The official report from the New Democratic Party review panel about why the party lost the 2013 provincial election has no mention of the word 鈥減ipeline.鈥�
It鈥檚 like reporting the sinking of the Titanic and leaving out any mention of 鈥渋ceberg.鈥�
It鈥檚 a classic piece of committee work. They tackled what is to most members a very offensive topic 鈥� how the party blew a sure thing and lost the election 鈥� and tried to be as inoffensive as possible.
So when it came to leader Adrian Dix鈥檚 decision to change course and oppose all pipelines to the coast 鈥� a move many think was a key blunder 鈥� the safest course was to just leave that out.
The committee members take the most dramatic political story of the decade and turn it into a bland series of observations about assorted failures on the part of the campaign. Nowhere does it feel as if they have taken the hammer they were given and hit any of the nails in front of them squarely on the head.
You get a feel for their approach early on, when they credit party staff for being supportive of their work, and in the next breath point out that a key document was withheld for undisclosed reasons, and others were handed over so late as to be useless.
It also shines through in pages covering the run-up to the 2013 campaign. It recounts the story of how former premier Gordon Campbell was forced to resign as leader, but leaves out any mention of the NDP caucus mutiny that unseated former NDP leader Carole James a few weeks later.
There鈥檚 no telling whether that approach will get members through this weekend鈥檚 convention intact. Six months have passed, so maybe some of the anguish has abated and they鈥檙e ready to return to the good old 鈥渨ait until next time鈥� optimism.
They can be a fun-loving bunch, so maybe they鈥檒l just enjoy what鈥檚 being billed as 鈥渢he party to end all parties鈥� tonight and lose themselves in a good time. Or it could turn into the political equivalent of the Stanley Cup riot.
Only a fraction of the resolutions will get debated. Still, they give a clue as to what鈥檚 on the membership鈥檚 minds. And the biggest batch (93) is about 鈥渃onstitution and party affairs.鈥� A couple of hours of arguing over obscure sub-sections of the party鈥檚 constitution (there are no fewer than four motions on 鈥渞eaffirming the equity mandate鈥�) could rekindle all sorts of grievances.
Not to suggest they鈥檒l be burning police cars. But when you get 800 people together in one room, all of them dealing with profound disappointment in various ways, anything can happen.
Another potential flashpoint is the election of an executive. The 鈥淔orward鈥� group has mounted a determined effort to take over the party. This weekend will illustrate whether they have pushed too hard when it comes to renewal.
The big question to be resolved is how and when to go about replacing Dix. He and the executive want a spring leadership convention. But when they moved that motion at the 133-member provincial council meeting a few weeks ago, there was an uprising. The decision was put off, and is now expected to be made by the delegates this weekend. Setting a timetable will probably clear the decks.
It has been almost two months since Dix announced he was stepping down. Even with the uncertainty over the timing, it鈥檚 looking increasingly strange that not a single candidate has stepped up to try to succeed him.
Just So You Know: I worked after high school in a plywood mill and was an International Woodworkers of America member while Jack Munro, who died Friday, was president. I made enough money to buy a car and save up for university, and I鈥檓 thinking Munro had a lot to do with that.
Thanks, big guy.
