Page 1

WILDROSE QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

HOW DOES THE CHAIN-OF-COMMAND WORK IN THE WILDROSE PARTY?
The Wildrose Alliance Political Association (Wildrose Party) consists mainly of the party membership,
the Executive Committee, the Party Leader, the Executive Director, 87 constituency associations and the
board of directors of each constituency association.
The Wildrose Party received just over $3 million from external sources in 2013, and spent $2.8 million on
its operations. Most of this was spent on party staff salaries and fundraising expenses. Decisions about
raising and spending money, what the partys activities and operations are, and what the staff would do
day-to-day, are under the control of the Executive Committee.
The Party Leader does not have significant authority over party operations. The Party Leader is a member
of the Executive Committee, and is therefore merely one vote among as many as 19 people.
WHAT ABOUT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR? DOESNT HE MAKE ALL THE DAY-TO-DAY
DECISIONS IN THE PARTY?
Not necessarily. The Executive Committee does not have to appoint an Executive Director at all. If it does,
the Executive Director is bound by terms of reference and powers set by the Executive Committee, which
may include giving the Executive Director no powers whatsoever. Instead, the Executive Committee can
delegate party decision-making to another staff member, such as the Director of Political Operations, or
instruct the Executive Director to defer to or take instructions from the Director of Political Operations, in
effect making the Director of Political Operations the Executive Directors boss.
IF YOU DIDNT WANT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO RUN THE PARTY, WHY NOT JUST
TERMINATE HIM?
Terminating the Executive Director is a costly maneuverfinancially and otherwise. A large amount of
severance may have to be paid, and if the termination is on bad terms, the risk of leaks of confidential party
affairs increases; not just by the Executive Director, but by his loyalists in the party. Organizational
fractures may be created or enflamed, both in the departure of the outgoing Executive Director and in the
competition for the replacement. It may take months or years to smoothly change a position of that nature,
which may not be fast enough for some people.
BUT WHO WOULD WANT TO DO THAT ANYWAY?
One of the resolutions proposed at the 2013 annual general meeting was to change the Party Constitution
to allow the Party Leader to veto the appointment of the Executive Director and veto the terms of reference
and powers of the Executive Director. This would ensure that party activities such as fundraising, staffing,
Page 2
communications (political and otherwise), and nomination of candidates met with the approval of the
Leader and a majority of the Executive Committee, instead of just a majority of the Executive Committee.
Another resolution was to permit the Party Leader to set the strategic direction of the Party, and to appoint
the Director of Political Operations. Without this resolution, these appointments would be under the
control of a majority of the Executive Committee, may be contrary to the Party Leaders wishes, and would
ordinarily report to the Executive Director of the party.
The object of the resolutions was to change the Party Leaders authority over the party to be 1/19
th
of the
Executive Committee to bilateral decision-making together with the Executive Committee.
Both resolutions failed. The general membership rejected both measures to increase the Party Leaders
authority.
SO ISNT THAT THE END OF IT?
Not if someone wanted to read a little fine print and do some leg work. The Director of Political Operations
could become the phantom Executive Director as I explained above.
BUT WOULDNT THAT HAVE TO BE AUTHORIZED BY THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE?
It would.
THEN WHY DOES IT MATTER IF THE RESOLUTIONS FAILED? THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
WOULD HAVE TO BE IN AGREEMENT WITH THE PARTY LEADER ON THE POWERS OF THE
DIRECTOR OF POLITICAL OPERATIONS ANYWAY.
Would they? Who was on the Executive Committee?
HEY, IM ASKING THE QUESTIONS HERE. WHO WAS ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE?
Several members of the Executive Committee elected, acclaimed or appointed in 2013 have at some point
been directly interested in being nominated as Wildrose candidates: the president, VP communications, VP
fundraising, treasurer, and 5 provincial directors. Lets throw the Party Leader in there as shes obviously
interested in not only her own nomination but all of the other nominations too. Together these are 10
votes, which is a majority of the Executive Committee.
WHY DOES THAT MATTER? THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS CAN VOTE HOWEVER
THEY THINK IS BEST FOR THE WILDROSE PARTY.
Because of the fine print: in order to run as a Wildrose candidate in an Alberta election, the candidates
papers have to be signed by the Party Leader. Thats not a party issue: thats provincial law. The Executive
Committee has no role in that process.
Page 3
COULD THAT AFFECT THE DECISIONS OF THOSE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS
INTERESTED IN NOMINATIONS?
Yes. The Party Leader could choose not to sign the provincial election papers for any of those Executive
Committee members, just like any other candidate nominee. In this way, the Executive Committee
members would have to satisfy the Party Leaders preferences on Executive Committee decisions or risk
falling into disfavor with the Party Leader, jeopardizing their nominations.
BUT THE PARTY MEMBERSHIP WOULD NEVER ACCEPT THAT, WOULD THEY?
They wouldnt, and it would damage the credibility of the Party Leader and the reputation of the party. The
Party Leader relies on the Director of Political Operations to advise her as to which candidates she should
certify, and which ones not. The Director of Political Operations manages an investigation, approval and
local constituency election process to reach reasoned, defensible conclusions on the political suitability of
the candidate.
The nomination questionnaire required of every nomination contestant was very long, and contains all the
specific details of the contestants personal, political and professional lives. Even in the case of high-quality
candidates, any adverse or potentially adverse content in the questionnaire could be used to justify a
disqualification.
Even without disqualifying a candidate, the general discretion of the Director of Political Operations to
time, waive, modify or cancel the process in the case of particular applicants and particular constituencies
permits the Director of Political Operations to help or hinder particular applicants chances for success, and
potentially affect the result. As long as the mischief is subtle enough for the general membership not to
notice, it will not reflect badly on the Party Leader, and the membership would accept the Party Leaders
final decision.
SO THE PARTY LEADER COULD DISQUALIFY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO
DISAGREED WITH HER IN THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, AND THE DIRECTOR OF POLITICAL
OPERATIONS WOULD HELP SANITIZE IT?
Its not that this would have to actually happen. As long as it could potentially happen, Executive
Committee members interested in nominations would try to avoid it by rubber-stamping the Party
Leaders opinions on Executive Committee business.
EVEN IF THAT MEANS THAT THE PARTY MAKES BAD DECISIONS?
Bad for whom?
ARENT WE ALL ON THE SAME SIDE?
Is the Director of Political Operations involved or interested in any other political parties?
Page 4
WAIT A SECOND. ISNT THE DIRECTOR OF POLITICAL OPERATIONS THE SAME PERSON WHO
THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE COULD DECIDE WOULD RECEIVE THE POWERS OF THE
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR?
Now youre getting the hang of this.
NOMINATION CONTESTANTS WOULD HAVE TO TAKE A LEAVE OF ABSENCE FROM THEIR
POSITIONS ON THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. DOESNT THAT STOP ANY MISCHIEF FROM
HAPPENING?
The nomination rules that granted so much power to the Director of Political Operations were approved by
the Executive Committee on January 25, 2014. No Executive Committee member interested in nominations
had taken a leave of absence or resigned by that time. Once the rules were approved, the Director of
Political Operations wielded considerable power over the interests of a majority of the Executive
Committee membersenough to affect any party decision.
But theres more fine print: the Party Leader can appoint 8 candidates irrespective of the nomination rules.
ISNT THAT FOR STAR CANDIDATES WHO ARE IN OCCUPATIONS THAT WOULD NOT ALLOW
THEM TO RUN A NOMINATION CONTEST?
Such as a member of the Executive Committee, perhaps?
ARE THERE ANY REMAINING EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE MEMBERS WHO HAVE BEEN
INTERESTED IN CANDIDACY?
One.
IS HIS POSITION UP FOR ELECTION IN 2014?
No.
I STILL DONT UNDERSTAND WHY THIS SHOULD BOTHER ME.
If these kinds of games were being played in the Office of the Premier, with an annual provincial budget of
$41 billion, would it bother you then? Im taking action now, before its too late, because it sure bothers me.
WHO ARE YOU ANYWAY?
Im someone who wants the Wildrose to succeed. I want a better future in Alberta for myself and my
family. I think that means a change in Albertas government, but I dont think well get there unless we have
a strong party and strong leadership within the party. Even after everything thats happened, I still have
hope.
Page 5
Because of the conflict of interest in a majority of the Executive Committee that Ive just explained, we
havent had strong leadership recently. I hope that will change in 2014 when the party selects a new
Executive Director and a new Executive Committee.
ARENT YOU JUST A SHILL FOR JOE ANGLIN, OR A REJECTED SOCIAL CONSERVATIVE, OR A
DISSIDENT FROM DRUMHELLER-STETTLER, OR A DIGRUNTLED FORMER EMPLOYEE, OR A.?
Im none of those. Im not in any camp. Im not pushing any agenda. I dont work for anyone.
SO HOW DO YOU KNOW ALL OF THIS INSIDE BASEBALL?
Everything here is based on public information. You can obtain the Party Constitution and records that
support the facts Ive mentioned from the party directly, and decide for yourself if my analysis makes sense.
You dont need to be an insider or trust an insider.
IF YOURE SO SMART, WHY DONT YOU RUN FOR EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE?
Its tempting. I might. Maybe I should have a year ago.
WHAT NEEDS TO CHANGE?
There are thousands of people in the party, and any change is ultimately up to them. Executive Committee
members should be disqualified from being Wildrose candidates, so they can make decisions with only the
partys best interests in mind. The party should have an Executive Director with integrity and strong
managerial experience instead of being a political operative. Legislative staff should not be involved in
party operations.
WAIT, THAT LAST THING YOU SAID. WHAT DO YOU MEAN?
The provincial government pays for employees and office expenses for the MLAs, including the Party
Leader. This is to assist them in their political and constituency business as elected representatives.
Obviously, the party works on the same political issues as the Wildrose legislative caucus, but taxpayers
should not be subsidizing the operations or management of the party. That includes legislative staff
involving themselves in party operations during business hours.
DO YOU THINK THATS HAPPENED?
I hope not. But I think its something people should think about.
Page 6
IN THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ELECTION AT THE 2014 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING, SHOULD
I VOTE FOR CANDIDATES BECAUSE THEY GET ENDORSEMENTS FROM PARTY STAFF AND
MLAS?
I wouldnt. Thats a good reason to vote against them. You dont want the tail wagging the dog. And you
dont want a fox guarding the hen house. We need an Executive Committee that is loyal to the party
membership, and doesnt owe favors to anyone involved in the party. If theyre right for the job, they can
get elected on the strength of their qualifications and track record. If they cant get elected on that, theyre
too weak to protect the party and its members.
WHAT DOES THE PARTY NEED PROTECTION FROM?
Would you like it if party membership lists, political research, and other confidential information was
traded to another political party advance someones personal agenda in that other party? What if that
didnt serve Wildrose interests, or would even hurt Wildrose interests?
DO YOU THINK THATS HAPPENED?
I hope not. But I think its something people should think about.
HOW CAN I ACT ON THIS WITHOUT MAKING POWERFUL ENEMIES IN THE PARTY?
Theyre only powerful because so many people think that way. Its like the Emperors new clothes.
Dont help them control you by being afraid.