[ad_1]
The United Democratic Party’s Democratic Alliance continues to demand that the party leadership convene a national party council meeting. Today, the group sent another letter to UDP party president Michael Peyrefitte after its motion was defeated earlier this month. The group wants to remove Shyne Barrow as party leader but claims Peyrefitte is blocking their efforts to reshuffle the executive. The campaign’s promoter, UDP Alberta regional representative Tracy Panton, spoke about these efforts and why the alliance continues to demand a national party council meeting.
Tracy Panton, UDP Alberta Regional Representative: “We believe it is important to discuss what is going on internally and try to find a way that we can move forward in the interest of the party, but more importantly, in order to have a strong opposition for the country. There is no provision in the party constitution that says you have to put up with it. Any decision of the NPC, or even the National Congress, can be overturned if you have enough signatures. You have the right to change your mind. You have to reach a threshold and once you reach that threshold, the issue is put on hold for deliberation. The problem we have is that we cannot even have a discussion. We cannot even meet to discuss or find a way forward. We have completely been unable to have any internal dialogue, if you will, and of course the frustration is high and of course people have to understand that this is not meant to create chaos, not at all. We all want the best for the party, but there has to be accountability, there has to be transparency, there has to be a sense of fair play in the way the party operates.”
Panton said she felt the chairman was biased throughout the incident because of his response to it. She has now called on Peyrefitte to respect their request, explaining that the group is now considering taking legal action.
Tracy Panton, UDP Alberta Regional Representative: “I think he’s totally biased. I think the chairman has shown total bias in this case and that’s unfortunate. He’s the guardian, the caretaker of the party constitution. He’s supposed to help facilitate dialogue, not prevent dialogue, which I really can’t understand. As you know, the chairman has legal training, he understands the implications of moving away from a democratic process to a more totalitarian approach, and so it’s unacceptable in my view that the chairman and the vice-chairman have decided not to act in the best interests of the party members. “We are seeking some legal advice as to whether we seek an injunction and remove the flag bearers and caretakers of these departments, who in some cases are recognized, in some cases are elected. But there are other provisions in the constitution that we haven’t yet availed ourselves of. We hope we don’t have to, but we may have to go there, for example, there is the possibility of filing a recall petition, if you will, we have those tools. We are trying to be rational. We are trying to find a way to work – we are bleeding and stop the bleeding and move forward as decision-makers in the party. This is not an attempt by anyone in the party to sabotage. This is an attempt by us to correct our course to ensure that there is proper accounting, proper transparency and it has to be fair to everyone involved in this process.”
The Chairman told Love News that he does not intend to support a move that he believes will harm the UDP.
[ad_2]
Source link
