[d at DCC] Lobbying, including inside of parties...

[Scott Elcomb]

On 8/24/06, Robert Smits <bob at rsmits.ca> wrote:
>
> >    I now believe that the best option is to collaborate with members of
> > every political party, sitting or not, such that our views become the
> > consensus of the government regardless of what the constitution is.  I
> > really believe that the problem is not that the government disagrees
> > with us, but that the government is generally mis-informed.
> >
>
> As a table officer of the BC NDP I must say that I agree with Russell on this
> issue. We need to get people in all parties to understand the issues so that
> solving the problem becomes non-partisan, if possible.  That isn't to say you
> can expect political parties to be non-partisan, but that broad general
> support for an issue can override political differences.

I can accept the point of view, but my lack of first (or even second)
hand knowledge of the day-to-day operations of political parties makes
me a bit skeptical.  Not in a bad way, I'm just having a hard time
seeing the other party's becoming actively involved.

FWIW, I'm glad you're hear discussing the matter - and taking steps to
ensure others in your party get a chance to listen.

> Next week I'll be travelling to the Federal NDP Convention in Quebec City,
> where my federal riding association has asked for the following resolution to
> be adopted, to put the NDP firmly on the side of the good guys. We recognize
> that there are some things in the resolution that could have been worded
> better, but we hope to work that out at convention.

It's a step in the right direction.  Best of luck with your efforts.

> The last comment is that it is extraordinarily difficult to get someone
> elected to Parliament in Canada. It takes enormous amounts of energy, money
> and volunteers to elect an MP, and it would be very unlikely to elect a
> "Pirate MP" in Canada. The Greens have a much broader appeal, and they
> haven't been able to do it, either. Therefore, to win on this issue requires
> that Liberals, Conservatives, the NDP and the Bloc all be persuaded of the
> merits of our position on copyright.

Again, I think the non-partisan approach is great.  My opinion is that
it's incomplete, but that's my problem - not the people's.

Regarding the Pirate Party, even more of an issue than the minimalist
agenda is their choice of name.  The "young'uns" might get a kick out
it, but those with reputations (and/or reason to worry about the media
or other public associations) probably don't.

For me, the study of Open Source led to the study of Copyright.  The
study of Copyright led to Intellectual Property.  Intellectual
Property led to Politics.

Before I was effectively forced to take some sick-leave from work, I
was in a conversation with members of our senior leadership team
during a business trip.  I was asked what I wanted to do in 5-10
years.

The people whom I was with (and whom I respect greatly; they've been
my teachers for the last 4 years) were taken completely aback when I
said I wanted to be in politics.

Maybe it's time I start hunting for some onlice Political Science courses?

-- 
Scott Elcomb
http://atomos.sourceforge.net/
http://search.cpan.org/~selcomb/SAL-3.03/
http://psema4.googlepages.com/

"In matters of style, swim with the current; in matters of principle,
stand like a rock."

  - Thomas Jefferson