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.
Establish a Committee on Co-Leadership
Proposal text
This motion directs Federal Council and the Constitutional Reform Committee (CRC) to strike an Ad Hoc Co-Leadership Subcommittee under the CRC to, if determined appropriate, recommend by-law or constitutional changes for members to adopt co-leadership at the earliest feasible General Meeting or through a Continuous Motion Development Process. The Committee’s work should include evaluating international practices and surveying and consulting members and EDAs.
Type of Proposal
A directive to ask the party’s Federal Council to consider an action
Objective / Benefit
The committee could consider questions such as:
- Does Co-Leadership suit the GPC and Canadian politics?
- What are the trade-offs of the different Co-Leadership models used internationally?
- Should Co-Leaders be elected in pairs or as individuals?
- How should responsibilities be managed?
- How should conflict and succession be managed?
- How does co-leadership change the Deputy Leader role(s)?
- What diversity/language requirements are appropriate?
- How should Elections Canada responsibilities be managed?
- How should Federal Council adapt to accommodate Co-Leadership?
- Should Leaders be able to run against Co-Leaders in the same Leadership Race? (See comments)
- Should the number of co-leaders be limited to two?
If your proposal replaces an existing policy or policies, which one does it replace?
N/A
List any supporting evidence for your proposal
N/A
Does this proposal affect any particular group and what efforts have been made to consult with the group or groups?
N/A
Jurisdiction: Is this proposal under federal jurisdiction?
Yes
Please indicate the language the proposal is being submitted in.
English
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
Has the Federal Council implemented this directive, or is it still under discussion?
If it is still open, it seems that this directive should be implemented before there is any further discussion, including and especially in a VGM.
A quorum-sized group of people will need to have a single, well-prepared proposal in front of them. It must be constitutionally correct, fulfil a real need and be coherent. The proposal must be clearly presented so that the members will understand the decisions that they are being asked to make.
I suggest that there be 15 members on the Committee – three from each C-proposal and D001. For example, the proposer and two supporters. Or three members from each supporter-group. Or, perhaps just 2 people from each proposal group, which might just be more productive.
They will choose their own Chairperson, Note-taker, and Reporter. After each meeting, their report (not minutes, but a report) will put in the discussion section of this proposal on We Decide. All members will then be able to comment on the progress of the committee as reported here.
The questions in G23-D001 can frame their discussions.
Let them propose the date for the General Meeting when they are ready to do so. Anyhow, the time when they have come up with a concrete set of ideas will be clear from the discussion here.
Shel Goldstein’s proposed amendment can be considered by the committee. Her comment on 01-02/2004 is also pertinent.
They should consider having some “Committee of the Whole”-style meetings, as the Federal Council does, open to members who wish to
observe. And, if they decide to do so (as does the Federal Council) they can invite observers to speak.
Many comments in the discussion section of each proposal have stated that the four proposals should be combined. This directive could provide the means to acknowledge that general feeling. It would also be transparent. Something that we strive to achieve.
I do not know what the procedure should be now. Perhaps someone from the Federal Council can comment? Could it be on the agenda for the next FC Committee of the Whole?
Loading comments ...