Change? -



Delegates have elected Mike Crawley—seemingly the choice of a certain contingent of younger Liberals—over Sheila Copps for the post of party president. If he does his job properly, you’ll never hear of him again.

In other news, an amendment that would’ve limited the party leader’s ability to appoint candidates did not receive the support sufficient to be adopted.



  1. Both good moves!

    • I’d like to hear why you think they are both good moves, Emily?  Mike Crawley was not my most preferred candidate, but really, I agonized over that decision for a full month and any of the top three or four would have been fine with me.  And probably five although I really didn’t get a good sense of Mr. Ward before he bowed out.

      But I’m curious why you think not limiting the leader’s ability to appoint candidates is a good idea.  I had a problem with the resolution as it was written, but not the general concept.  Please explain.

      • I wanted Crawley in because he’s young, and not known as a member of the ‘old guard’, and yet has experience.  He’s been president of the Ont exec….a fully functioning sucessful branch of the Lib party. He has the chops.

        Sheila ….as I read today….has been around since Madonna was a virgin.  LOL

        Up against those two, nobody else stood a chance.

        Appointing candidates is a good thing for several reasons…..riding associations are often made up of elderly retired guys from a different generation. They’re the only ones with the time to do the job!  They aren’t usually big on women or minorities. Their idea of ‘qualified’ ….beyond ‘white male’… ‘how many memberships did they sell?’

        The ‘vetting’ is often non-existent.  Who cares?

        So we get ‘one issue’ candidates….often anti abortion, but also other things the party doesn’t support.  Or wackos like Libs had the last time with some guy who used to be a white supremicist and it wasn’t discovered until it was too late to change things.

        There must always be a way for the leader to prevent damage to the party, and to ensure local bias doesn’t eliminate good people.

        • Nicely said.  Thanks.