Browse

Quick Search

... by Riding
... by Candidate

Upcoming Nomination Meetings

|
Home: Blog--Guide to the Pundits' Guide

BLOG -- Guide to the Pundits' Guide

Saturday, January 16, 2010

Greg Thompson To Retire From Politics Next Election, Resigns From Cabinet

A fourth M.P. has announced his retirement from politics at the next federal election. The Saint John Telegraph-Journal is reporting that New Brunswick Southwest M.P. Greg Thompson is retiring from cabinet effective immediately, and has decided not to re-offer in the next election.

The story concentrates more on Thompson's reasoning and history, and the implications for New Brunswick at the cabinet table, and contains no speculation on who might be in the wings to run in his stead, although we can assume that story is coming next.

The former executive director of the John Howard Society in that area, Kelly Wilson, was acclaimed to represent the Liberals in this riding this past October, and she has not been joined by any NDP or Green candidates thus far.

The riding has been a PC or Conservative bastion since the first Trudeau election of 1968, although funnily enough it had been a Liberal seat before that. Thompson himself has represented the riding since 1988, with only one break from 1993-1997 when it returned Liberal Harold Culbert for a single term.

I've deleted Thompson's entry for the 41st General Election from the database, and have added his riding to the list of Ridings with Retiring Incumbents on the "Search the Database" page.

Labels: , ,

2 Comments:

Blogger Shadow said...

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20100118/conservatives_spending_100118/20100118?hub=QPeriod

Might be something to look into.

Does this mean in and out is legal now and can be done in the next election ?

January 18, 2010 11:54 AM  
Blogger The Pundits' Guide said...

Hi Shadow,

My superquick reading says that in-and-out transfers per se are fine, as they always were, and that the content of a candidate's ads have to promote the candidate OR the party OR the leader, as always used to be the case.

But there has to be a reasonable basis for allocating costs of regional ad buys between the local campaigns, based on their market value to the campaign (not on the basis of how much room they have under the limit), and that the difference between what the candidate's campaign paid and what the market value of those ads to the candidate's campaign are to be considered a contribution in kind.

However it's not up to the CEO to decide that candidates' ads *must* promote the candidate in order to be eligible election expenses for the candidate's campaign.

Also, the Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) is not forced to issue a certificate pro forma. But the differing statuatory roles of the CEO on the one hand, and the Commissioner on the other, are discussed.

It's also clear that the Commissioner's investigation is on-going, and there may be other developments to come in this story.

I'm going to do a post tonight with links to the ruling and some of the various blog commentary from different perspectives.

Overall, I think the points were worth litigating, and the ruling will provide a lot better guidance to both the CEO as well as to all the political parties.

Thanks for taking the time to post that link.

January 18, 2010 12:22 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home