation would look at what Matt said and come to the following conclusions:

    – a trenchant had hitting criticism of what those managing the situation are doing.

    – so, indeed negative. But with very specific crtiticisms.

    – as well as that, a clear statement of position, and pointing to an alternative to the current situation.

    – overt about bias.

    Then we have you:

    – no answer to the specific criticisms

    – an allusion that its all bullshit, without pointing to anything in particular, and with allusions to other unspecified instances [which you by the way virtually always do with people you have decided are beyond the pale.

    – a attribution of a number of seemy motives [packed into just a few words]

    – no statement of position in disputes involved or of biases held. Instead- hide behind rhetorical device of ‘the higher good’ …. though without directly saying so, done by attribution of opponent as not motivated by the greater good.

    You couldnt make it much clearer Dave.

    A good many smears can only be identified with those having some background in the situation.

    But you don’t leave any doubt. In the line-up you’d stick out to anyone.

  11. @john,
    yes you are right about the orangutang movie, every which way but loose. It was almost funny too. I had forgotten, I saw it in High School, some 31 years ago.
    @Dave, Bad doggie… No Bite. hehehe
    Sorry about the misinformation, not sorry about the rest. It does not take a red flag with you. You should keep out of politics, you cannot keep your cool, even when people specifically say that they are teasing you to make you lose your cool. Actually, it is cruel of me, and I will stop. You cannot help it, you are just unseasoned, and not very political.

  12. Ken,
    I asked him what he was doing to help the situation, what should be fairly easy question to answer.

    Then I pointed out that he has an interest to cast the current party leadership in the most unflattering light as he has publicly announced that he us working on the campaign of a leadership hopeful.

    Finally I expressed disappointment as to which group he has decided to throw in with. Which yeah doesn’t have anything to do with the post but is related to his conflict of interest.

    How is pointing out someone’s conflict of interest a smear? Shouldn’t the people reading this post know about these conflicts?

    Matthew could have responded to this but instead he told a lie. Showing a lack of personal integrity he replied that he has no conflict of interest (I’d call that a lie, especially after reading this and then accused me of having a conflict of interest because of (another lie) my girlfriend works at the GPC office (only she doesn’t and never has).

    If Matthew wants to write posts critical of the party that’s fine. However he should be honest about his conflicts of interest, and when called on it he should avoid telling lies.

  13. Matthew you should read this post you wrote

    Here’s a quote:
    For those of us who have read Flannagan’s book, Harpers Team, we are already aware that the CPC’s operating principle is that it doesn’t have to be TRUE, it only has to sound PLAUSIBLE. The underlying assumption is that people just don’t care enough to fact check

    Replace CPC with BGB and it sounds about right. By the way calling you on a lie, doesn’t mean I’ve “lost my cool” and when you’re caught lying it only backs up my point (about your lack of personal integrity) that you respond by belittling me.

  14. You are spinning Dave. And seriously deluded.

    I know its hard for you to stand back and compare what Matt wrote to your comment.

    Much later, spinning along, you are picking at nits and just SAYING Matt is generally lying, distorting, etc.

    IF Matt is engaging in a smear campaign on Elizabeth, its the clever variety. And those kind of smears are hard to deal with. You aren’t doing it- because you refute nothing of what he says.

    You SAY many things like you can’t be bothered, people know whats true, etc…. but talk about what looks awfully self-interested.

    You on the other hand are transparent.

  15. Yes, I have heard about those personal integrity attacks. The intention is to obscure the candidate. You like to pretend that it is dark and secretive Matthew Day pulling the strings in a dark corner. Well I am not running for anything, so whatever faults you may find with me don’t matter at all. Personal invective is not smart politics, and has nothing to do with the issues at stake. For example, when you read conbots mocking Elizabeth Mays appearance, it turns the stomach. Hey! I am thinking I may have just coined a phrase, MayBots: Those who unquestioningly worship every utterance of Elizabeth May.
    Fortunately, I do not have to answer for anything to anybody. Your opinion does not matter to me, and I doubt that your political purpose, obfuscation, and skirting the issue of competence will be served by it. Please feel free to explain away the multiple resignations from your vast store of priviedged information. Tell us, In Elizabeth’s own words just how nefarious, and lacking in integrity all those former staffers, deputy leaders, campaign managers, national Campaign managers, Executive Directors, council members, former leader, etc. etc. etc were. Note that every one of those positions I mentioned were in the plural, with the exception of former leader. That was accurate, because more than one of every position has quit, resigned, etc. after a short tenure. Except Jim Harris, former leader. He is too much the politician to respond to personal attacks.
    Of course you have no answers to these things, so you turn to insults and invective. Will you distract the readers here with this tactic? Who knows, there is after all, one born every minute.

  16. Matthew Day telling someone they’re unseasoned and should stay out of politics – HA!

    This whole blog is a great advertisement why Dave Bagler is FAR better suited for politics than the author.

  17. @Ken, I’m not accusing Matthew of smearing Elizabeth. I’m merely pointing out a conflict of interest. He is working on a leadership campaign. It’s not really controversial. But I am enjoying you smearing me.

    @Matthew, Don’t flatter yourself. I don’t think you’re pulling the strings. I just brought up your conflict of interest.

    To be fair I did also express my disappointment regarding you throwing in with the gang of 4. Of course being in Toronto, you might not be aware of the issues the gang of 4 has caused in Ottawa, which is why I didn’t accuse you of agreeing with them, I simply expressed disappointment in the choice (feel free to disagree).

    You say “personal invective is not smart politics” which makes me think of something regarding glass houses. You claim that I am skirting the issue of competence, but this isn’t simply isn’t true. Often I think you have a point in your blogs, but you go about it in such away that you wont bring about any improvements.

    I don’t think the former staffers and others are nefarious or lacking in integrity. I never suggested (with the exception of two, one who broke his confidentiality agreement) that they lacked integrity. I suggested that you did.

    You seem to equate disagreeing with your with “unquestioningly worship[ing] every utterance of Elizabeth May”, again sorry but don’t flatter yourself. Just because I don’t agree with you doesn’t mean I agree with your targets.

    Also don’t pretend to be above insults and invective, especially when trying your best to insult me.

  18. I just wish someone would give us semi outsiders a play chart of who the hell all the factions are and what the represent before the council elections.

    At this point I’m not pleased with the petty bickering, the cult of personality, our lax critiquing of day to day HOC activities/issues and our inability to keep talent.

    Lizzy you got some explaining to do and without first hand knowledge of the dynamic in the upper echelons it would appear someone is hard to work with/for/around.

  19. The term “conflict of interest” gets bandied about far to liberally these days, including within Green parties. Usually those bandying it about do so in order to discredit a position based on the imputed motive(s) of their opponent. Just because a dentist recommends that I get my teeth cleaned from which s/he would benefit financially, for example, is not a good argument against teeth cleaning. In logic, allegations of conflict of interest fall into the “straw man” fallacy. In a democracy every voter is technically in a conflict of interest since we each believe that the people and causes we vote for will directly or indirectly benefit us. If bluegreenblogger is supporting someone to succeed Elizabeth May and Dave Bagler is a May supporter, so what?

    Whatever bluegreenblogger’s motive in his post is – which I think is logically irrelevant, as I’ve written – he has posed an interesting question that his inquisitors haven’t addressed: so why is there a revolving door at the higher echelons of the GPC and why have all of these people quit or been terminated during May’s tenure as leader?


    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Party member)

  20. Oddly enough, I shared a beer with M. Moreau and the new organizer from Edmonton ,Alberta yesterday evening. She is driving East to the Ottawa Valley and has the membership list.
    Have fun!

  21. What a lovely brawl :-)

    I live in the Ottawa area and as a riding exec I received an email a while back informing me that, after layoffs, the organizer for my region lives in Edmonton.

    The Ottawa area is FULL of experienced, motivated Greens. There are (or were) about 1,000 local members who should have been considered for the organizer job. I could offer Dave as an example.

    But somebody is making sure that paid organizers are picked for qualities other than actually living in the area and knowledge of the local EDAs. Our previous organizer for E. Ontario was from Central Nova..

  22. Well oddly enough not a word about what I said
    Its like talking to council

    “”Often I think you have a point in your blogs, but you go about it in such away that you wont bring about any improvements.”” Bbagler

    @ bbagler….hahahhahha well who died and made you the bloggod?
    theres been more action here in hours then there was at the last lizzymay pulpit ….it appears he contributes just fine !!

    “”Also don’t pretend to be above insults and invective, especially when trying your best to insult me.””” bbagler

    No ones tried their best son….dont take yourself so special young taurus

    you have contributed and its sad we are splintered
    even that should say volumes to any outsiders…no?

    I am sick of the factions to be honest as I see things so much very much different

    I will say I had this dream and because of my fight I knew all the best people to grab as we went and scared the hell out of all of them in the next election

    I came home to a message

    One that can create possible new problems …yes


    Solve everyones tomorrow
    I mean most people here

    Tomorrow @ 10:30 Pacific time

    (Jan 4-11 2010)















  23. No wonder I’m not a card carrying member of any party. Look at you guys, all babbling on, taking shots at each other, other parties, including your own. No wonder faith in common decency and humanity is slowly fading from any and all interactions with mankind. You should all be ashamed of yourselves. Obviously far too much time on your hand than doing something productive in our world. Continue to bicker while our economy, social status, earth and everything else is destroyed. Well done all of you. Keep up the good work of distracting everyone from the REAL issues.

  24. There is some irony in disgusted voter’s rebuke.

    And to defend bluegreeblogger’s original post, it raises questions related to the effectiveness of the present party leadership. Surely effectiveness is always a valid concern. The alternative is not addressing effectiveness. If disgusted voter is concerned about “our economy, social status, earth and everything else [being] destroyed”, then surely s/he must be concerned with effectiveness.

    I will agree that the comments did digress somewhat from the subject of the original post and the tone of some of the comments did get a little sharp.

    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Party member)

  25. I meant to say social policies, but at any rate, the problem as I see it, all the parties have a similarity that cause voters to become apathetic because of the “politics” of each of the parties. It seems to me the Green Party has many of the fundementals on the right track, but the constant bickering within the party cause it to be terribly ineffective hence making it not much different than any other party. One thing that confuses me, is that Elizabeth May seems to be attacked for being the “Leader” when it’s convenient, and when it’s convenient for her to NOT be the “Leader”, and be the “spokesperson”, seems she’s damned whatever she does. If the organization could get themselves together, structured properly, and let Elizabeth May do what she does best… debate the REAL issues, the party may be able to move forward. But at the rate it’s going with the constant decline of people losing faith in the party per se, and listening and reading constant attacks on her person…. I wouldn’t want any of these people leading me through a dark alley! Where is the professionalism? Where is the tact? I would think everyone could agree Elizabeth May is a mere mortal and has made mistakes and will make mistakes in the future… But people, who among us can throw stones at her for not being perfect?? There is a much better way to be dealing with things, not on a blog site (s) and being back stabbing opportunists. I have great hopes for the Green Party. The majority of the party has let me down by actions like you can read above. Everyone seems to have an AX to grind. It’s a scary thought when I start thinking we are all better off with Harper at the realm! There’s no alternative. Just sayin..

  26. Meant to say “HAD” great hopes for the Green Party

  27. and shalvuk your claims were obviously nonsense, or so said the Supreme Court of Canada today, Hope you managed to get to sleep last night afterall. What a complete waste of tax payers dollars for such nonsense. Give it up. We’ve all felt wrongfully accused from time to time. It’s called life. Move on and put all your energy into something productive as opposed to your narcissistic views of yourself. I don’t know you, never met you, and frankly would never want to after watching and reading your rants. Should say.. some of your rants. I click NEXT after the first couple of lines like most everyone else is doing, no doubt.

  28. Or is that you Debra?
    You posted that here one minute after the green party site I see

    You did not receive “complete vindication”

    As the judge agreed I was libeled and betty may lied

    It will come back to haunt you doubt

  29. Funny this one is not there

    I sent this one first


    Well thanks lizzy may ….but as no media even has that decision nor any quote yet …..
    we must just assume it is someone I myself mailed it to today

    Gmail has a 500 email limit so it will take me awhile to get it to all the members

    It shows all I said was true
    They libeled me and betty may lied like a siv

    they argued fair comment based on my being a public candidate and one planted agent judge agreed in my view…it was obvious from day one

    What you of course do not see is the judge agreeing that they libeled me and betty may a LIAR !
    Something that will come back to haunt a few

    But….its just more likely that it is just you responding eh… betty may??

    “”Will you let off this personal war against elizabeth now, you sound like a fanatic!””…lizzy may

    Actually now I am going to get ready to actually start my real fight

    See you all in SGI and in my appeal

    The judge they slipped in is probably a life time member of the sierra club as they have a carol jean ross and her daughter to boot

    I saved it all and will now make it seem like I had never done anything….zero before comparatively in my work against betty may

    If you thought my suspicions only being confirmed that the judge was probably a plant and why they killed my jury…well you just have not even paid attention to me

    All thats happened is much more money needs spending………

    watch and wait

    I will do all I said…still
    no matter what

    Sad no one even gets it

    June 9, 2010 8:53 PM

  30. @disgusted voter: You’re right. You’re right about John and you’re also right about E May. Is she perfect? No, no one is. But don’t worry too much about the blogs.

    There are some who blog and still actively work to improve the party. There are others who use their blogs to distort and mislead. Regardless the blogging (and bickering about blogs) doesn’t really do much and thankfully (for me anyway) it doesn’t take up that much time.

    There are many more people in the party who (sans blog) work very hard to improve the party (regardless of their feelings toward the current leadership) and luckily these people still outnumber those who distort and mislead, although granted they are often less vocal about it.

    I disagree when it comes to taking shots at each other. When people make dishonest/misleading accusations it’s only natural that people want to respond.

    I want to stress that there are many people who are working to improve this party. For example tomorrow the Green Party of Ontario is holding a training day in Ottawa providing various workshops to help our candidates and campaign teams get our message out and make the most of the 2011 election.

  31. Thanks Dave for what sounds like an honest and sensible response, unlike some of the other nonsense. I read the release from the green party site about the Shalvuk trial, that whole thing was bizarre but I notice there has been no media which usually tells the story. I feel sorry for that man, I think some medication might help! Thanks for taking the time to respond and good luck in your efforts!

  32. With all due respect to Markus here…but

    But I john shavluk beat two lawyers in a court room plus the three others who quit working for betty may along the way

    I beat betty may herself and exposed that she lied
    and swore false court filed Affidavits

    If you guys think I will now just quit…well you just did not obviously pay attention along the way

    I told you all I knew they would do this and that this would happen and that they were guilty before the judgement even came out

    I do not lie

    I guess I will have to educate a little more

  33. Why are my posts deleted here?

    Things said here?'s+blog)

    I am saddened you have chosen to hide the truth

  34. The CBC/Canadian Press story was the result of this

    It is missing an awful lot

  35. So, it looks like M. Rivard left the Party to join the Bloc! Interesting. Here’s a link to the story:

    Does anyone think that there’s any merit to Gilles Duceppe’s claim that Jacques Rivard is a “long time sovereigntist”. If that’s the case (and I’m not saying it is — I really don’t know much about Rivard’s politics), what was he doing as Deputy Leader of the our Party? I’m sure our Party members will be looking for a response to M. Duceppe’s statement.

  36. I wonder when Elizabeth May discovered Rivard is a long-time sovereignist.

    Here’s the November 2009 media release announcing his appointment as deputy leader:

    He was a journalist at Radio-Canada for 20+ years. It’s comforting knowing that our federal taxes provide jobs in Quebec for long-time sovereignists.

    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Party member)

  37. Markus: so your point is that if a journalist working at Radio-Canada is a sovereignist but no one can tell because he’s too profesionnal to show his opinions, he should be fired?

  38. Slothful logic. Who said that anyone should be fired? I was just enjoying the irony. It’s really a metaphor for Canada. The federation spends large amounts of money to keep Quebec from leaving but the beneficiaries of that policy don’t support the federation.

    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Pary member)

  39. Markus: the irony would be more around the fact Quebec isn’t a legitimate part of the federation as the province never agreed to sign the constitution.

  40. Yes, it’s true, the seperatist provincial government refused to sign the Constitution for its own political reasons. But Quebec sure enjoys its disproportionate share of direct federal spending and transfer payments without protest.

    Poor Quebec. Canada is such an oppresive federation.

    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Party member)

  41. Markus: think again. 3 federalist Qc PM refused to sign the constitution: Robert Bourassa, Daniel Johnson and Jean “captain Canada” Charest. As well as 3 sovereignist PM: Jacques Parizeau, Lucien Bouchard and Bernard Landry. Gee, six ungrateful PM in a row? What a bad luck.

  42. Canada has made oodles of concessions to Quebec since the late 1960s. If it is still unhappy in Confederation, then perhaps it should leave. The fact that Quebec hasn’t left (yet) suggests that, protestations notwithstanding, its people are quite happy with their deal with Camada.

    I thought that Reed Scowen’s book “Time to Say Goodbye: Building a Better Canada Without Quebec” makes a compelling case.

    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Party member)

  43. Canada might kick Quebec out before Quebec makes up its mind. We seem to be happy being unhappy about the statu quo.

  44. At last, Daily Sloth, you and I have agreement! Canada, and evidently also Quebec, is a nation (or two nations) where the talking never ends. It is generally a good quality but a little frustrating sometimes.

    Markus Buchart
    Winnipeg, Manitoba
    (Not a Green Party member)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: