I got a personal letter from John Tory in my e-mail. At least I assumed it was personal. He used my first name and everything. He must have heard that I was upset at his leadership and decided to write me. Sadly it was written in some strange language. It took me a while to translate…
Quite simply, the campaign we ran in 2007 fell well short of expectations, and did not live up to our party's legacy of success. We do however have a lot we can be proud of. Working with you, I'm very proud that we managed to erase the party's monstrous $10.5 million debt from 2003 and get the party into financial shape to fight the election. We had a great slate of candidates and a committed hard-working team of volunteers around the province who were the backbone of our campaign effort.
Translation: We lost horribly. But we lost horribly with a smaller debt than the last time we lost horribly.
If that is how low we want to set the bar for our leader, then great job.
We believe in trust, competence and fairness. They believe in spin
Translation: I think that platitudes make up for the lack of substance.
Despite this, on October 10th, the people of Ontario delivered a verdict that was extremely disappointing and obviously not what we had hoped to achieve. As party leader, I take full responsibility for that outcome
Translation: I am willing to say it’s my fault as long as there are no consequences that go with blame.
On the issue of the faith-based education policy specifically, I have heard from party members that they believe the issue has been clearly dealt with by the voters and accordingly, we should not deal with it further. I agree. The voters rendered a clear verdict which I accept and this issue will not be part of any future platform while I am the Leader of this Party.
Translation: I’m not a complete fucking moron.
In the past two months, I have met with hundreds of grassroots Conservatives. I have listened, I have learned
Translation: I went campaigning to save my career with party funds.
The grassroots must have a final say on the Party's platform. It must be a platform which is concise, clearly distinct from those of our opponents and consistent with Progressive Conservative principles. It must come from a process which includes all Conservatives
Translation: I just found out that people like to have a say in the things that they are expected to support.
Really he said the same thing before the election. His inclusiveness idea amounted to having a section on the website where people can write things that no one would read. Unless he can tell me what process he wants to bring, experience tells me that it would be most likely a farce.
The Party's financial crisis after 2003 took a heavy toll on support for ridings whether database, communications or basic organization. This is basic support ridings need to be ready for 2011
Translation: It’s not really my fault that we lost. It is Ernie Eves’ fault.
Too many ridings saw good candidates end up without adequate local support.
Translation: It’s not really my fault that we lost. You just didn’t work hard enough.
We have to get back to basics on membership, money and training. We have to look at new techniques. This will require new full-time staff to help organize and train the volunteers so crucial to local success.
Translation: The party wasn’t centralized enough to win.
We spent massive amount of money and time training people. How much training do you need to knock on a door? Make a phone call? Track Right took me about 10 minutes to figure out. Is this really the issue?
Listen and learn. Then listen some more. Keep working hard but work smarter. More time listening to the grassroots. Become a better communicator. When you do a $250/ticket fundraiser, try to schedule a lower priced ticket event too. Include a listening event with grassroots party people on every tour. Make sure the Leader's office is staffed by people who know the Party, listen to the Party and respond to its needs.
Translation: I am completely new to politics and never ran any campaign before in my life. I never realized that politics was about people other than me. Who would have guessed that you needed people that understood the party to staff the party?
I will keep my word to you and I won't shy away from accountability to you.
Translation: Hold me accountable by giving me another mandate to lead.
Really does he even know what accountability means? Or will he “say whatever it takes to hold onto power.”
How do you plan on showing that you are accountable? Taking responsibility means accepting the consequences of your actions. What personal consequences are you accepting for your actions? An adult can’t just simply say, “Sorry I won’t do it again.” Those are the words of a child not of someone that I would want to lead my party.
6 comments:
I received that same "personal" letter. All of these letters, combined with piles of Christmas cards, John must have been pretty busy writing lately.
Bravo on your clear analysis!
John Tory blew the last election with his top-down policies and communications.
I have trouble understanding how John Tory's policies were "conservative" and am disturbed about how little regard the Ontario PCs seem to have for grass-roots policy input.
This reeks of desperation.
Obviously this had a lot to do with his Dear John Letter:
http://www.draftaleader.com/index.php?option=com_seyret&Itemid=74&task=videodirectlink&id=7
A very direct analysis...
I think many of us are pissed off about all these Tory shenanigans (syrupy letters, 'I'm really sorry' sorries, defensive comments, blaming other people, offering excuses and putting off standing for anything). Leadership isn't about coming off as a total apologist and that's all Tory seems to do very well (which you have hit on in your assessment here).
John Tory lost the election because he proposed a poor educational policy that was poorly framed. His opposition saw through his "faith based" funding promise and switched the wording to "private religious school" funding. His proposal only gave choices to religious families. Not-so-religious families had no choice where to send their children. Also, there was no means test for which schools would be determined as being religious in order to receive funding. Finally, would these schools have been allowed to charge tuition or service fees of some sort? His proposal did not demonstrate the necessity to improved educational standards in Ontario, just religious aquisition.
Tory could have promised "choice-in-education" with no tuition allowed. Essentially, families could send their children to public charter schools so that their children could get the best education possible. Families could send their children to public, religious, French Immersion, Mandarin Immersion, arts, or athletic schools as examples.
What I saw by supporters of "faith based/private religious" schools was a money grab for private businesses that operate religious schools. Why would I support John Tory?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xz_M1x2mAdc
Post a Comment