A good post from MenonRRR, which I reproduce in its entirety, in response to MikePalecek’s Substack:

A long time NDP member. Here are my suggestions:

1. The NDP needs to clearly differentiate itself with bold, unapologetic progressive positions that cannot be co-opted by the Liberals.
2. Build stronger local riding associations, recruit diverse candidates, and invest in grassroots organizing.
3. Position the NDP as the party of real change, focusing on affordability, anti-corporate sentiment, and electoral reforms.
4. The next party leader should be bold, progressive, and, most importantly, disciplined, even willing to discipline their own Members of Parliament to rebuild trust among party members and Canadians.
5. Tailor regional messages and addressing them. For example, economic justice for Alberta, secular progressive in Quebec, economic sustainability for the North.
6. Accountability on Liberals. Be more aggressive in drawing red lines and showing what was only possible because of NDP pressure.

Here is my response:

Overall (also as a longtime NDP member) I agree with these, but I have some comments.

First, any position can be co-opted by another party. If the position is of any worth, we *want* it to be co-opted by other parties. Where we differentiate ourselves is in the *consistency* of advocacy for high-quality positions. That doesn’t mean we never change our views; the world changes, we change. It means, though, that we have a true North Star that guides us, and we don’t just flap in the breeze. That was one of Jagmeet’s greatest failings (IMO). We didn’t know what he stood for, and ultimately he stood for nothing.

Second, we should position ourselves not as a party of ‘change’ necessarily, but as a party of values. We know what we stand for, and yes, it is most likely a change from the current system, but we’re going to change the things that need changing, and preserve that which needs preserving. Poilievre’s failure was in promising change and not really being clear about what that change was (mostly because it was it was change most Canadians would hate).

Third, I agree with the need to develop strong riding associations – that should be a top priority for a new leader. I also agree with the need to respect regional differences. But this is in contradiction with strong central party discipline. We need to have a clear understanding about what brings us together and at the same time respect the diversity that makes us strong. There’s more to be said here.

Fourth, we need to clearly *define* our core values. One strength of Carney’s message was that he could do this, and can still do this. We’ve been left by current leadership with a shambles in this regard; even New Democrats are not clear about what we stand for, much less outsiders. If it were me, I’d be basing a core program on values of diversity, openness, autonomy and cooperation. But this is just me, and I’d have more to save here, starting with this: https://www.downes.ca/vision.htm

Finally, I agree we need to hold the Liberal and other parties to account, though this should not become the focus of our party. This operates on two fronts. First, we should hold them to account with respect to their own values. Too often parties say one thing and do something else. We should work to keep them honest. Second, we should hold them to account with respect to our values. We don’t expect them to be like us, of course, but any time they undermine the rights, interests and needs of Canadians, as described clearly through our own values and policies, we should hold them to account. Anything else is trivial, and should be ignored as a distraction.

What this collectively builds is trust that we stand for something and will do what we say, skill and capability to organize: first, ourselves, and then second, a government.