Transitioning Queen's Park Staff

 

Behind the curtains at Queen’s Park is a small army of political staffers who are currently in limbo.

 

 

Politics is much like a movie - what you see on camera or in the headlines is but a fraction of what goes on behind the scenes.  Politicians are supported by countless volunteers, stakeholders and of course, political staff.  While there is no one way into jobs in a Minister or Member's office (nor really any training once you get there), few positions you can have are more rewarding, draining, inspiring and all-to-often thankless than working in those back offices.

 

In addition to the challenges of doing The People's business, the Party's business and ideally, learning and contributing some of your own content in support of a shared vision, there's the constant uncertainty of employment (or perhaps, certainty of eventual unemployment).  So much of your job stability is dependent on factors completely removed from your actual performance; as Ministers get shuffled or Parties go in or out of favour, some positions simply vanish.  

 

With so many A-type personalities in politics, personality conflicts play a role, too - if you're associated with someone (or conversely, not seen as "one of XX's people") you can easily be painted with the same broad brush as a current or even former political boss or seen as inconsequential for not having the right connections.  Knowing which position to favour or not favour, or which of several competing direction-givers to follow can lead to analysis paralysis, which then actually does impede performance.

 

A sad consequence of this uncertainty is that some of the folk on the employer side of the equation are often in places where they simply can't keep the team together.  The cognitive dissonance that comes from having to let good people go sometimes results in a confabulated, comforting stance of "they were never that valuable anyway" being assumed by those holding the hammer.  These sorts of sticky situations result in a lot of bitter feelings, well expressed by Warren Kinsella's farewell tribute to Dalton McGuinty's outgoing staff.

 

In a recent conversation with a friend who worked on Team Pupatello, I mentioned that those who would be out of work were in for a rude awakening.  As this comment was first interpreted as meaning "those people have never had it so easy" I clarified thusly - the dedication, multi-tasking and ridiculously long hours worked in support of a cause, not a profit, doesn't translate as easily as one might hope to the private sector.  Figuring out how to frame your skills, experience and connections into a tight package that makes it clear what value you can add to a firm is far from intuitive.  Given the tightening restrictions around government relations, all the easy avenues are gone.  With a tipsy economy and an expanding pool of available labour, employers are defaulting to what (and who) they know instead of seeking to expand their operations or offerings in out-of-the-box ways.

 

The stress of the uncertainty, the loss of income and sudden inability to manage existing responsibilities, the mounting challenges and steadily increasing pressure in finding something new and the gradual loss of both financial resources and personal confidence can take a heavy, heavy toll.  These pressures can manifest themselves through things like anxiety, depression, substance abuse and damaged personal relationships.  It's not a pretty picture.

 

But it doesn't have to be this way.

 

When the Liberals were returned to Queen's Park with a minority government in 2011, it was an unfortunate reality that staffing levels would have to contract, significantly.  How to handle this situation in an appropriate manner became a topic of discussion among some of "The Centre" folk.  Although I've never been on anyone's insider list, I've been in politics long enough to know some of those who are; while talking with one such staffer at a reception, I volunteered to create a staff transition strategy that would help The Centre train and point outgoing staff in useful directions.  This offer was accepted. 

 

To me, Liberals aren't about throwing people into the deep end or buying them oodles of flotation devices - it's about teaching them to swim with the tools and training that makes the most sense for them and their context.  This "teach a man to fish" model became the basis of my plan; the opportunity presented by the election, I felt, was to put into practice the values that bind Liberals together.  Of course, in addition to helping political family members leave the nest under their own wing power, supporting staff who end up being tomorrow's stakeholders makes strategic sense.  Plus, it's an inevitability that your turn will come; we all know how karma works.

 

I called my staff transition strategy Moving Forward Together, with the implication being that moving forward together means leaving no one behind.

 

You can find it here.

 

For my part, I consider many of the people who now face employment uncertainty friends.  I get that there was some polarization that happened over the leadership, just as their was friction when the number of chairs on the deck were reduced in 2011.  That shouldn't matter - we are either all in this together, or we're not. 

 

There are ways to help the team find success that won't break the bank; they just take time, commitment and active communication.  You also have to care enough to invest yourself in the process.  But the same applies to governing, doesn't it?  If we don't believe we have what it takes to nurture and accomodate people with the tools they need to succeed, then we're in the wrong business, or maybe the wrong Party.

 

Move Forward Together - it can't be just a tagline, it has to be a value statement, a mission. 

 

But we have to believe it's possible for us to make a difference.  Not them, not you - us.

 

So - do we?

A Thank You Letter From Gerard Kennedy

 

 

I am very proud of the campaign effort that you helped to make possible.

My name was on the banners and the ballot, but our campaign was fuelled by a shared commitment to change, and by volunteer ideas and efforts. The personal sacrifices that so many made, taking precious time from family, holidays and work made a difference.

The change we stood for over 76 days mattered. Change to increase meaningful political engagement of Party members and of residents. Change toward a new culture of enterprising action to transform government and challenge our other sectors. Change to deliver labour peace, equality for women and new Canadians, an economy that would reduce youth unemployment and increase people’s individual potential, as well as an expressly stronger voice for youth in our Party.

The Kennedy Team delegates and volunteers in attendance were a vibrant presence at the Convention, impressing observers and other campaigns alike with your extraordinary passion and high level of organization. We did earn a possible path to victory and the fact it did not emerge was no reflection on your efforts.

Our caucus “huddle” with everyone after 2^nd ballot to discuss not only my fate as candidate, but that of the convention, surprised many. It was entirely consistent with the spirit of genuine democratic participation that marked our campaign and I was very glad to be able to submit my recommendation to our group discussion. That both the reaction in the room and in the subsequent ballot showed nearly unanimous support takes nothing away from the ownership that was exercised by all.

There can only be one Leader, and I know you will join with me in fully supporting our wonderful Premier-designate Kathleen Wynne in her leadership of the party and the province going forward. There are many winners, however, in a process that infuses the party with new outlooks and hopes and ambitions. The renewal we advanced will no doubt be evident in the weeks and months ahead. I encourage you to stay involved to help.

Thank you for all your tremendous support for me and for a better Ontario. It was a privilege to be your candidate. Personally, I greatly appreciate the faith and trust you placed in me. It gives me new enthusiasm to contribute in some way in future. For now, I relish the chance to make up time with my kids and enjoy what is an unusual role for me as private citizen.

Best regards,

 

Gerard Kennedy

Thank You, Team GK

Jeff Jedras‏@jeffjedras

#TeamGK is rockin-out to A-Ha at the moment. All the other camps seem a little subdued. #olpldr

 

 

While we were unsuccessful in our bid to see Gerard Kennedy become Ontario's next Premier, Team GK - now happily part of Team Wynne, also known as the Ontario Liberal Party - is proud of our candidate and our campaign.  We're equally of the woman who is now our leader.  We're optimistic about the future, too, as were all Ontario Liberals I spoke with last night.  It didn't matter who they had supported, originally - it was clear Kathleen Wynne would represent each and every one of us.

 

There's good reason for this.  More than just a ground-breaking Premier in terms of demographics, Kathleen Wynne presents an historic opportunity for growth, both for the Party and for Ontario.  Perhaps a bit more pragmatic than Kennedy, Wynne is just as much a consensus builder with a knack for active listening and developing shared solutions, an approach sorely needed right now. 

 

As Gerard is one of those who engages in politics because he actually believes that the whole can be more than the sum of its parts; there is still a role for him to play in provincial politics.

 

The same, I hope, holds true for the amazing team assembled by Gerard's Campaign Manager, Suzanne van Bommel.  CMs and campaign teams tend to reflect a bit of the candidate's personality, which was certainly the case with us.  Every single member of the team dedicated 120% of themselves to the cause.  We made the best use of new technology but rocked it old-school, too.  We made dirty hobo chic trendy. 

 

Along the way this team developed, under the guidance and direction of Gerard himself, some amazing ideas for political and social service renewal.  The ideas never stopped flowing, really; we were flexible enough to reinvent ourselves to maximize the potential of our ever-growing team but focused enough to never lose sight of the prize - seeing Gerard's vision made real.  We also had the most convoluted inside jokes of any campaign I have ever worked on.  Despite the overall pressure to engage in cynical political tricks on any political trail, we worked hard to keep to the high road, following the example set by Gerard himself.  Plus, we had crazy fun doing so. 

While I'm flattered that Jeff Jadras notices how much we enjoyed ourselves, the quote above doesn't even begin to scratch the surface.  What other team could have turned last night's late-night Convention Clean-Up into the After Party at the Holiday Wynne, including a DJ and a push-up contest?  Check out our Tumblr page for just a hint at the fun we had along the journey.  Work hard, work creatively, work ethically, leave no stone unturned and live in the moment.  That's how Team GK rolled. 

I want to thank the team, some who were there from day one and others who brought their talents to the gang throughout the campaign.  In no particular order, thanks to Melissa, Allie, Jay, Tamer, D-Love, Chelios, Krystyna, Debra, TorDan, Calgary Grit, Jason, Gaby, Chris, Tom, Matthew, Bennett, Sarah, Matt, Vince, Jill, Grahame, Michelle, Kathleen, Denise, Kira, Luke, the other Sarah, any missing Dans, Dagny, Greta, Amanda, Mary, Dave, Mark, Salma, Carolyn, Ryan, Nicholas, Was It Andrew?, Priti Kriti, Kuttimol, Kim, Brad, Kristin, Rachel, Jenny, Ted, Ruth, Jeremy - and anyone I missed, please know it's due to fatigue, not a reflection of your impact.  Team GK was truly a team, in every sense of the word.

 

Special thanks goes Suzanne for the invitation to join Team GK and the opportunity to be part of something so special. 

 

Above all, though, I have to thank Gerard and Jeanette for creating this amazing opportunity in the first place.

Now that the campaign is over, let the renewal begin.

 

A Gerard Kennedy Story (3)

 

Political campaigns are full of little stories both positive and negative that never make the news. These random encounters or tactical choices offer windows into the characters of the candidates and their teams. Here's one from Team GK:

 

So technically not a story about Gerard Kennedy, there's an important connection - you'll have to read all the way through to find out what that is.

 

The first politician I worked for is one that I actually campaigned against. 

 

It was 2003; the Liberal MPP for my home riding of Stormont-Dundas-South Glengarry (Stormont-Dundas-Charlottenburgh at the time) had retired and the nomination was up for grabs.  My parents were friends with a couple of the candidates; they agreed to help the first one that reached out to them and I offered to help at the nomination.

 

That candidate was Brian Lynch, a capable man who had served as Mayor of Cornwall in a previous political life.  He wasn't much of a risk-taker and that was reflected in his approach.  Opposing him was a former political staffer, Denis Sabourin and a retired school teacher who'd served in municipal politics in the Counties, Jim Brownell.

 

The night of the nomination meeting, a small group of protesters gathered outside the Cornwall Civic Complex.  I went out and asked them about their concerns - they were looking for a provincial response to allegations of historical sexual abuse in the community.  They said they weren't trying to cause a fuss, they just wanted to know that those seeking to represent them cared enough to listen.  I respected their effort to be heard and told them I would go ask Brian, which I did.  The answer he gave me, sadly, was one I have heard too often in politics: "there's no votes outside this room, so it's not worth the time."  Lynch lost my support right there.  He would go on to lose the nomination.  His resentment at this loss caused him to leave the Liberal Party and join the NDP, which was telling.

 

The man who won was the only candidate who took time to listen to those protesters - Jim Brownell.  Jim would go on to win the seat and serve two terms faithfully as MPP for the riding.  Along the way he got those protesters their Inquiry, too.  It was tricky politics, perhaps, but the right thing to do and a necessary healing process for the community.  This is why Jim was so effective as a leader - he never lost sight of his mandate, which was to strengthen his community. 

 

Years later, he invited me to interview for him.  "I know you supported another candidate," Jim said as we chatted. "That doesn't matter.  You're a person of good character and I respect your contribution.  I'd love to have someone with your dedication on my side."  With that, I became a member of Team Brownell, a team that would reach beyond his paid staff and come to include most of the Liberals at Queen's Park.  Jim didn't buy the respect, admiration and loyalty of all these folks; he earned it simply by being himself.  People were willing to help him then and remain loyal to him now because there is never cause to doubt what he stands for. 

 

While Jim is supporting Eric Hoskins for leader this weekend, the candidate who I feel resembles him the most is Gerard Kennedy.  Gerard's a guy of unquestionable integrity who has inspired and retains the loyalty of the staff who have worked with him over the years.  He's also someone that has never lost sight of what he believes in, which is challenging and empowering people to reach their full potential.   Gerard doesn't cut corners and therefore never has to worry about the consequences of doing so.  This unwavering commitment makes him fearless, which can be intimidating to those who don't hold to that standard. 

 

Perhaps most importantly, though, Gerard is a guy who listens.  Gerard will stop and talk to stakeholders in a room, people on the street, even protesters on the line.  He understands that politics isn't about him, or even the Party - it's about us.  All of us.  Gerard gets that the slow erosion of public faith in politics is largely due to the cynical approach taken by many political people, of all partisan stripes, to ignore people they don't feel are useful to them.  As easy as it might be to paint the other - other candidates, Parties or stakeholders with one brush, Gerard knows that's a short-sighted approach.  His end goal isn't to win the Leadership - that's just a step along the journey.  His mission is to nurture a stronger Ontario where everyone has access to the tools they need to succeed.

 

If you've taken the time to read my post, you know why it is I continue to support leaders like Jim Brownell and Gerard Kennedy.  I have faith in what they can achieve, given the opportunity, just as they believe in what we can accomplish when given the chance.

 

With that kind of leadership, we can get Ontario working again.

 

 

 

 

A Gerard Kennedy Story (2)

Political campaigns are full of little stories both positive and negative that never make the news. These random encounters or tactical choices offer windows into the characters of the candidates and their teams. Here's one from Team GK:

About a year ago, I got an invite from a friend to attend a Gerard Kennedy fundraiser. Normally, those sorts of events are way out of my price range, but this one was different - instead of a ticket price, the money would be raised by selling prints of Gerard's portrait of Lester B. Pearson. There was a recommended ticket price but the attendees were free to donate what they felt appropriate. While my donation was far less than some of the other folk in the room, I appreciated the opportunity to participate.

 

It wasn't until I got to the event that it became clear how much he had  accomplished. By building an inclusive price-model, Gerard was raising funds (there were big donors in the room) but also creating an opportunity for people like me to get involved.  Using the portrait as an anchor, Gerard had an opportunity to talk about something that mattered to him – the arts and, more broadly, expression. 

 

The thought that went into maximizing the potential of this event was impressive; planning matters.  What made the night really stand out for me, though, was something else entirely.

 

Gerard Kennedy is well-liked and well-respected, so there was a good crowd.  Among them was an elderly gentleman; whether it was the crowd or the hour, part way through the evening he became light-headed and started to wobble.  There was a slow ripple of reaction from those near him, but it was the host’s voice that brought everyone to attention.  Before most of us knew anything had happened, Gerard was at the microphone, asking if there was a doctor or anyone with medical experience in the room.

 

He didn’t stop there.  While the majority of guests stood, uncertain what to do, Gerard did what he does best by jumping in to action and addressing the problem at hand.  With the assistance of a few of his former staff, Gerard got the man, now too feint even to stand, water and some towels to use as a pillow.  At the same time, other former staff of Gerard’s had been tasked to call 911 and canvass the crowd for medical expertise, which was found.  Once they had a chance to assess the man, Gerard asked these doctors if there was anything they didn’t have that would help.  It was a remarkably astute question, one that I would not have thought of asking.  It was one that Gerard’s various life experiences had taught him to ask and that he has consistently applied in his political life – how can I help you find the tools you need to succeed?

 

Since Gerard acted swiftly and comprehensively, the event was able to continue and the man’s health and privacy were both respected.  It was a remarkably effective bit of leadership.

 

This story came to mind today while reading an article about another remarkable man who has dedicated his life to helping others – Eric Hoskins.  Both are individuals of integrity who lead by example.

 

Which is exactly the kind of leader Ontario deserves.

A Gerard Kennedy Story (1)

 

Political campaigns are full of little stories both positive and negative that never make the news.  These random encounters or tactical choices offer windows into the characters of the candidates and their teams. Here's one from Team GK:

A couple weeks back, Gerard was in the office (to be clear, I work on his team) for a filmed interview with Susanna Kelley of Ontario News Watch. As the interview was wrapping up and the ONW film team was putting away their gear, a delivery of juice and pop arrived at the office.

Chelios, one of the volunteers who has brought a wealth of talent and dedication to Team GK, began moving the cases of drinks to the back of the office and from there, to the basement for storage. It's the kind of proactive guy he is.  Instinctively, Gerard began to do the same. "It's okay, Gerard," said Chelios - "you don't need to worry about this."

 

Gerard smiled back and replied, "this is what I do. I've got a few minutes - it'll get done quicker this way."

What followed next was pure magic.  Seeing the candidate role up his sleeves, others in the office felt inspired to do the same - even the ONW camera team helped out.  With a suggestion from Gerard, the team split in two, with one half moving the cases to the back and the next bringing them down to the basement.  The move happened quickly, efficiently and we all felt a sense of empowered teamwork when it was done.

It's a little thing, maybe, but to me this tale personifies what GK is about.  Gerard Kennedy leads by example, empowers other to contribute and then looks for ways to make the process more efficient and effective.  Everyone then has more time and greater collaborative potential to dedicate towards adding value.

 

Best of all? There was a camera team right there.  Gerard could have turned a good deed into a photo op, but I doubt the idea ever occurred to him.  His focus was less on what he could get out of the work at hand than it was on what he (and collaboratively, we) could contribute. 

 

Ontario deserves a leader who leads by example.  Gerard is that kind of leader.

Mike Del Grande and A Lesson For Liberals

 

"Believe it or not I listen to what the lefties have to say."

- outgoing Budget Chief Mike Del Grande

I have no doubt that Del Grande did listen to them lefties, in the sense that he put himself in a place where their voices were picked up by his ear drums.

The fact that he refers to them by the stigmatic brand "lefties" suggests that while he might have listened, he didn't take those voices seriously. 

Del Grande can't be individually blamed for this oversight - we all live in glass houses when it comes to active listening. The average person will listen to conflicting positions strictly to develop counter arguments, instead of seeking clarity.

Rob Ford did the same thing. Stephen Harper does the same thing. Tim Hudak has never demonstrated the ability to actively listen.

The constituencies each of these leaders represent are fractured - a direct result of the divide-and-conquer approach they take to their politics. Their primary goal is to win, individually, meaning they automatically see other viewpoints as threats to success instead of opportunities for improvement.

When it becomes about winning, not achieving, you're lost.  Which, of course, is a big part of how we've gotten into our big social/democratic/fiscal mess in the first place.

Something for the Ontario and Federal Liberal Parties to think about as they pick their new leaders:

What do Liberals stand for? Partisan success and imposition of interest or active listening and shared solutions for all people, wherever they rest on the political spectrum?

Questions worth considering if we want to keep moving forward. 

The Party That Listens

But what about the candidate that Ontarians would choose if they were voting?

 

Now that the delegates have been selected, there is much chatter about how the Ontario Liberal campaign teams will narrow their scope to just those folk with the ability to cast ballots at the Convention.  It's traditional wisdom, this; when winning is the objective, you put your blinders on to shut out everything that doesn't lie on the path to victory.  If some obstacles get swept out of the way in the process, they can be dealt with after the win.  As the platform shrinks, you expect campaign teams to target delegates with an increasingly laser-like focus, tuning out everyone else.  It's in this climate of steadily rising excitement and tension that deals get made and occasionally, sparks fly.

Originally designed to help break political deadlock, the delegated process itself is an exclusionary one.  To be able to participate, Party Members must get their name on the delegate ballot, win support among their Association peers and then afford the price of admission.  Even then, successful delegates face transportation and time-associated cost challenges.  In the days of yore, those privileged few delegates, ex-officios and campaign teams who made it to the Leadership Convention would congregate behind the curtain and privately decide the fate of the Party.  As the process happened out of the spotlight of broader Party scrutiny, it could  well have involved the sort of horse-trading (of potential cabinet positions, for instance) that gives leadership contests a bad name.

The Party itself has changed much since the days of George Brown, just as media has evolved since he founded the Toronto Globe.  Funny enough, those changes have moved in the exact opposite direction of the delegate process, steadily leaning towards increased transparency and broader participation.  With cell-phone cameras and social media, every interaction unfolds in real-time.  The back-rooms have turned into fish bowls. 

Whatever decisions get made or actions get taken over the campaign or on the convention floor, it literally takes seconds for the story, complete with pictures, to go viral - not only to delegates or Party members, but to everyone plugged in to the Internet.  The curtain is rapidly being pulled back on politics-as-usual, forcing the players to dance as if everyone is watching.  

 

What's even more fascinating - Ontario Liberals want to engage each other in an open way.  Yesterday, Liberals were proudly tweeting photos of their ballots, letting the world know who they were voting for and why.  Instead of one camp hoarding result numbers from another, the quickest place to get updated figures was on Twitter.  Supporters of one candidate were congratulating supporters of another on winning a delegate spot.  A week back when a media outlet tried to generate a story out of "secret meetings" happening between candidates (often in public restaurants), the candidates turned it into a meme and posted pictures of themselves together online. 

 

From the grassroots up, Liberals are putting themselves out there on social media feeds, on blogs and most importantly in their communities.  This trend towards collaborative transparency doesn't stop with Party members, though - we're connecting with family, friends and complete strangers to let them know why we believe liberal values matter and to share our ideas on how to keep Ontario working. 

 

Sure, there's a danger in being so open - someone might publicly criticize one of your ideas, or even you for sharing them.  It's an uncomfortable risk, perhaps, but one Liberals are comfortable in taking.  If you want people to trust you with their visions for the future, you have to be willing to share yours with them.  Then, you have to prove your sincerity by straying away from talking points and responding to them as directly as possible, something that's only possible when you give everyone the respect they deserve.

 

It's a tough challenge, but being a Liberal has never been about taking the easy path.  After all, moving forward together means not leaving anyone behind.

 

The six leadership candidates recognize that this process isn't about them - it's about us.  All of us.  This is why they will defy political gravity and spend the rest of the campaign connecting with Ontarians from every corner of the province, from all walks of life.   The end goal for each of these candidates and the teams that support them isn't an individual win but rather a strong, sustainable Ontario.  Whoever becomes the next Premier, we will continue to work together, to listen, to build and to have some fun along the journey.

 

That way, everyone wins.  

 

(CFN) Is Tim Hudak Electable?

Tim Hudak does a hilarious stand-up routine.  He's as good as Rob Ford when it comes to ranting.

What Hudak is not, however, is someone with the right combination of skills, sensitivity, experience and listening ability to lead this province. 

CFN  – “Many Ontarians, including some of his own Progressive Conservatives, dismiss Tim Hudak as unelectable based on his dismal first campaign as leader.”

Hudak has made it clear he’s looking for a fight. Good for him for finally shedding any attempt at sheep’s clothing – he’s going for broke with an aggressively conservative plan that, if enacted, would break the back of social services and foster a leaner, more Dickensian Ontario. Heaven help those who aren’t among the fittest because in a Hudak-governed Ontario, they wouldn’t be intended to survive. Knowing this is his last kick at the can, Hudak wants to go to the polls as quickly as possible and either get the chance to remake Ontario in this Darwinian image or go down trying. More than a few Conservatives are biding their time, counting on the latter to happen.

Politics, of course, is all about selection of the fittest through aggressive competition. As such, traditional wisdom suggests the only way for Liberals to keep Hudak from dismantling Ontario’s hard-won public services is for the Party to dig in its heels and get ready for a bare-knuckle fight against a navy Blue Machine. There’s already been some noise on the Liberal leadership campaign trail about the need to be fight-ready. Going on the offensive is a quick and easy course of action to take, but not necessarily the most resource-effective for the Party (nor necessarily in the best interests of Ontarians).

Consider:

Andrea Horwath seems to have settled comfortably into her role of compromise-supporter; one can imagine Horwath finding her happy place in the Leader of the Opposition’s office, focused on creating opportunities for thoughtful pause rather than facing Ontario’s massive structural challenges directly. With that in mind, it’s not overly difficult to see a minority government situation working, if it weren’t for Tim Hudak’s inability to think outside his own box.

There’s some (far from universal) support in his caucus for a my-way-or-the-highway approach to the Legislature, though funny enough that’s the kind of thinking Hudak has criticized the outgoing McGuinty Government of having. Fortunately for the PCs (and Ontario) there are voices of reason within the PC Caucus, including the amazing Christine Elliot. While Elliot can get her dukes up with the best of them, at her core she is a woman dedicated to making the province work – which, of course, makes her a political threat to the Liberals and NDP, but a natural ally if the goal is not a partisan win but to fix Ontario’s structural problems.

Personally, I’d rather embrace a challenge that forces me to up my game rather than spend my resources on impeding an opponent. It’s only by running along one’s creative problem-solving edge that it keeps from becoming blunt. The enduring brand is the one that expands, not stagnates or worse, contracts. Growth and continuity are accomplished through adaptation – compromise, innovative solutions and the fostering of inclusive, equitable institutions. Adaptation in politics is a collaborative process, achieved by working with partners willing to participate on non-partisan objectives. The objective all Parties should be aiming for right now is moving Ontario forward by empowering Ontarians themselves. There are a number of common-ground issues out there that could form the basis of such a positive, proactive working relationship, proactive mental health being one of them.

True decentralization isn’t about amputating government services and throwing Ontario into the deep end of the pool, as Hudak would do, nor is it about government carrying every single Ontarian over troubled waters. We need to foster the stability people of diverse challenges need to keep their heads above water, then provide them with equitable opportunities and education that will empower them swim in whatever way works best for them. To use another analogy – don’t give a man a fish, nor sell a man a fish, but teach him how to fish. Through the process, you might even learn some new techniques yourself.

There are those in the opposition who get this – they’re the ones Liberals should be reaching out to. It’s a different way of doing politics, perhaps, but I’m pretty sure there’s consensus that the current system isn’t working as well as we need it to. If Ontario Liberals (not just the institutions or the MPPs and candidates, but every Ontarian that holds true to the values liberalism, at its best, represents) are serious about renewal for the Party and the province, they need to consider which of the candidates for Party Leader are best positioned to lead this kind of solution-based approach.

It doesn’t matter where we come from, as outgoing Premier Dalton McGuinty has told us, but what we find along the way. That includes potential partners, wherever they themselves come from. The best hope for Ontario Liberals and for Ontario as a province is for the next Premier not to be someone spoiling for a fight, but someone willing to extend an olive branch to partners willing to move forward in a together-like fashion, including the Opposition. If Tim Hudak is unwilling or unable to work with the other Parties, too bad for him; I guarantee there are others in his caucus who are.

GK: Drawing People Together

 

 

"And so I found that my ability to sit back and watch and learn gave me the capacity to draw people together and ultimately come up with some solutions."

 

"Don't judge someone until you've walked a mile in their shoes" is as dog-eared a maxim as they come, but like all cliches it endures because it's true.  Bridging the communication gap between people is also one of the greatest challenges we ever face.  This is because understanding others is not intuitive; we all view the world through experiential lenses that are shaped by our environments, families, our communities, the language(s) we speak and the ups and downs of our individual lives.  As this is an organic process, we're rarely aware of how and why we hold the views that we do.  We are therefore inclined to assume our worldview is simply the way the world is, misinterpreting the fishbowl for the ocean.

 

A quick example - the grammatical gender a language ascribes to a noun literally changes how the speaker views that object.  Heck, there are tons of words and concepts in world languages that simply can't be translated directly into others.  Then you get into experience; it's no wonder Mitt Romney simply couldn't understand the ground-level realities of the 47% and assumed they were playing the victim card.  He has never had to face the uphill adversity that so many average Americans live with day-to-day.

 

One of the key traits of strong leaders is the ability to communicate, which has to flow in multiple directions.  Too often we confuse communication with the notion of messaging, which only flows one way (Stephen Harper, for instance, is a master at messaging but dismal at communication).  Real communication is like diplomacy or mediation; it takes time to understand the players from their own viewpoint, establishes common vocabulary and then builds a common direction from there.  Leaders are meant to serve as the stone in the soup, being the thing that challenges people to find common ground and build a whole that's greater than the sum of its parts.

 

As such, the best leaders live and breathe holistic communication - walking with others, bringing people together, empowering the people to collectively create a shared vision of the future.  Communication is a lot like art that way - a pain-staking, challenging process requiring patience, a willingness to listen and a keen eye to recognize opportunity not for oneself, but for the people one wishes to communicate with.

 

Which is why I'm so excited by this:

 

All of the political parties at every level have fallen into the trap of concentrating too much power in person and the office of the Leader. Despite the best of intentions, the over-centralizing of power makes decision making without genuine consultation increasingly convenient. As a result, fewer and fewer voices are heard. Inevitably mistakes are made and people and groups are alienated. We are hardly the worst offenders but that is beside the point. This style may work for the other parties but it is ill suited for the Ontario Liberal Party whose calling card is driving consensus and solving problems, let alone good governance of a large, complex province like Ontario.

It's time "forward together" leaves nobody behind.
 

Harinder Takhar - In It To Win

The standard theory of Takhar’s candidacy is that he’s running to consolidate his power within the party, and guarantee himself a cabinet post under the new premier.

 

Takhar, meanwhile, says he’s running to win.

 

             - Michael Bryant

 

Seven individuals are running to become the next Leader of the Ontario Liberal Party and Premier.

 

It's a fascinating race with a remarkable slate of candidates, each bringing with them tons of experience amassed inside and outside of government.  It also happens to a be remarkably diverse slate, as far as traditional politics goes; there are two women candidates, two openly-gay candidates, a candidate with a physical impairment (that makes zero difference in their ability to do the job they're running for) and of course, the first Sikh candidate of South Asian descent, Harinder Takhar.

 

From the get-go, there have been clear front-runners, some wild cards and one self-described "dark horse."  A couple of candidates that were not given much consideration at the outset have run campaigns that demand attention.  Nobody following the race questions any of the candidates' commitment to win - unless that candidate is Takhar.

 

Why is this?  Like all the other candidates, Takhar had to raise funds and collect names to earn a seat at the table.  He's also gone to the trouble of fleshing out policy ideas and is out there now, pressing the flesh, sharing his ideas and listening to those of others - just like all the other candidates.  That's a lot of effort if you're really just vying to be the next Minister of Finance. 

 

Having spent some time around politics and worked on a few campaigns over the years, I can't believe that anyone would do any of this unless they were seriously trying to win - especially if they've been through the process before.  Politics isn't an occupation, it's a lifestyle; you do it because you're driven to.

 

So - if Takhar truly is running to win, why are people doubting him?  Nobody has suggested that any of the other lesser-known candidates are just looking to play king/queen-maker.  The answer, I think, is as predictable as it is uncomfortable.  Just as most of us will automatically think "he" when someone is talking about a doctor or "she" if they're discussing a teacher, we all have something of a preconceived notion of what a leader should "look" like.  It's s bit like labeling a peach-coloured crayon "skin-tone"; we don't often stop to think outside our personal boxes until we are challenged to do so. 

 

Not that long ago, few of the candidates in the running would have been taken seriously by the majority of voters.  Times have changed and will continue to change, but it still takes trailblazers to increase our opportunities by demonstrating what is possible.

 

By seriously running a serious campaign, Takhar is just such a trailblazer.  However well he does in his bid to be leader, Takhar is opening the door for future generations of potential Premiers from across the ethno-cultural spectrum, helping them maximize their personal potential by expanding the opportunities available to them and providing a role model.  As our current Premier once said, it shouldn't matter "where you come from, but what you find along the way."

 

The more trailblazers like Takhar can broaden our perception of what a leader can look like, the closer we get to a point where we really aren't subconsciously judging candidates on the colour of their skin, their gender, religion or sexual preference, but by the content of their character, the power of their vision and their ability to inspire others to follow where they lead.

 

There are seven individuals running to become the next Leader of the Ontario Liberal Party and Premier. 

 

May the best person win. 

 

Is Ontario In the Closet about Stigma?

Still, some 20 per cent of Ontario residents surveyed opposed gays running for elected office.  Among evangelical Christians, barely one-third supported gays in politics.

It's a sad fact, but homophobia still plays a role in politics; so do racism and gender-bias, among other stigmas.  Sheila Copps was regularly dismissed in a way she never would have been if she were male.  There are still plenty of folk in the United States who simply refuse to accept the notion of a black president and try to confabulate reasons why  Obama can't be legit.  

At the same time, Sheila Copps was an elected politician; POTUS Obama was just elected for a second term.  There was a time when women weren't allowed to vote and black men were enslaved.  In the Ontario Liberal leadership race, there are candidates who are gay, who are women, who are visible minorities - there's even one with a physical disability.  These accomplishments are significant victories that have been hard-won and need to be vigorously maintained, but we're headed in the right direction. 

I have enormous respect for trailblazers who refuse to believe there are certain positions that are simply off-limits to some and choose not to accept that some blatantly stigmatic attitudes aren't worth challenging.  In changing society's perceptions, these outliers enrich us all by forcing us to think more broadly.  Some of them make excellent leaders, given the opportunity.

Discrimination is like wine (easy to consume but leaves a nasty hangover) but with time, in iterations, it's being watered down by experience and understanding.  Stigmas are the same as any phobia - they can be overcome, but only when confronted.  

Or as one famously disabled politician once said, "we have nothing to fear but fear itself."

UPDATE:



"The iPhone maker will argue that gay marriage bans in 41 states are a detriment to workplace morale, harm employees and undermine recruiting, according to Bloomberg."

Telling.

Proactive Mental Health in Ontario

A good start would be proactive care to stop health problems before they become seriously expensive.

Hmm... how do you consciously get ahead of the healthcare challenges crippling our workforce and weighing down both families and provincial fiances today?

Can you create new jobs and improve productivity and innovation through the same process, killing two birds with one stone?

Something to think about, eh?

What Do I Think Of Gerard Kennedy?

 

Mr. Kennedy comes from decades of activism, both in and out of politics.

 

He began by running food banks in Edmonton and Toronto for 13 years.

 

 

In politics, loyalty is everything.  It's hard to earn, even harder to maintain.  So, when you have a "lone wolf" and "non-team player" who manages to retain the loyalty of some pretty capable and in-demand people over years, that tells you something. 

 

Kennedy isn't a hard guy to like; he listens, he cares, he's charming in a low-key way.  He also makes time for people, even when they don't necessarily have anything to offer him in return.  It's just the way he is.  Not that long ago, Kennedy took the time to sit down with me, a complete stranger, to listen to my ideas for a social enterprise and offer advice.  Not only did he give some useful direction, he also put me in touch with some partners that have become invaluable.  That's not something I'll forget, and I'm hardly the only person he's helped in this way. 

 

One thing that is true about Kennedy; he is demanding.  He's not a yeller, like some politicians are, nor does he employ passive-aggressive techniques to get his staff to bend to his will.  What Kennedy does is push his people to reach higher.  He's a big thinker - he connects dots in ways that others might not think to do.  That's not a bad thing - we've done the elect the simple message guy thing recently and ended up with Rob Ford.   Friends of mine who've served on Kennedy's team in the past say it's always a challenge working with him, but a rewarding one.  And again, they continue to back him, which speaks to his character.

 

Also worth noting - Kennedy has been labeled "the man who gave Liberals Dion" because he threw in his support behind the second-last Liberal Leader to be driven into the ground by Stephen Harper's attack machine.  Look at the picture to the right - Kennedy wasn't the only one who thought Dion was worth giving a shot.  What if, for argument's sake, he'd backed Ignatieff?  He didn't work out so well, either.  In fact, if the last two losses have taught Liberals anything, it should be that we have structural problems that need addressed - we have to stop pinning all our hopes and all the blame on our leaders and step up our game at every level.  We have to take collective responsibility for our Party if we want to continue offering positive solutions and making meaningful differences in our society.

 

Last thing - people are telling us that GK has political losses under his belt and is therefore doomed to fail again.  I flatly reject that notion, because it isn't a Liberal one.  Yes, politics is an aggressive survival-of-the-fittest game and any weakness is sure to be exploited by opponents, but our political system is the foundation around which our whole society is built.  Are we going to tell people who have been fired from their jobs that they are worthless, move on?  Do we tell students who fail tests to give up because they've proven they're not up to the job?  Should we hand our veterans lump-sum cheques and tell them they're on their own?  Stephen Harper won by being the deadliest player on the field; look where it's landed our country.

 

I am fundamentally opposed to the idea of writing people off - that's not what a responsible society does.  The reason we fall is so we can learn to pull ourselves back up - society and government is the hand that guides.  That's not what's happening now and our society is suffering for it.  We deserve better than that.  We need better than that.  Leaders lead by example; if Liberals truly believe that everyone has something positive to offer, we can't write anyone off as having outlived their usefulness.

 

We have some amazing candidates who've put their names in the race to lead the Ontario Liberal Party - the province will gain no matter which one wins.  I love the fact that the three front-runners have a solid background in education and social justice, as well as experience working in or interacting with the business sector.  Remember that Tim Hudak has no professional experience out of politics, period.  He has no track-record of success to run on and his bluster has so far done nothing but polarize Ontarians and grind our Legislature to a halt. 

 

Liberals at both levels are faced with a generational challenge - to focus strictly on the win and turn ourselves into a mean political machine like Harper's Conservatives, or aim to be something that reflects the values we hold dear - the values of Canadians.  We will not win by seeking to demolish the opposition; that's the game Hudak and Harper are playing and it's one that's hurting our country.

 

At both the federal and provincial levels, we win when our communities win, when we put the people, not the Party, first.  We won't find success through dividing and conquering, but by moving forward together.

 

 

A CONSCIOUS SOCIETY: Post-Secondary Education

Ideas for a Conscious Society

I'd love to hear your ideas and opinions; please drop them in the comments section or build your own platform!

POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION

Here's a fact - people entering the workforce today are less likely to hold one job their whole lives than any generation previous. Not only will tomorow's employees cycle through multiple jobs; those jobs will straddle completely different employment sectors.  Core competencies today need to be more nuanced to stand out among tough competition but equally broad enough to be applicable to various fields.  The only way to build that kind of organic flexibility is for the workforce to have more direct ownership of its own labour.  The employers of tomorrow will be more like teachers than CEOs, motivating success rather than simply paying for it.

While the importance of education will only increase, it will no longer be enough for students to learn one or even two trades in post-secondary institutions, a process that with the traditional model would see them amass debts that would burden them for years. Workers need to be able to adjust rapidly to changing work conditions and opportunities, rebranding their skills and themselves multiple times over their careers.

That level of flexibility can only be built around a core of confident self-worth and an intuitive, communicable understanding of one's values.

Post secondary education needs to go beyond today's specialized information dump model and nurture sales skills, critical thinking, resiliency and above all, critical communication skills.

The nature of certification needs to change, too. While job postings might refer to "education or equivalent experience" there's no question that education trumps.  Employers rightly feel more comfortable knowing that a potential employee's skills have been certified by a reliable body.

Having said that, the Internet has changed the way information is distributed and absorbed. Varied life and work experiences provide valuable skills by osmosis. There are likely thousands of self-taught individuals who, with a bit of direction and some additional learning, could be adding greater value to our economy in high-need fields.

The hurdle they face is that we tie certification for specialization to specific curriculum.  Even the Second Career program, while a great concept, occasionally puts people in the position of having to replicate the wheel in order to get their papers.   Degrees in a given field obtained from different institutions will result in slightly differing skill sets, but all degree holders will equally be considered professionals. 

We need to uncouple certification from traditional education and make it easier for people to get recognition for the skills they have amassed and creating more opportunities for them to get work in their trades of choice.

Where's the best place to enact these changes and provide these opportunities? Online. We're already offering public services online. The US has a Road Map to create an entire digital government. Innovative post-secondary institutions are embracing both the possibility of online content and the opportunity to crowdsource ideas and engage students where they are - on Twitter, Facebook, Pinterest, etc.

Government must lead the way and empower greater online training and data exchange - an important step in transition positioning Ontario for success in the knowledge economy.

BEST PRACTICES:

- Laurentian University is truly embracing the potential of online student and stakeholder engagement.

- UExperience is leading the way in personalized education, helping their students internalize the skills they need to build careers that will engage them.