Former Liberal MP Garth Turner has abandoned his quest for a seat in the next election.

And in classic Garth Turner fashion, he blames everyone around him.

In doing so, he cements his legacy, not as a politician who merely lost, but as one who failed.

On CTV's Power Play, Tom Clark confronts Garth Turner on the question of why there was no nomination meeting.  Garth Turner has just finished making his claim that the reason there was no nomination meeting was that the Liberals did not want outspoken straight-talker Garth Turner in the party.  Tom Clark quotes DCFLA Membership Chair Janet Rosenstock who has claimed that the only reason a nomination meeting had not been held was that the riding was short nine new members, and that Garth Turner had failed to sign up these members.

Garth Turner calls Janet Rosenstock a liar, then he makes this statement:

"What's she's saying to you now is news to me."

Really?  He had no idea?  I spoke to people in the riding association, and here is what they say to be true.

The first meeting at which the question of signing up new members as a prerequisite for triggering a nomination meeting occurred on June 18.  The issue of the memberships was referenced in the minutes.  He was at the meeting, and at every subsequent meeting, and at each one the questions of memberships was brought up.

The last meeting happened on September 18 (Jeff May said it was September 17).  Garth Turner was there along with his supporters within the riding association, Lynda Kee, John Kee, Paul Flynn, Bill Snell and Neil Orford.  Again, the issue was raised.

The next meeting is October 15 (tomorrow) but it is not clear is Garth Turner plans to attend.  I'd expect the issue of memberships to be raised yet again.  You have to realize that the longer the riding association is forced to wait, the more difficult the problem becomes, since memberships expire, and even more members have to be signed up to account for the attrition.

If it is true that Garth Turner knew since June of his obligation to sign up members, and in four months failed to reach the goal, then the problem has gotten progressively worse for the next nominee.

Janet Rosenstock was interviewed by CTV, and responded in detail regarding Garth Turner's allegation that he did know about the need to sign up nominees (or that he was short of the number required -- Garth Turner is not clear on just what exactly was "news" to him):

But Janet Rosenstock, the chair of the Dufferin-Caledon Federal Liberal Association, has a different story, saying Turner only needed nine more members to sign off on his candidacy for a nomination meeting to be called.

Turner called Rosenstock's version "incorrect" but did not go into details.

In an email to CTV.ca, Rosenstock responded to Turner's statement and said Turner was told a nomination meeting could be held as soon as the riding reached the required membership level.

"I am not misinformed. Mr. Turner simply does not listen. He was first informed of the necessary number (of members needed) on June 18th," she said.

Additionally, Dufferin-Caledon Federal Liberal Association president Jeff May told CTV News in an email that Turner was informed on Sept. 17 that he just needed a few more members for a nomination meeting to be called.

"Neither he nor his team brought any new members to the Association between that statement and his 'resignation,'" May wrote.

Garth Turner "simply does not listen".  Ouch.  I doubt Garth Turner enjoys being contemptuously dismissed like that.

You know, if Garth Turner had simply returned to private life after the 2008 election, he would have gone out as a politician who had lost.

That's ok.  Most politicians go out that way.  You try your best and you lose.  It happens to everyone eventually.

Now, Garth Turner will return to private life, yet again, but this time as a politician who failed.

Talking to Michael Ignatieff?  In his bitter final blog posting, Garth Turner claims that "today I informed the leader of my resignation."  Tom Clark asked Garth Turner if he spoken to Michael Ignatieff.  Garth Turner paused and said he had corresponded with him.

Ah, so he emailed Michael Ignatieff.  Gee, I could do that.  Michael Ignatieff's email address is right on here, on his MP's page.

So Garth Turner and Michael Ignatieff exchanged emails?  Is Garth Turner sure about that?  I mean, Michael Ignatieff has people on staff whose job it is to respond to trivial emails.  Michael Ignatieff might be interested in a confirmed candidate resigning, but a nominee dropping out of the race to be a candidate?  I just don't see that as being on Michael Ignatieff's radar.

Uncomfortable next meeting: For those members of the riding association who invested so much personal capital in recruiting Garth Turner, only to have him quit, and to take potshots at Michael Ignatieff as he left, there is likely to be some uncomfortable stares from around the table at tomorrow's riding association meeting.  It's one thing to bring in a candidate who loses, and another thing to bring in one who fails.  But to bring in one who hurts the party even as he fails?  Oh, yes.  Many uncomfortable stares...if not worse.

What doesn't Garth Turner understand?  From the Liberal blog Muskoka Liblog, this intriguing post: "Garth Turner doesn't understand how nomination meetings work".  But the post has been deleted.  Too bad.  I would like to know what a Liberal has to say about this.

Posted by: Steve Janke at 01:32 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 947 words, total size 7 kb.