Archived
Commentaries

FAQ

Past Projects

About TDH

Contact

October 25, 2004

It can be safely assumed that when Chuck Cadman made the decision to run as an independent after losing the Conservative nomination he had held since 1997, he never expected that he would be in the position he sits in today.

And yet, Mr. Cadman, a pony-tailed, guitar-playing anti-politician whose son's tragic murder compelled him to run for public office, now sits as one of the most influential and powerful members in the House of Commons.

In losing his position within the Conservative party last spring, Cadman brought to light a serious issue facing nomination processes in all political parties, that being bulk membership purchasing.  His triumphant electoral victory, however, also proved to the powers that be that while one might not be the most politically connected or organized, the inclination of the electorate still rules supreme.

Which is why any consideration of sliding back into being a Conservative MP must be handled with the utmost of care and consideration by Mr. Cadman.

Cadman has laid out 2 conditions for his possible return.

First, he must get the go ahead from his constituents.  Now while this is a necessary course of action, it also presents a puzzling dilemma as to how this consultation might be carried out properly.  Saying that he would be looking for the support of "55 to 60 per cent" of constituents, Cadman is nonetheless playing with fire. 

Sure, turncoat members who cross the floor are nothing new.  On the other hand, Cadman does not have the weight of one political entity or another backing him, but rather the "independent" voices of 15,080 voters.  Thus, moving back to a party whose tactics inspired such impassioned  throngs of protest from the voting public is a very delicate matter indeed.

Which leads into Cadman's second bone of contention.

He wants the rules behind Conservative nominations reformed. Great...this is a complaint being heard by party members of all stripes from across the country.  Only, Cadman's requirements are somewhat ridiculous, and in essence, constitute the closest a membership-driven system can come to an appointed process.

Cadman wants all members voting to be "eligible voters" (translation: of age and citizenship), to be signed up at least one year in advance of the nomination meeting, and for a declared candidate to receive "better than 50 per cent plus one, fifty five, sixty per cent I'd say."

Sounds like Cadman isn't willing to work for a nomination, rather wanting to rely on perennial members of the riding to take care of the sitting MP.

Regardless, if such conditions were agreed upon, the entire power of the house would shift back into the loosely defined Conservative/BQ coalition that has emerged in the past few weeks.  In adding their 100th member, the Conservatives could be on the winning end of every vote, assuming that they are able to work in cooperation with their BQ counterparts.  The Liberals would be forced to dramatically adjust their strategy, premised on the new understanding that any potential defeat wouldn't rest on the shoulders of one man (a daunting responsibility to say the least), but rather upon two parties and more than half the house.

If TDH Strategies were advising Mr. Cadman, though, we would encourage him to stay on as the independent member in this minority atmosphere for as long as possible.  If he is tired of the nomination process, sick of party discipline, and enjoying the pandering he receives as part of the horse trading from all sides of the house, why would he give it up?

Mr. Cadman has proven that to the constituents in his riding, he as an individual is bigger than any one political organization.  And in such a polarized atmosphere of partisan tomfoolery, this is quite frankly a refreshing change from all the bullshit.

Comments? jonathan@tdhstrategies.com