Resolution #1: Resolution to adopt bylaw revisions as proposed by Provincial Council

One of the primary tasks of the new Provincial Council last year was to conduct a SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats). From this exercise we developed our Strategic Plan, with our Vision, Mission, and Purpose statements. This gave us a clear picture of where we wanted to go, the next step was to figure out what we needed to do to get there.

From a strategic perspective, there were a number of things we needed to change in order to improve our structure and governance. The result is a complete review of the Party's Bylaws which need to be approved by the membership at the AGM. Unless you are intimately familiar with the current bylaws, the changes proposed in the 2015 bylaws may not be apparent.

Read the Backgrounder describing the bylaw changes being proposed.

Read the full text of the Bylaws with proposed changes incorporated.

Read the current Bylaws.

Page activities

Please check your e-mail for a link to activate your account.
  • followed this page 2015-05-18 19:54:31 -0700
  • commented 2015-05-05 08:39:54 -0700
    Thanks Terry – Great, I’m glad we’ll have the chance to talk and address your issues. You should receive an email invite to the webinar shortly.
  • commented 2015-05-04 14:44:07 -0700
    Thursday, May 14 works for me.
    May we discuss process as well as content? The proposed changes may be suitable for the organization; however i have the following concerns:

    1) that the changes are not easily discernible (that might have been achieved through highlighting, underlining or bolding).

    2) saying that the proposed changes are just fine does not lead to good discussion – its like being asked to “trust us” and maybe its fine this time but future proposed changes may not be, but members got “lazy” and relied on the authors to assure them of appropriateness.

    3) its like asking Peter McKay which party to vote for.

    4) Or why even have alternative parties or even members of parliament when we could just rely on our Supreme Harper Leader.

    Let’s enable being able to have qualitative input even if it is to say “Good job” making the improvements.

    Thank you for your efforts.
  • commented 2015-05-04 11:45:35 -0700
    I will attend the Thursday May 7, 5:00pm – 6:00pm Webinar
  • commented 2015-05-03 19:59:19 -0700
    Adam and I have found three dates for the webinars to discuss the AGM resolutions.
    Please let me know if you plan on attending and I’ll send you the link.
    The dates/times are as follows:
    Thursday May 7, 5:00pm – 6:00pm
    Thursday May 14, 6:00pm – 7:00pm
    Monday May 18, 7:00pm – 8:00pm
  • commented 2015-04-27 12:58:58 -0700
    Thanks Larry – I’m not sure Robert’s Rules are considered “bad rules”.

    On your other note, please see my comment to Terry about the changes to the bylaws – hopefully you will be able to join us for one of the webinars, or the Saturday morning panel discussion.
  • commented 2015-04-27 11:31:37 -0700
    Bob – I appreciate your comment and all the amazing work you folks have done to strengthen the party. However, bad rules can lead to bad decisions. Robert’s Rules are indeed popular, but so is the Liberal Party. It’s time to abandon both.

    On another note, it’s a standard convention whenever By-laws are revised to issue the revised document with all changes highlighted for easy identification, i.e., the deleted text with strike-through lines, the new text in a different colour, etc.
  • commented 2015-04-27 10:44:42 -0700
    Thanks Larry, I think Murray’s comment is interesting “In the end, the rules are less important than the decisions.” Provincial Council is recommending Robert’s Rules of Order as it is one of the most popular and well documented.
  • commented 2015-04-27 10:44:13 -0700
    Thanks for your notes, comments, and questions Murray. To answer your questions :

    1) Regions – We are looking at the way with tourism we most often see six regions: 1. Vancouver, Coast & Mountains 2.Vancouver Island 3. Thompson Okanagan 4. Northern British Columbia 5. Cariboo Chilcotin Coast 6. Kootenay Rockies.

    2) We are still working on the structural rules.

    3) We hadn’t discussed a returning officer role – I will pass that on, thanks.
  • commented 2015-04-27 10:43:22 -0700
    Thanks for your comments Terry. A year ago the new Provincial Council recognized that we needed to focus on 1) fundraising and 2) conduct a SWOT analysis. The results of the fundraising efforts are evident (and impressive). The SWOT analysis lead us to our strategic plan, vision, mission and purpose statements. Now that we have a plan, we are able to recognize issues with our current bylaws that should be changed.

    To help members understand the changes, we have included the full copy of the new proposed bylaws, the current bylaws, and a backgrounder to explain the reasons for the main changes. In addition, Adam Olsen and I will be conducting some online webinars (to be announced) leading up to the AGM, as well as a Provincial Council panel and open mic on the Saturday morning of the AGM. I hope you will be able to join us either online or on the 23rd.
  • commented 2015-04-27 07:55:34 -0700
    I support the other two resolutions, but this one needs to be split into its major components for separate votes. Some of the changes make good sense, but the piece I strongly object to is adopting Robert’s Rules of Order. It’s a cumbersome system developed in 1876 for the US Congress, and the very few people who have read its 700 pages often do so to manipulate meetings in undemocratic ways. Full of arcane language and totally unwieldy except for the very basics that could be condensed to a few pages. The Party should be considering more practical guides like “Call to Order” by Herb and Susan Perry, or “Democratic Rules of Order” by Fred and Peg Francis or some other modern guide that is actually useable.
  • commented 2015-04-24 20:23:38 -0700
    Some changes I noted are:
    The elimination of Deputy Leader from the bylaws and Council [ retained in Structural Rules ]

    Change from being able to renew your membership at the AGM to 30 days before AGM to be able to vote

    Directors at Large reduced from 3 to 2

    The Executive Committee is eliminated

    What is the geography of the six regions proposed?
    Are the Structural Rules updated to conform with the bylaw changes?

    An addition might be the appointment of a Returning Officer be included in the bylaws as per Ombudspersons.


    The bylaw changes will make us less of a grassroots Party in terms of organizational leadership. This may be required to win seats.

    The change from CA’s to Riding Associations is absolutely necessary and should not interfere with local political autonomy. We wasted far too much money on auditors over the years.

    Changing from using Green Rules to Robert’s Rules is a bit sad to me. I will say that I never had a good grasp of how the Rules should apply when I was Chair. In the end, the rules are less important than the decisions.
  • commented 2015-04-24 14:56:04 -0700
    Sweeping motions are not conducive to debate and discussion. I would like to see each aspect a separate motion and the sections that are changed highlighted or somehow marked (eg a line along side). It is unnecessarily quite onerous having the old and new as two separate documents and have to play “find the difference”. This approach is reminiscent of how other parties seek to have a motion passed before everyone even has their copy. I expect better from the Green Party.
Donate Get Involved