Collaborative Proposal Creation
Create, improve and sponsor proposals in a respectful, fully bilingual environment. Grow proposals in the "Hothouse", for promotion to the "Workshop", to become official GPC policy.
Proposal text
Article 9 - Co-Leaders
Preamble:
In the 2022 leadership race, the membership had a choice between two co-leadership teams as well as two individual leadership candidates. The members voted for Elizabeth May as Leader with the platform commitment to appoint Jonathan Pedneault Deputy Leader while working toward a constitutional amendment to move the GPC to co-leadership, in preparation for the next federal election. If this constitutional amendment for co-leadership is approved, then the membership will be asked to both confirm and ratify that change and to approved Elizabeth May and Jonathan Pedneault as the party's first Co-Leaders as part of the transition. Following the next federal election, and when the next leadership contest occurs, the leadership race will be for Co-Leaders to run as slates.
9.1 There shall be two spokespeople for the Green Party of Canada, known as Co-Leaders.
9.2. Purpose
9.2.1 The Co-Leaders will follow the principles of “servant Leadership". They shall be the primary public faces of the party, responsible for presenting Green Party policy and promoting its electoral activity and campaigns to the public on a daily basis.
9.2.3 They will be called to inspire, motivate, mobilize and help grow the Green movement and to influence public opinion and decision-making in the Parliament of Canada. The Co-Leaders are expected to run in federal elections.
9.2.4 Prior to an election, the Co-Leaders will jointly decide on a primary spokesperson - filed as ‘Leader’ pursuant to the Canada Elections Act - tasked with attending the National Party Leaders’ debates.
9.3 Duties and Powers
9.3.1 The Co-Leaders shall:
9.3.1.1 Act in accordance with the Constitution, Bylaws and Principles of the Green Party of Canada;
9.3.1.2 Speak for the Party concerning political issues and be guided in so doing by the Party’s member-made policies and platform;
9.3.1.3 Share one vote on Federal Council and the Executive Committee;
9.3.1.4 Chair the Caucus and Shadow Cabinet;
9.3.1.5 Appoint or remove a Deputy Leader as needed;
9.3.1.6 Appoint or remove members of the Shadow Cabinet;
9.3.1.7 Attend to any other duties and responsibilities pursuant to the Canada Elections Act;
9.3.1.8 Be an integral part of discussions and decision-making about the Party’s Electoral Strategy.
9.3.1.9 Report to the Party membership at every General Assembly
9.4 Election of Co-Leaders
9.4.1 The Party Co-Leaders shall be elected in accordance with the Bylaws and shall always include:
9.4.1.1 At least one woman; and one person of any gender;
9.4.1.2 Both co-leaders shall demonstrate functional proficiency in both official languages upon their election or appointment. Indigenous co leaders are exempt from this requirement.
9.4.2 Co-Leadership candidates must have been Members of the Party in good standing at least 3 months prior to an election;
9.4.3 Co-leadership candidates shall run as a team.
9.4.4 Two hundred (200) Members of the Party in good standing shall be required to nominate a Co-Leadership slate;
9.4.5 Voting shall be exercised using a form of the single transferable vote (STV) requiring a majority of votes cast for election.
9.5 Vacancies
9.5.1 Should one or both Co-Leaders resign or their positions becoming vacant, Federal Council is to proceed as highlighted in Bylaw 2.1.8
9.6. Accountability and Leadership Review
9.6.1 Co-Leaders are accountable to the Members assembled as General Meeting.
9.6.2 A Co-Leadership review where all Members in good standing may vote, shall be held:
9.6.2.1 Within six months after a Federal Election, unless one of the Co-Leaders becomes Prime Minister or is appointed to Cabinet as part of a Coalition Government;
9.6.2.2. Should at least 50% of the Membership petition Federal Council to hold a Co-Leadership Review;
9.6.2.3 Should a resolution approved by at least the two-thirds (2/3) of Federal Council and the two-thirds (2/3) of Caucus at an extraordinary Federal Council meeting calls for a Co-Leadership Review.
9.6.3 The date of the Leadership Review vote will be set by Federal Council and may coincide with a General Meeting.
9.6.4 The Co-Leaders’ terms shall end if Members in good standing do not pass a resolution endorsing the Co-Leaders by at least sixty percent (60%).
9.7 Dispute Resolution
9.7.1 Candidates to Co-Leadership and Co-Leaders will commit to:
9.7.1.1 Flagging any apparent disagreements early and openly to one another;
9.7.1.2 Keeping any disagreements or dispute private and confidential between until resolved;
9.7.1.3 Attempting compromise and the search for consensus if and where disagreements exist;
9.7.1.4 Pursuing mediation from a mutually agreed upon mediator skilled in dispute resolution should one of them feel the disagreement requires it;
9.7.1.5 Avoiding adversarial, legalistic solutions at all costs.
9.8 Consistency
9.8.1 This Constitution and Bylaws, as well as all other existing internal and external literature will be amended to reflect Article 9 and refer to Co-Leaders instead of Leader.
Transitional Provisions
1. If this amendment is adopted, it must be ratified by the membership. That ratification ballot will include a second vote to ratify that the current Leader and Deputy Leader shall serve as the party's first Co-Leaders.
2. Following this transitional period, in recognition that the leadership race of 2022 elected a Leader, whose campaign presented a partnership with the current Deputy Leader, with a joint platform that set out the process for the transition, the next race for co-leadership will proceed as per the amended Constitution.
Bylaw 2.1.8 Where one or both of the Co-Leaders’ terms end or become vacant:
2.1.8.1 If one Co-Leader position becomes vacant within two years of a Federal Election, the remaining co-leader will nominate, and Federal Council shall appoint an interim co-leader until after the Federal Election. Within six months after the federal election, baring one or both Co-Leaders joining Cabinet, a co-leadership contest takes place in which both the Co-Leader and interim Co-Leader are allowed to run.
2.1.8.2 If one Co-Leader position becomes vacant more than two years from a Federal Election, a co-leadership contest takes place within six months of the vacancy, in accordance with the bylaws. In the interim, the remaining Co-Leader continues as interim Leader and is allowed to run as a slate in the co-leadership contest.
2.1.8.3 If the two Co-Leader positions become vacant, Federal Council, in consultation with the legislative caucus, will appoint an interim Leader until a co-leadership contest is held in accordance within six months of the vacancies, as per the constitution and bylaws. If the appointment takes place less than one year from a Federal Election, Federal Council may decide to organize the co-leadership contest after the election.
Type of Proposal
A constitutional amendment to change the constitution or bylaws
Objective / Benefit
The 2022 Leadership Contest saw four candidates running on a Co-Leadership platform. Together, they gathered more than 88% of the vote at the first round.
As we prepare for the next elections - which could take place sooner than 2025 - this party needs to move fast on this promise to members and Canadians and institute co-leadership.
If your proposal replaces an existing policy or policies, which one does it replace?
The following proposal would amend the GPC Constitution to add a new Article - right above the one referring to Federal Council - to move on the promise of Co-Leadership and define the purposes, duties, powers and election of the Co-Leaders as well as the measures to ensure they remain accountable to the party membership.
It also modifies all Articles and bylaws that refer to the « Leader".
List any supporting evidence for your proposal
The Green Parties of New Zealand, Germany, England & Wales have espoused co-leadership years ago and succeeded in building strong political movements that challenge status quo in their respective nations. At home, Québec Solidaire also operates with a dual leadership that has shifted the conversation about leadership in the province and allowed them to make significant gains.
Does this proposal affect any particular group and what efforts have been made to consult with the group or groups?
Members have had a chance to interact with two pairs of candidates proposing co-leadership throughout the 2022 leadership campaign and have since November had the opportunity to observe the collaboration between Elizabeth and I, as well as to share supportive feedback and comments during numerous town halls and community events throughout the country.
Jurisdiction: Is this proposal under federal jurisdiction?
Unsure or Not applicable (e.g. directives and constitutional changes)
Please indicate the language the proposal is being submitted in.
English
Amendments (1)
-
Created at
22/02/2024 -
- 0
We're building a new kind of politics. One that is open, participatory, and people-powered
If you believe in what we're doing, please consider making a small donation to help us build it
Report inappropriate content
Is this content inappropriate?
Comment details
You are seeing a single comment
View all comments
Conversation with Elizabeth May
The 2022 Green leadership race was the first time that four candidates ever presented as two co-leadership teams. Members had the choice between two leadership candidates running conventionally to become sole leader, as well as Anna Keenan and Chad Walcott running as a team, as well as Jonathan Pedneault and me presenting as a co-leadership partnership. In fact, it was the first time in which any prospective leaders presented together. In the 2020 leadership race, co-leadership came up frequently in the various candidate debates. At the time, it seemed to me that Green members were keen to move to co-leadership, but that was only an impression.
Soon members will have a chance to vote on the constitutional amendment to the Green Constitution to make the move official. JP and I will really need your support when voting opens, so (assuming you are a GPC member in good standing), please watch your emails for news on your ballot.
It seems a good moment to share why I believe co-leadership strengthens the party. Green parties all around the world use the title leader or co-leaders. We stay within the conventions of other political parties, but we are not conventional. In other parties, the leader has power. Loyalty to the leader is absolute – or punishments ensue. Unfortunately, the role of prime minister in Canada has moved to be ever more presidential. Over the last few decades, in terms of media coverage and control over MPs, the leader-centric aspect of politics has gotten more pronounced. But in the Green Party, that is not the case. We are grounded in values of grassroots democracy that keep the leadership role to that of “chief spokesperson.” Under our constitution, policies and by-laws, the leader cannot refuse to approve candidates, even though the federal Elections Act gives party leaders that unilateral power. In the Green Party of Canada our bylaws and policies ensure that just as the Green leader in parliament does not have the power to whip votes, neither can the leader reject a candidate nominated by a local EDA (Electoral District Association). To refuse a nominated candidate, a super majority of Council is required. The shift to co-leaders better reflects our values of distributed leadership.
The huge advantage of the co-leadership model is in representing greater diversity as well as in avoiding disastrous difficulties in leadership transitions. Such difficult successions are not unique to the Greens. Witness the quick rejection of new leaders after electoral failure for the Conservatives- from Harper- to Scheer- to OToole to Poilievre. In a co-leader model, succession planning is rather built-in.
One of my favourite friends in the Green movement, British MP Caroline Lucas, convinced me of the benefits of co-leadership from her life experience.
In 2010, Caroline Lucas, then Leader of the Greens of England and Wales, was the first Green MP elected in a first past the post voting system. She stepped down as leader virtually immediately after winning her seat in Brighton-Pavilion. The party elected Natalie Bennett to be Leader. Natalie, now a Green peer in the House of Lords, is also a friend. She is smart as a whip and super funny. But, sadly, she stumbled in her first UK election campaign. After disappointing results, Natalie stepped down as leader.
The Green Party of England and Wales decided to move to co-leaders. Caroline Lucas, MP came back in the co-leader role with a younger, lesser known, but extraordinary Green, Jonathan Bartley. After a term serving together, Caroline stepped down as co-leader and Jonathan Bartley picked a new partner to run for co-leader as a team. He and Siân Berry, younger, lesser known, were elected as new co-leaders.
The experience of the German Greens led to JP and my proposal to satisfy expectations of the Canadian political scene with the designation of a chief spokesperson in the writ period. The German Greens had a consensus process to decide which co-leader would stand for chancellor on the ballot in 2021. This was the first election in which the German Greens ran a candidate for chancellor. By consensus, they chose Annalena Baerbock to lead the ticket running for Chancellor with co-leader Robert Habeck in full agreement.
Following the election, both Annalena and Robert entered the new government of Chancellor Olaf Scholz, as Cabinet ministers in critical roles. They stepped down as co-leaders. In early 2022, Omid Nouripour, 46, and Ricarda Lang, 28, were elected as new German co-leaders. Iranian-born Omid is a German Green veteran MP and Ricarda is the Greens’ youngest ever leader, elected to the Bundestag for the first time in fall 2021.
We have a lot of Global Green experience in co-leader models. Not all Greens have co-leaders. New Zealand does, Australia does not. Scotland does, England and Wales too, but not Ireland. Sweden yes, Norway no. Most of the EU Green parties have co-leaders. African Greens mostly have sole leaders. We are a big Green tent of over 80 nations with Green Parties with over 400 elected MPs at the national level. In my experience where co-leadership has an unparalleled advantage is in the mentoring and preparation of the next leaders team.
At the GPC members general meeting in spring 2022, held virtually, a motion was put forward to move to co-leaders. It proposed that following a leadership race the two top vote getters, whoever won and whoever came in second, would serve as co-leaders. That proposal was not ever actually voted upon, but I voted against it. My strong sense of the elements that make co-leadership work comes from my friends and colleagues who serve as co-leaders in Green Parties around the world. I once asked James Shaw, who was at the time climate minister in New Zealand and co-leader of the Green Party of New Zealand. if he had ever seen down sides to the co-leader model. He replied (and not necessarily an observation from New Zealand) that the only trouble he had heard of was when two co-leaders had trouble getting along with each other. Big trouble.
Clearly, the idea of co-leaders being matched based on any random forcing would not be workable. JP and I approached our partnership with deep and prolonged mutual questioning. In a real sense each of us was trusting the other with our very lives- our reputation and our future success. We drafted and committed to our own partnership contract. We agreed to dispute resolution, our shared values and set out only one “deal breaker” – dishonesty. We have each other’s backs, through thick and thin. Having entered into our agreement more than 18 months go, I am grateful on a daily basis for his extraordinary strengths.
As we approach the February 24-25 General meeting, members will be asked to vote on constitutional amendments.
Please let JP and me know if you have any questions on the various resolutions. We have had one “work-shopping” the resolutions in hope of emerging with one proposal to be accepted by consensus. One immediate change to the first version is that JP and my motion calls for an election by the membership for co-leaders. We expressly identify the first step as a transition election, as the leadership race just concluded in 2022, and, if the co-leadership model is supported in the GM process, we are ready to move to a confirming ratification of JP and me as co-leaders, not an entirely new leadership race. If following the 2025 election we are are not supported in the leadership review, then a new leadership race for new co-leaders would be required. I think through work-shopping we have answers for questions about every eventuality. Thanks so much to volunteers coordinating these efforts! Maria Rodriguez and Catherine Jones.
In choosing JP and me in the leadership race, members have had a first vote in the process. I have cut and pasted this process from our 2022 leadership platform
The Nitty Gritty – getting there from here:
1.If one of us becomes leader, the other will be appointed Deputy Leader as per our current Constitution. This will explicitly be seen as a step to co-leadership – but only if, and, when members approve the Constitutional change and ratify it.
2 At the first opportunity, we will propose a Constitutional change from “leader” to “co-leaders.” The co-leaders would be prescribed by various identifiers of balance and diversity. Co-leaders should reflect diversity in various ways including different genders, languages, cultures, sexuality, ages, backgrounds, race, aspects of focus in previous life’s work, etc, guiding the party for the future.
3.We will share the one vote and one seat at the council table currently occupied by the sole leader to avoid any increase in leader power or authority.
On the second round of GM voting, where will be two votes on the question: the ratification vote and a vote to confirm that the Green Party of Canada’s first co-leaders will be Elizabeth and Jonathan.
Performance reviews post-election will continue as per the current Constitution voting on co-leaders as a team.
Assuming members agree, the changes to the Constitution should be completed prior to the 2025 election.
There will then be a consensus-based process to decide which co-leader takes on the role of lead for the national debates and any other Elections Act or campaign requirements for a single leader during the writ period. The choice of either Jonathan or Elizabeth will be ratified by members, but we will remain co-leaders outside of the writ.
Comparing what we have accomplished with the platform plan, we are moving through the steps quite well, despite delays in holding the General Meeting. As you know, I am serving as Leader under terms of our current constitution, and JP is Deputy Leader, also a post in our current constitution, and one of the few “powers” o the leader, to appoint up to two Deputies. Now we are moving to point 2, the Constitutional change. None of the proposals before you impact that the Leader- now (we hope) co-leaders can name up to two Deputy Leaders. as I just did in bringing Rainbow Eyes back as second Deputy.
Loading comments ...