Well, some big bombshell from left field, or so Peter Van Dusen on CPAC thinks, anyway.
I haven't caught all of this but apparently Scott Reid came up with some goofy proposal in the workshops to try and change the leadership selection process away from each riding having complete equality in the leadership votes. And apparently his proposal got passed in committee or something and they made it sound as if Peter MacKay was hopping mad, because it was right out of left field.
This is the Conservative party messing around with one of the bedrock principles from the merger agreement and all I will say is that this is why I say it's Amateur Hour over there. The amateurs run the show. Now some of the old PCs are saying this isn't that big a deal, but still, this looks bad for optics: it looks like the Alliance types are trying to hose the old PCs. More ammunition handed over to the Liberals.
UPDATE: Ahem. My mistake.
Apparently this proposal doesn't have anything to do with leadership races at all, from what I heard listening to some guy who was in there when this was debated. Instead it goes to the selection process for policy conventions. Well, then, this is less of a big deal than I thought it would be, but still, it's a colossally stupid idea. It gives all the weighting to all these ridings where we win all the time, which means that they'll have all the clout in writing policies at policy conventions. It does nothing for us in the ridings we regularly lose. And if we're going to win everywhere we need to treat all the ridings the same and have the same input on policies from these ridings that we lose; frankly, the name of the game is winning. That's why Peter MacKay is so hopping mad. He wants to win and get these Liberals booted out above all else. This proposal by Scott Reid does nothing to get this party moving in that direction.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Now I've heard Peter Van Dusen say that future leadership votes ARE affected by this. SO now I'm thoroughly confused.
For the record, Michael Fortier, an old PC who's from the place most affected by this goofy proposal, Quebec ( he's also a Harper loyalist ), was on CPAC saying he's convinced this proposals won't fly on the floor anyway. But the CPAC people are making a big issue of this. What a way to get started on a Friday. Anyway I hope Fortier's right. I would hate to see a fight over an issue that was a bedrock merger issue to begin with. But this type of thing is what I mean when I say the people who are running the show in the party are a bunch of amateurs. Scott Reid should never have made this proposal to begin with. (UPDATE- John Reynolds just came out against the Reid proposal, too.)
From this vantagepoint the convention is not off to an impressive start. Now I wish I were in Montreal, voting against Scott Reid. But I would have needed Belinda's money in order to go.
For complete streaming coverage of the convention cpac.ca has coverage. More later.
UPDATE: On the positive side the speakers may be OK after all: Jim Prentice is up there speaking right now.
On the negative side these jokers just voted against some proposal re: urban transit and the urban agenda. Wonderful, make the job of Conservatives in Toronto tougher. Show the GTA that you care.
See this is what drives Tories here up the wall. These are proud loyal Conservatives, and I'm a loyal Conservative, but the rest of the party is finding ways to lose and it drives all of us urban Conservatives crazy. Being a Conservative in Toronto is like cheering for a incredibly bad losing pro sports team. We're acting like pathetic fans calling up sports talk shows to complain about the management and all the trades. Yecch.
I'm going to post some more later and I'm going to try and find something good to say about the party later. But I stand by my comment: Amateur Hour.