They want you to vote them into government but an internal dispute seems to be showing the BC Conservatives are having trouble running their own party.

After sending members an email urging a "yes" vote in a leadership review party vice president Ben Besler is at it again.

Besler has sent another email to members calling out leader John Cummins for getting paid four thousand dollars a month from a party with limited funds.

Besler goes on to say after steady growth of constituency associations,  they are now not only stagnating,  but some are resigning en masse in protest of the party leadership.

On the other side board member Al Siebring , who is running for party resident, sent out his own email blasting Besler cohort John Crocock and by extension Besler himself.

Siebring says the two are fomenting discontent and working behind the backs of the board in general.

He adds the last thing the party needs right now is a leadership review.

A vote of 50-percent plus one in the review would trigger a leadership race.

The leadership review votes will be counted at the party's A-G-M on September 22nd.

-------

Email in full from Ben Besler

Hello, BC Conservative Members

 The feedback I’ve been getting from my address to the membership, this past week, has been positive in the fact that I have had a chance to clear up issues relating to party communication and administration that have been weighing heavy this past term.

 It seems as though there are issues affecting our party that many of you had wished the respect of knowing sooner, but were not privy to.

Please let me clarify, too, that my intent on bringing to light party matters and the encouragement to vote yes in the leadership review, is that this party can ensure a strong success in the next general election.

 Although you may not be aware, it has been made public knowledge, that our party has limited funds and has weekend its ability to raise funds this term. In fact, last month our expenses were twice that of funds raised. With this in mind, in a vote that was not permitted to go to secret ballot at a board meeting, by our party president Reed Elley when asked for; and in contrast to our one MLA putting up his own money to fight the BC Rail case. John Cummins is now taking$4000.00 per month, plus his expenses, of the party’s limited resources, to add to his extremely high personal income, at a time when we need every resource possible to fight the next general election. With this in mind, we must ask ourselves what the motivation of the leadership of this party is when we have not seen, although we have gone through two by-elections, one workshop to train our volunteers in election readiness. When we had seen the growth of this party’s organisation develop, on an average rate at one Constituency Association (CA) every two weeks from 2010-2011, to a stagnant term where CAs have now resigned and dissolved. To the inability to provide in many instances a positive work environment, respect to volunteers, and a proper channel of communication to you our CA presidents and local representatives.

The fact of the matter is that we will not be relevant in the next election, even in times like these, through a campaign of press releases and limited resources.

 I hope this brings more clarification to recent statements.

 If there are other items I can clear up, you can give me a private call.

 Ben Besler

Vice President

BC Conservative Party

--------

Email in full from Al Siebring

Good morning:

 These are certainly interesting time to be a BC Conservative. 

 We have an AGM coming up in Langley next month; probably the single most important event in the history of  our party since its' rejuvenation under John Cummins' leadership.

 This email is primarily to let you know that I am running for President of the Party, and that I would very much appreciate your support in that endeavour.   I believe I have demonstrated a proven track record of leadership on the Board this past year, particularly in my roles as the Chair of the Province-wide Policy Committee, and now the Platform Committee as we head into the May election.  Those of you who have dealt with me directly know that I listen, consult, collaborate, and work toward consensus wherever possible.  These are skills which, it would seem, are badly needed within our Party right now.

 Which brings me to my second point.  You likely received an email early yesterday from one John Crocock, a director-at-large on our Board, in which he urges a vote in favour of a "leadership review" in advance of the AGM.

 First of all, you should know that Mr. Crocock does not speak for the Board.  We had no idea it was being sent out.  The fact is that when he and his single ally on the Board tried to get access to the full party membership database earlier this month - apparently, in hindsight, so they could spread their message of dissension - they were roundly denied.  There were only two votes in favour of that motion. 

 However this email, (the one you're reading right now), is going out with the full knowledge of the vast majority of the Board.  Every one of them got a copy in advance, and not a single one of them urged me not to send it.

 As to the substance of Mr. Crocock's comments, there truly is none.  He claims to have been "getting a lot of phone calls" from members who are somehow upset with the direction of the Party.   If this is true, he's pretty much the only one.  I haven't received any communication of this kind, and I have taken a fairly high profile in my various roles with the Policy and Platform Committees; I'm certainly not inaccessible.

 Further, Mr. Crocock seems to question some of the decisions of the Board.  I would remind you that he has been a member of that Board for almost a full year, and as I've reviewed the minutes of recent our Board meetings, he has not asked for a single "recorded" negative vote on a single issues that has come before us.  And most of the motions he has made in the last 6 to 8 months have "carried".  So for him to criticize decisions that he was an an integral part of seems disingenuous at best, downright dishonest at worst. 

 The bottom line, folks, is that the last thing we need right now is a "leadership review".   John Cummins has taken this Party from getting less than 5% of the vote in the last election to the point where we are now consistently in the low 20% range.  We are tied with the governing Liberals, and the trending has us pulling ahead in the next few months.  Suggesting that we change leaders when we in the midst of this kind of success curve is absolute madness. 

 Even the imploding BC Liberals recognize the folly of a leadership review this close to an election, and if any Party is in desperate need of new leadership, it's them!  Having a leadership race now would be a ridiculous waste of time, resources, and energy, all of which should be put toward fielding winning campaigns and candidates in next May's election.

 I had not intended to make John Cummins' leadership an issue in my run for President, and it certainly is not central to my ambitions for that position, but for the record, I will be supporting him 100%, and I urge you to do the same by voting "no" to the leadership review.

Al Siebring,
Director-at-Large