Will the PLP’s Central Committee be able to circumvent a legal barrier that could shift the vote count in their party leadership election? …or could the road get even bumpier as the matter returns to court tomorrow?
The PLP’s internal leadership election has spilled over into the public arena after contender Curtis Dickinson successfully sought a legal pause to new membership rules.
Now, the question is whether the Central Committee will successfully circumvent his action, which may affect his votes in the upcoming ballot… or could any attempt to circumvent be seen as legally problematic?
At a PLP Central Committee meeting on August 24th, Premier and PLP Leader David Burt proposed amendments which could prevent former candidates or supporters of other parties from becoming PLP members in the short term.
We understand there was a second proposal that new members must wait at least a year before they can vote in a leadership election.
This is widely seen as targeting some of the new members supporting Curtis Dickinson, rumoured to be former OBA supporters.
However, Curtis Dickinson launched legal action on Friday and obtained an interim injunction against party executives, arguing that it was against the party’s constitution for the Central Committee to change membership rules in this way.
The Central Committee held an emergency meeting last night, where we understand they voted to hold a Special Delegates Conference in a few days to vote on the proposed membership amendments – a vote which would be in line with the constitution.
Insiders tell us that the majority of those attending the recent meetings voted in favour of the membership changes – both last week and last night – and that this should be reflected at an SDC.
However, if the injunction acquired by Mr Dickinson prevents the party from taking any action to further the August 24th membership proposals, will his campaign argue that trying to hold an SDC now to validate those same proposals will violate such an injunction?
This is in line with some of the legal commentary coming to our newsroom.
On the other hand, can it be argued that the Central Committee is able take certain actions it deems necessary in the interest of the party?
All of this may beg the question as to why the PLP leadership did not simply call a Special Delegates Conference on this matter in the first place…
The PLP has been very clear that the current party leadership race between Jason Hayward, a long-time Cabinet member alongside Premier David Burt, and former Finance Minister Curtis Dickinson, is an internal matter.
This leaves the public and the media to seek inside sources or explore informed speculation on the proceedings.
The Royal Gazette reports that an internal message from Premier David Burt cited concerns that the party is “at risk of tearing itself apart”.
We understand that further concerns have been raised about the financial liability of PLP Chair Dawn Simmons and PLP Secretary General Patricia Basden, who were directly named as defendents in the action brought by Curtis Dickinson and his campaign.
The PLP Constitution does appear to indemnify officers of the party against all losses and expenses they may incur in the discharge of their duties.
In a release following the legal action, Curtis Dickinson’s campaign office stated that the action had been taken “with great reluctance and only after genuine efforts were made to resolve the matter respectfully within the Party…
“Those named in the action are named solely because of the offices they hold.”
The matter is expected to be back in court tomorrow.
