Hudak memberships in question?

The story broke on PerezHudak.com earlier today. It is rumoured that the Hudak campaign filed a number of their membership 1.5 hours late of the deadline.

I’m hearing that the Tim Hudak campaign has failed to meet a deadline for submitting some of their paperwork, and as a result many of their memberships may be in jeopardy:

As you probably know the deadline to submit actual membership forms with signatures was today for the leadership campaigns – an electronic list was submitted last thursday to the party by campaigns.

Apparently Team Hudak submitted their forms 1.5 hrs late today and could result in all their sales being disqualified.

Rumour is that the Christine Elliott campaign is pushing to have these members struck from the list of eligible voters for the leadership election. The Leadership Election Committee is meeting tonight to consider the matter.

I’ve learned that about 5,000 memberships may be in questions. This was confirmed to me by sources close to both the Elliott and Klees campaigns.

Yet, where the story differs, and where it may have instead developed, is in the Elliott campaign reaction. I received this from the Elliott campaign addressed to the Party.

This is either a sportsmanlike gesture from the Elliott campaign or an attempt to bring more attention to the issue and flesh it out within the news cycle.

UPDATE: I’ve heard that Elliott’s campaign lobbied the Leadership Election Committee all day to toss the Hudak memberships, but when they received a “definitive no”, that’s when the strategy changed to put out a statement supporting the memberships in question.

UPDATE: I’ve received formal communication from the Hudak campaign explaining what went wrong,

Comments

comments

  • Jack Redpath

    Jack Astor asked for more on this and here it is! Thank you Stephan for FINALLY responding to this issue. The party's leadership committee is meeting tonight as we speak to decide the fate of these memberships. They are expected at very minimum slap a fine on the Hudak campaign. Another party Cash Grab.

  • Hoarfrost

    Too bad she doesn't support getting rid of the HRC's. Her head is in the sand on this one. That is the issue of the campaign. Conservatives and all right thinking people regardless of party need to support the abolishmwnt or curtailment of the HRC,s as constituted. Only Hudak and Hillier are onside on that issue so far.

  • Liz J

    I too disagree with Elliot on her stance re HRC's, there's just no comparison to the school funding issue. I also don't think a flat tax is the way to go.

  • http://twitter.com/nathaliejcaron Nathalie

    I’m glad the party will keep these memberships, one hour and a half should not disqualify 5000 legitimate members. The Elliott campaign move shows her opportunism, whether that’s something you look for in your candidate, be advised.

    If the Party did not respond to the request by the Hudak campaign to extend paper submission time, can they entirely be blamed? I find the response from critics very harsh… An administrative error should not dismiss an entire two months of effective campaigning.

    We’ll have to keep our eyes peeled for any minor faux pas on the Elliott side, since these are so very important testimonies of one’s ability to run the province of Ontario…

  • Barry

    Is there a genuine small-c fiscal and social conservative in this group of leadership candidates?

    I’m still looking. I’m having trouble finding the key phrases I need in order to vote:

    “downsize government”

    “10% across the board cut in next budget”

    “sell crown corps such as TVO & Liquor stores”

    “eliminate departments and/or programs”

    “privatize”

    “cut regulations”

    “cut taxes across the board”

    “layoff thousands of employees”

    “voucher system for public and /or private schools”

    “different pay levels for teachers”

    “no strike law pursuant to teachers”

    “include only social conservative lawyers/judges on the list advising the Fed. Govt. re: appointments.”

    “privatize some medical testing/procedures as far as legal”

    Is there a real conservative is this group, or do we just have some moderate versions of McGuinty who is building the Socialist Republic of Ontario?

  • Jack Redpath

    There are so many things wrong with this post that reveals the witters lack of knowledge of politics.

    1. The party has not said they are keeping these memberships.
    2. One second late should mean a penalty – forget an hour and a half – rules are rules and for Tim Hudak to spend his campaign talking about “one rule of law for all” then breaking the rules is hypocritical
    3. The Elliott camp didn’t show opportunism, bue we have seen what happens to people who challenge delegates.
    4. It is not the patry’s job to respond to every request that the Hudak Campaign makes, nor is it their job to change the rules around his schedule. I understand how it appears that was as the process is being fixed for him, however, it is the arrogance of people like you on Hudaks team which is really turning people off.
    5. Is 5000 memberships over the past 2 years what you call “effective campaigning”

  • east of eden

    I hate to see in-fighting and, over something like this? Good grief. Look, we need members in our party and does it really matter who obtained the new members? This all seems to petty and narrow. The protesting makes Elliott look like a Liberal – out for herself. She has lost any chance of my support.

  • Jack Astor

    Thanks Jack and Stephen! This is getting dodgier by the second. So Tim Hudak is complaining that they sold too many memberships to administrate and they needed an extension? The party did not grant the extension so they just took it anyway? Is there somethig here I am missing? How is the inability to follow basic guidelines purely an administrative matter? Is that akin to calling tax evasion – purely an adminisrative matter? I was under the impression that rules & guidelines were put in place for a reason? Something stinks! Who is getting to the bottom of this?

  • Sam

    I agree. And I'll bet Elliott won't even implement the tax policies she HAS announced. She doesn’t believe in flat taxes. She can barely defend this on TV. Did anyone see Goldhawk Live this week? Elliott is already backing off her flat tax proposal – she is talking about phasing it over some unknown period once she “looks at the numbers”.

    She's already running away from her proposal – after just one tough question from Dale! If she is backing down now, what’s she going to do in an election?

  • Mike Brown, Lindsay

    Maybe you should file a complaint Mr. Astor – using your REAL name, rather than anonymous smears.

    I seem to recall Flaherty getting fined by the party for going over on his Convention speech and Mr. Klees got tagged for sharing lists when he shouldn't have. This is a total non-issue – for any candidate.

    This is all just stupid nonsense. Shame on these anonymous cowards for trying to throw all this mud.

  • Jack Astor

    Someone called “Mike Brown” is accusing others of being “anonymous cowards??? Really?

    This “Mike Brown” says this is a “non-issue” and “just stupid nonsense.” Well, Mr. Brown, if you really feel that way why are you even commenting on it? Hmm? Perhaps you are trying to insult other people enough to get them to stop asking questions. So who is paying your salary?

    What was really going on then? Did somone hit a nerve? Must have to require that sort of response??? I guess something really does stink after all and apparently “Mike Brown” going around calling people “anonymous cowards” is the hitman they need to get the rest of us to stop asking any questions.

    To say not being able to follow basic guidelines and making the brilliant decision (so they claim) to take an extension that was never granted? I do not think so. Did they need the money or something? I still would like to know what is going on and if Mr. Brown thinks it is such a “non-issue” then he can go on about something else and stop telling others what is an issue and what is not!

  • east of eden

    Okay, well how about I wade in with what I think IS the bigger issue. Membership. Why are we not focusing on membership instead of who had what, when, where and why. I dislike all these hoops and machinations – the important thing is membership and…of course…winning the election. Personally, I think it's all a whole lot of nonesense. Just get on with it – elect a leader, and let the games begin. Each day that passes gives McGuinty one more day to wreck the lives of us Ontarians. We have a lot of repair work to do since Tory handed McG his second majority and we have to start sooner rather than later. Personally, Elliott is not the person who can pull it off – IMHO.

  • Jack Astor

    East of Eden – Agreed!

    I bring this up now so we make sure we are electing the RIGHT leader and some nasty business does not come out later after we elect the WRONG leader and we end up handing McGuiny over another election! I suspect there is more here than meets the eye with respect to Hudak and this sorry story about why they could not get their memberships in on time. I want to know exactly what is going on now before we make a balloting decision and end up making the wrong one again!

    I cannot imagine how anyone in thier right mind can see a problem in that?

  • Sarah C.

    I agree with “east of eden.” Remember: the party will have to come together when this is all over. Tim Hudak has the support of the party and the most PC Party members, which is one of the many reasons why he is the best choice for the top spot. For example, Christine Elliott’s spin has been all along that she was “twice” elected, giving the impression she has been in office for two full terms. Tim Hudak has served for 14 years. He also is being supported by half the PC caucus and by far the most former candidates from 2007 that we’ll need to win a majority. Why is Christine Elliott trying define a “faith based school funding” issue?

    If any of you have worked at a riding association, then you know that memberships dropped off there on membership cut-off night are not counted in the total numbers being announced for each candidate by the party. For example, if I collected 85 memberships for Tim Hudak at a backyard barbecue in SW Ontario, then these numbers wouldn’t be counted as part of Tim’s “7,000.” Tim Hudak’s campaign had scrutineers in all but 2 ridings on membership cut-off, so they know who dropped off memberships for Tim Hudak. This number wasn’t in the hundreds, but several thousand. Since Tim has the most support from the party, many of his supporters told campaign workers that they had renewed their membership with the party soon after John Tory lost, but that they were voting for Tim.

    The numbers being quoted by the other candidates are inaccurate, but they feel that if they repeat them enough then people will believe this is a “horse race.” It’s a good strategy, considering they’re forced to come from behind.

  • east of eden

    Unfortunately, Bob Runciman is not running. I really do prefer him over the other contenders.

    As for Elliott, I believe that no matter how wonderful she may or may not be (IMHO, she is not wonderful but that's just my opinion), I highly doubt that Ontario would elect a woman premier.l don't get the lefties who call us progressive when we don't have much in the way of elected female leaders. We need, for the sake of winning, a male leader who can lead us to a majority so that we can have a hope of repairing the gross damage wrought by McGuinty and his gang of lying fools. This is our only chance to win back Ontario and put it on the right track and we have to be very careful to get the right person.

    I am getting the feeling that Elliott may cause some trouble – I have no proof but I'm having a feeling that she may turn out that way. We must avoid any bad optics, any impression of in-fighting, any hint of sliminess.

  • Murasak

    Oh it really doesn't matter. I know lots of people in my riding who renewed their memberships through Eliott's campaign, but are voting for Hudak.

  • aa

    Hudal is a dummy to miss this deadline. If he can't get the membership drive right he lacks the qualities necessary to lead Ontario.

  • Michael

    Sounds like a distraction coming from other campaigns…how disappointing. Tim has run a strong campaign the whole way long, and to his credit he & his team have been completely positive with the other candidates – Tim has always said “thou shalt not speak ill of another Conservative”.

    One of the strengths of our Party is that it would never disenfranchise people over a simple administrative issue, if one existed. Perhaps everyone just needs to take a deep breath!

  • Issues that really matter

    “thou shalt not speak ill of another Conservative”…

    Are you serious?

    We are talking about a man and an organization that semi-covertly undermined John Tory for more than 2 years. I guess that directive came down after Tim and his wife and their band of merry losers were done attacking the previous leader?

    P.S. – it gives me great concern that the backroom insiders driving the Hudak bus are the same gang of folks who can claim credit for our Party's roaring success in both the '03 and '07 election campaigns… if we are serious about renewal and change and winning we need to reject the bumbling gang of backroom losers driving the Hudak bus and look for some new blood.

    P.P.S. – Someone should let Tim Hudak know that when he comes across the words “(pause) Thank You” in a speech he is not supposed to read them out loud before anyone claps.

  • Cat

    Eden says “we must avoid any bad optics, any impression of in-fighting, any hint of sliminess.”

    We're not starting off very well are we. The fact that we're having this emergency meeting is the worst optics of all and just gives the opposition more ammunition.

    Why are we helping them again?

    My small town rural community is dying, our major employer is leaving town and a school closing when it shouldn't be, not to mention the runaway spending on highly-paid bureaucrats by the Liberal government and I can think of better things for our party to do then continue to be Kinsella's poster child for dried-up tired old dudes.

    I'd like to ask anyone here why during a leadership campaign the main PC webpage hasn't got links to local riding associations…with contact info.?

    You see I've sent that request through various channels, been the good sport and followed the rules yet the info. doesn't appear to be there. A nice map and short description of the riding but no contact info. for those looking for a name and number locally.

  • Cat

    Eden says “we must avoid any bad optics, any impression of in-fighting, any hint of sliminess.”

    We're not starting off very well are we. The fact that we're having this emergency meeting is the worst optics of all and just gives the opposition more ammunition.

    Why are we helping them again?

    My small town rural community is dying, our major employer is leaving town and a school closing when it shouldn't be, not to mention the runaway spending on highly-paid bureaucrats by the Liberal government and I can think of better things for our party to do then continue to be Kinsella's poster child for dried-up tired old dudes.

    I'd like to ask anyone here why during a leadership campaign the main PC webpage hasn't got links to local riding associations…with contact info.?

    You see I've sent that request through various channels, been the good sport and followed the rules yet the info. doesn't appear to be there. A nice map and short description of the riding but no contact info. for those looking for a name and number locally.