There’s a hypocrisy over how political parties open their doors (or don’t) to people who want to get involved in politics, and it really needs further unmasking.
The road to running for Parliament, provincially or federally, almost always starts with trying to win a party nomination. (Yes, people can run as independents, but independents almost never win.)
You would think the parties would want to encourage citizens to come forward, sign up supporters, create interest, and encourage people to offer themselves for office. Former prime minister John Turner used to say, “Democracy doesn’t happen by accident; you’ve got to participate!”
But if the way some parties organize their nomination meetings is any indication, they’d much prefer to remain a closed shop.
Yet again, we’re hearing complaints that one of this country’s major parties has neglected to let appropriate democratic practices take their course. Some are grumbling that a party has put its thumb on the scale for a preferred candidate.
I wrote about this several months ago when I, and many others, pointed out some curious anomalies related to the Ontario Liberals’ nominating meeting in Scarborough Southwest. Now that party’s federal cousin has made strange decisions in the recent nominating meeting in Beaches—East York, designed to find a candidate to replace the departing MP Nate Erskine-Smith (who was a primary character in that mess in Scarborough Southwest).
If a party wanted to demonstrate its open-mindedness and democratic nature, surely it would welcome all qualified candidates into the race and set a date for the nominating meeting — a date far enough in advance such that those candidates could knock on doors and sign-up new members.
But the federal Liberals didn’t do that. On July 9, they announced the meeting would take place on July 18. Nine days would give prospective candidates barely a chance to sign up new supporters.
Then the party decided that none of the candidates, who’d already been greenlit to run, could sign up new voters at all. The brass backdated the deadline to sign up new members to July 7 — the date Erskine-Smith announced his resignation. That effectively put a thumb on the scale for one of the candidates at the expense of all the others.
This candidate was Tanveer Shahnawaz, the 28-year-old who managed Erskine-Smith’s constituency office. Shahnawaz, by virtue of having that job, had access to the riding’s data base of email addresses of the more than 5,000 Beaches—East York party members.
To put it simply: Erskine-Smith had been the MP for the riding for over a decade. It’s safe to assume that the registered Liberals in that riding skewed pro-Nate — and that those supporters might be interested in supporting his candidate.
The disadvantaged candidates were the other five in the race, two of whom (Marc Hull-Jacquin and John Tory Jr.) dropped out almost immediately, quite possibly realizing the futility of trying to compete without having any opportunity to sign-up new members.
One party member, Guri Pannu, who’s spent decades involved in Liberal politics, shared his complaints about all of this in a letter to the editor of the Beach Metro Community News: “Transparency is not measured by whether a vote eventually takes place. It is measured by whether ordinary members have a genuine opportunity to participate.”
Pannu called the process “a de facto appointment” of Shahnawaz, who not surprisingly was the winning candidate.
But wait, you’re asking. Is all this allowed? Isn’t the party obliged by its own constitution to have at least a two-week period from the time the nominating meeting is called to the time it’s held? Well, yes. It is obliged to do so.
Except when it isn’t.
Rule 18-1 of the Liberal constitution says the co-chairs of the party’s electoral commission have “unfettered discretion” to waive that two-week period in case of “electoral urgency.” It’s been nine days since the nominating meeting was held, and Prime Minister Mark Carney only Monday called for the byelection to be held on August 31. The House of Commons doesn’t return until September 21. Where exactly was the electoral urgency?
I wanted either of the co-chairs who made that decision to explain it to me, but emails seeking an explanation went unresponded to, despite multiple attempts. The party’s president also didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Unlike in the Scarborough Southwest provincial nomination, in which Erskine-Smith immediately raised concerns to journalists, none of the losing candidates here is making a fuss. At least not publicly. That’s probably because when they put in their application forms to run, they signed a non-disparagement agreement, promising not to complain about any aspect of the process. So far, to the best of my knowledge, the losing candidates have all adhered to that, even though to my eye there’s plenty to complain about.
But Peter Karavos did not sign any NDA. He’s a 65-year-old communications consultant and relative newcomer to politics who was one of the few hundred people who voted at the nomination meeting (yes, turnout was terrible as ever — only about 15 per cent.) Karavos stresses he has nothing against the winning candidate, whom he did not support. But when I asked him what he thought of the process, his response was swift: “Garbage.”
Despite supporting Erskine-Smith for Ontario Liberal leader in 2022, Karavos was disappointed with his soon-to-be former MP’s conduct in the Beaches—East York contest. Erskine-Smith sent an email to Karavos, explaining why he was backing his former assistant, while being critical of Shahnawaz’s challengers. For example, Erskine-Smith wrote that Claire Seaborn is “smart but does not have the ground game or front-facing political experience.” Summer Nudel “is lovely as a person and has done good volunteer work for the local Lions. Her team is a disaster…I can't imagine ever building a team like that.” Former MP Arthur Potts “is a great guy and has the front facing political experience but doesn't have the policy depth and he's a more traditional politician.”
Karavos found the email so troubling, he sent it to all the other candidates.
Of Shahnawaz, Karavos says, “Maybe he's a good guy. Who knows? But he had all the runway and advance to get everything done. And we had a nine-day nomination process and five minutes of speeches for the candidates? It’s so disrespectful to anyone who wants to put in the time to run. That's ridiculous.”
The party declined to announce the final results, which is standard operating procedure, but someone leaked them to me. In the end, Shahnawaz defeated Seaborn, a former chief of staff to two federal Liberal cabinet ministers, by a razor-thin margin of victory: 13 votes. Summer Nudel, senior advisor to Toronto’s commissioner of housing equity, came third. Former MPP Arthur Potts rounded off the ballot.
Someone who’s not complaining about the process is Nudel herself. She started signing up members to vote for her candidacy three years ago, when Erskine-Smith first mused about stepping aside as the MP.
“I didn’t think I was disadvantaged,” she told me. “My failure was in getting enough people out to vote. I prefer to take responsibility for myself.”
But the quick turnaround, from announcement date to nominating meeting, meant many of Nudel’s supporters (and presumably the other candidates’ as well) couldn’t attend.
“So many people told me they’d already made vacation plans to be away and couldn’t do anything about it,” she says.
As for Erskine-Smith’s email, Nudel admits, “That was a very big disappointment to me. I’m a vice-president of his riding association. I’ve donated to him. I’ve volunteered for him. He mischaracterized my qualifications. In fact, after my speech, he said to me, ‘I didn’t realize you had that much experience.’”
Erskine-Smith says of the email that "Peter Karavos bizarrely shared an individual email exchange between us in which he expressed frustration that I had issued an endorsement and told me to stay out of the race. I regret sending him the note, as these were my personal views shared privately and not ones I ever shared publicly. Every candidate brought a lot to the race, worked hard, and would have represented us well. Claire in particular proved she had a strong ground game and excellent political acumen. "
At the nomination meeting, Erskine-Smith also parked himself at the entrance of the school where the vote took place and reminded everyone that Shahnawaz was his candidate. “Nate’s endorsement of Tanveer carried a lot of weight,” Nudel says.
"I was transparent for years with all potential candidates that I would back Tanveer if he ran, as he has been a huge part of our local team," says Erskine-Smith. "Summer and Arthur were both campaigning for many months to be prepared for a nomination."
Nudel says she hasn’t decided whether she’ll stay on as a vice-president for the riding association.
Yes, nomination battles can be bruising. And yes, candidates and their supporters can get their noses out of joint when they lose. But the size of the disconnect between party insiders and the broader membership is annoyingly vast right now. Members expect fair, transparent processes. For too long, they’ve been getting anything but that.
Karavos put it simply: “Nate inspired me to stick my nose in, and see what politics was all about. But after this Beaches—East York nomination thing, I'm done.”
Long-time Liberal organizer Marcel Wieder, while confirming he had no issues with the nomination-day process, raises a bigger issue: is this really the best way for parties to pick their candidates? After more than four decades in and around politics, he’s concluded: No it isn’t.
“The responsibility for putting on nomination meetings should be taken away from the parties and given to Elections Canada or Elections Ontario,” he says. “All the shenanigans would be done with. It would all be above board. The way candidates are now chosen has become an insider, cynical process. If we want to encourage more people to participate, we should open it up.”
Wieder doesn’t like much about the American political system, but on nominating candidates, he thinks their primary system is superior to the way we choose candidates.
“The parties pick a date well ahead of the vote, anyone can participate, and anyone can vote,” he says.
We’ll find out the wisdom of the party seemingly putting its thumb on the scale for Shahnawaz pretty quickly. There’s a strong possibility that former Toronto city councillor Mike Layton, son of the former national NDP leader Jack, will be that party’s candidate, as he’s confirmed he’s considering a run. And while the NDP hasn’t had much game in recent general elections, the party is strongest when it can put all of its resources into individual byelections — particularly during the summer, when less passionate Liberal supporters may be out of town.
It all adds up to this: Beaches—East York isn’t remotely done making news.
UPDATE: This article has been updated to reflect a conversation with Nathaniel Erskine-Smith.