BC NDP Leadership: Order of preference

Finally! More, though not all expected, contenders for leadership of the BC NDP have entered the race.

Adrian Dix isn't expected to do so until next week. That is past the due date (January 17th) for new members whose votes can affect the leadership race.

That January 17th deadline irks me to no end. It has affected my decision with respect to which of the two parties I will sign up for membership in order to cast a vote for its leader. My preference would have been the NDP. However, the deadline has given me and other reflective British Columbians no time to assess currently absent detailed policy or leadership styles; whereas the longer leadership period of the Liberals has. Ergo, unless a scientific miracle happens, I'll be signing up for a Liberal membership.¹

As with the selection of leader of the BC Liberals, how NDP candidates stand on the following three issues will shape my decision:

Democratic reform. Support for greater independence and return of powers to local governments (candidates are ignoring this, yet it's the most crucial of democratic reforms), outreach and meaningful engagement with the public, resumption of powers to MLAs, open government, electoral reform.

Taxation policy. Smartly applied carrot-and-stick consumption taxes designed to guide consumer behaviour and a gradual reduction of earnings taxes, ultimately to zero. The latter punish enterprising activity, behaviour that should be encouraged. I favour the HST, a carbon tax with teeth and the proposed-then-rescinded 15 percent reduction in income tax for the middle-class. (I also favour the elimination of all corporate taxes provided that corporations no longer have person status; if they continue to be deemed in law as persons, then they can damn well pay income taxes like the rest of us.)

Climate change. Greening the economy, which must work in sync with the taxation policy. Greening the economy must include an effective carbon tax and cap 'n trade.

Given the dominant themes stated above and the scant information presently available (two candidates haven't yet websites), of the six current and expected contenders for the BC NDP leadership race, this is my present order of preference. I admit doing a dice throw for most. Absent policy, detailed or otherwise, doesn't help.

1. John Horgan. He has the nicest website of all candidates, of either party. That visual communication appears to be part of an overall communications strategy, with good engagement by Horgan and his team on Twitter and Facebook. Would be nice to have an Islander heading the party.
   ETA Jan 15 8:15a: In the Globe and Mail, Horgan is described as "a Roy Romanow kind of New Democrat." I'd take that as a compliment, John. In fact, it's enough for me to move you up to 1st place and to move Larsen down to your old 3rd place spot.
2. Mike Farnworth. His leadership announcement contained the most substance. I like the suggestion of using carbon tax to fund public transportation alternatives, his emphasis on sustainability (does he support Sustainable BC?). The call for a commission on education sounds nice and is getting a lot of play in the media. However, as with all commissions, committees, consultations, town halls, inquiries... unless their recommendations are given teeth, they are meaningless.
3. Dana Larsen. I've a soft spot for rebels, nonconformists and people who push the status quo. I also like Larsen's platform. (OK, it's more that he has one.)
4. Nicholas Simons. Not enough information to make a judgement.
5. Harry Lali. Hasn't a website, so I've no idea what he stands for.
6. Adrian Dix. Hasn't yet entered the race.

¹That I'll soon become a big 'L' liberal has me shaking my head. Don't recall ever voting Liberal, federally or provincially, during my 40 years as an eligible and dedicated voter; I've voted Progressive Conservative, NDP, Independent or Green. But this is an important opportunity to participate, directly, in choosing the next Premier of this province. It's an opportunity I'm not going to pass up. Who will I vote for? Don't know yet. Stay tuned!

Recommend this post

BCNDP New Member Deadline Dissuades New Members

Any non-members of the BC NDP who want to have a say on the party's new leader - who will be elected April 17th - must sign up for membership in the party by January 17th.

So far, the only declared "heavy-hitter" in the leadership race (according to insiders) has been John Horgan, who announced his intention January 10th. Other 'heavy hitters' rumoured to enter but yet to declare are Adrian Dix and Mike Farnworth. (Just caught on Twitter: Farnworth is set to announce tomorrow.)

From the perspective of seriously interested nonpartisans, undecideds, dissatisfied members of other parties, and so on, the timing for membership sign-up to the BC NDP is abysmal.

All these would have to happen before I, for example, took the step and became a party member:

1. All men and women who had intended to declare for leader had done so
2. All leadership contenders had set out, in clear form, their proposed policies
3. All leadership contenders would have debated one another at least twice; i.e., at All Candidates Meetings
4. All leadership contenders would have had reasonable time to respond to questions I (and others) had asked to them
5. Given all the above, I'd have had time to reflect

The timing of the new membership deadline makes all but #1 impossible and #2 unlikely. One can only assume that the BC NDP does not want new blood or fresh ideas, that it does not want new people who would make decisions on selection of a leader or, for that matter, selection of a party for membership, so seriously and thoughtfully.

Therefore, I suppose that people such as myself are left to change the channel back to the leadership race of the BC Liberals. As for the NDP, whoever the current membership of the party choose, it is likely that he or she, together with the current provincial council, will conduct business pretty much as usual.

ETA: This man's run for the BC NDP leadership would seriously interest me.

Recommend this post

Simplistic Interpretation of Female Support Shift

I take exception to Keith Baldrey's simplistic interpretation of why female voters will play a key role in the next BC election - not that they will, but why their support may be shifting from the NDP to the Liberals.

According to Baldrey (chief political reporter for Global BC - oh dear!), one of the pillars pushing women's support away from the NDP is "the brutal take-down of a female leader" by members of that party.

I submit the reason instead to be the problems with the NDP leadership, provincial council and other internal machinery.

Baldrey's second pillar is squeezing that former NDP female support toward the Liberals.

were [Liberal leadership candidate Christy Clark] to become premier it is likely the Liberals would stand a good chance of corralling a huge chunk of the electorate denied them in the past. I suspect Clark appeals to a lot of young and middle-aged women voters...

Why? Because she's a woman?

Women have been voting for men for decades.

We also don't vote as a block. Women don't vote on the basis of gender but on a candidate's ability to represent the values and concerns that each female voter deems important. Just because a candidate wears a skirt doesn't mean she shares another woman's concerns.

As for female support leaving the NDP, Baldrey has more to say:

The NDP has long prided itself as a champion of the interests of women, and it even implemented an affirmative action policy to ensure more female candidates in the last election. But it is now seen as the party that undemocratically turfed a female leader, and it will undoubtedly elect a man to succeed Carole James.

In fact, it will be interesting to see if any women even run for the NDP leadership... If none do, it will be a stunning commentary about the party's true commitment to the interests of women.

Traditionally, the NDP has drawn more female voters than have the Liberals. According to Baldrey's logic, that must mean the NDP has always had female leaders.

As for that "stunning commentary about the party's true commitment to the interests of women" should no female candidate for leader come forward... again there haven't always been female leaders or female candidates for leader.

Should we construe from this that the party has never previously had a commitment to the interests of women? And does it have such an animal now - specifically to women, rather than to people, men or women, who share similar concerns?

Putting Baldrey's simplistic interpretation of the situation aside, women are more likely leaving the NDP because they see, as many men have seen, that trouble is a-brewing. A party that can't manage itself shouldn't be given a mandate to manage a government.

As for Clark's alleged appeal to an alleged mysterious block of women because she's a woman, I suggest instead that the appeal is her (again, alleged) outsider status to the Campbell government. That appeal has drawn interest from both men and women and as more becomes known of Clark's background and (absent) policy, that interest will again likely shift.

Recommend this post

BC's Political Scene: Voting age hypocrisy

For decades I have supported lowering the voting age to 16 for election of officials to all levels of government. I might even support lowering it to 14.

This week BC Liberal leadership hopeful Mike de Jong was first out of the gate with the proposal to lower the voting age in this province to 16. None of the arguments against the change have borne up, not even under the most halfhearted scrutiny.

The No side's primary objections: that 16-year-olds are immature, lack the skills to think critically and cannot form opinions independent of the influence of others (isn't the latter what political campaigns and mid-term communications strategies are about? - peddling influence?).

I recently suggested that those 18plus-year-olds who are slagging 16-year-olds observe their own chatter in terms of maturity, critical thinking, independent opinion... In other words, pot meet kettle.

I leave it to another to flesh out why lowering the voting age makes sense and to rebut the nonsense arguments of the naysayers. For me the bottom line is this:

The BC NDP allows members as young as 12 years old to vote for the party's leader. The BC Liberal Party permits 14-year-old members to vote for leader. Therefore, anyone against lowering the voting age to 16 who also runs as a candidate on behalf of the NDP or Liberals - for party leader or for a MLA spot - is a hypocrite.

Recommend this post

BC's Political Scene: The 'family values' theme

A few recurring themes have come up in the Twitter stream regarding the BC Liberal leadership race.

First is the nauseating use by leadership contenders of the 'families first' or 'focus on family' theme.

It is meaningless fluff intended to make people feel good.

Somewhere, sometime, someone (likely Frank Luntz) did a 'focus group' and determined that family could be a key into manipulating public opinion. That the family mantra leaves so many Canadians cold appears to have been overlooked by our politicos.

A more appropriate theme than family values (whatever the hell those are) would be community, specifically returning power and autonomy to local governments.

Communities are, after all, where families live. If communities were not so strapped for funding, or limited in terms of areas of responsibility and means to raise funding, then fewer families would be struggling.

The biggest problem facing communities is that of autonomy or the reluctance of upper tier governments to return power to them, the result of which has been communities with their hearts wrung out. Senior governments dictate one-size-fits-all policies for problems which they, and not locals, identify. Then they dribble money attached to those policies to a few lucky municipalities.

This typifies the funding problem. Money is attached to top-tier policy while the needs of communities, all unique, rise up from the bottom where families live.

So I say to Liberal (and future NDP) leadership candidates: Enough with 'families first' or 'focus on family' talk. Let's talk communities.

Recommend this post

Responsibility and Leadership - UPDATE

Here is the audio video version of today's resignation speech and scrum by BC NDP leader Carole James.


James: "I'll be stepping down..." from Sean Holman on Vimeo.

Nowhere does James take responsibility or ownership of problems faced by her party. Indeed, she may only have furthered the divisions by blaming the 13 MLAs - to whom she refers as "bullies" - who were calling for a OMOV leadership convention.

The message in James' scrum is that these "bullies" wouldn't toe the line that she dangled.

Around 13:35, someone asks (I think Sean Holman): "Do you think you bear any responsibility?"

James' answer: "No."

Another reporter follows up: "Do you think you could have done anything better?"

James' response is again denial.

I am surprised and disappointed she didn't take at least some ownership of her party's difficulties. That she took none is only further evidence that James should never have been leader of a political party.

Recommend this post

Carole James Resigns - UPDATE

Took bloody long enough.

Let the speculation begin!

Maybe now British Columbians will have viable options, including substantive policy, for which to vote at the polls.

Maybe now the Liberals will be challenged by public opinion regarding their leadership choice.

Maybe now public opinion, not just the opinions of party members, will sway the choices for both parties. Which is only right, given that the leader of the governing party will become the Premier of this province.

ETA: It's unhelpful that the labelling continues right in the midst of Carole James' resignation speech. Seemingly her resignation was "a win for the bullies."

Recommend this post

BC's Political Scene: Chaos

For political junkies, the political brouhaha in British Columbia surrounding our (currently) top two parties provides a high ride. Its end may not come before Spring 2013.

First, we have the NDP imploding with dissidents and loyalists fighting over leadership, democratic process and control. The labelling largely thrown by the 'loyalists' at the 'dissidents' is loathsome. The media of course has perpetuated it and so, therefore, has everyone else. Loyalist, dissident: it's all about perspective, people!

Second, we have the Liberals at the start of a leadership race, with Gordon Campbell having resigned the post he still, ahem, occupies.

Four candidates have officially declared: Former Cabinet Minister Dr. Moira Stilwell; Former Cabinet Minister George Abbott, who claims the support of 11 MLAs; Former Cabinet Minister Kevin Falcon, who also claims the support of 11 MLAs; and former Cabinet Minister Mike de Jung. You may detect a pattern.

Expected to announce her leadership bid this week is also Christy Clark, who once was a Cabinet Minister but resigned for 'family' reasons mid-term through the Liberals' second mandate and has been out of government for six years. Clark has huge name recognition, largely I suspect not because of her role in government but because of her role as a radio show host.

Clark consistently leads strongly over the declared candidates in public opinion polls. However, it isn't the public Clark needs to convince in a Liberal leadership race, but members of the party. Given Clark's comments on her radio show, some members of the current administration, including fellow leadership candidates, could bear a grudge. That said, if the party has learned anything, it will listen to what the public is saying, especially given that listening heads the campaign theme of the four declared candidates.

So now we have the leadership status of both the NDP and Liberals up in the air, not to mention the continued existence as we know it of one of those parties.

In terms of the Liberal race, we have Clark without a seat in the Legislature and thus looking for a safe one to occupy. She may get help on that score from one Gordon Campbell, who spoke yesterday of the awkwardness of current leaders having former leaders hanging around. While Campbell said he would wait to decide on resigning as a MLA, he did put the issue out there. Further, should his seat become empty, it wouldn't be hard to suppose it to be a safe seat for any future Liberal leader. Vancouver-Point Grey constituents are, after all, used to having a Premier as their MLA.

Now consider the Liberal race within the context of the NDP implosion.

If Had Carole James hangs hung on, then given the public damage that has been done to her leadership, together with other public exposures of NDP processes and powers, then even a new leader of the Liberal party with strong ties to the current administration would be likely to win in 2013. In other words, it is was doubtful a James-led NDP could win against the Liberals, regardless of who headed the latter.

Given current polls, if the Liberals were headed by Clark, there would be no doubt of a Liberal win against James. Further, should Clark be the new Liberal leader and she occupied the Vancouver-Point Grey seat vacated by Campbell, it is likely she would call a by-election or a snap election. In either case, it would be for the purpose of obtaining a clear mandate, given Clark had been out of government for six years.

If Carole James resigns and a new leader of the party emerges, however, then the NDP might stand a chance in 2013 if the new Liberal leader has strong ties to the current administration. But again, against Clark, the odds of a NDP success fall, especially if there's a snap election.

In any event, if James were replaced by a new NDP leader, the latter would have to, and be seen to, have done serious restructuring within the party - and quickly - and be charismatic, open and forthright with the people.

ETA: Carole James is to talk to the media at 11:00 a.m. Oh, the suspense! ...CKNW's Penny Daflos reports James is expected to resign.

ETA 11:00am: Carole James has resigned.

Recommend this post

In Defence of Jenny Kwan

Jenny Kwan, the BC NDP MLA who spoke out yesterday on behalf of true democratic process in her party... she, who thus ultimately spoke out on behalf of the people of British Columbia... That Jenny Kwan was lambasted today by the majority of guest commenters on the popular Bill Good Show.

One commenter accused Kwan of having been silent throughout her tenure as one of only two NDP MLAs sitting as Official Opposition from 2001 to 2005. The man's observation didn't mesh with mine. It was Kwan's feistiness during that period that first drew my attention to her.

Another commenter remarked that Kwan had done nothing useful over her 14 years as an MLA and that she had been a constant annoyance to the party. Worse, accused the man, he couldn't count the number of times Kwan had cried in public.

CRIED. IN PUBLIC.

How positively sinful!

How so much more appropriate that politicians endlessly express (manufactured) outrage - OUTRAGE, mind you -, that they bluster, shout, wave their arms about. I mean, really, that's so much more... what's the word I'm looking for... manly.

That Kwan has indeed been an MLA for 14 years; that 12 other MLAs in the party refused to don the famous yellow scarves two weeks ago (40 percent of the NDP caucus, in all); that MLAs, their constituency associations and their canvassers are more directly in touch with voters and their intentions... all these are irrelevant.

Why? Because the three governing institutions of the NDP have decreed it so. The party, they say, determines the leader. MLAs have nothing to say in the matter.

That suggests a major and fundamental flaw in either the party's constitution or its application.

Recommend this post

Local NDP Members Disgruntled By Carole James & Company

Since the 2009 election (crowning?) of this riding's NDP candidate and ultimately-elected MLA, Bill Routley, there has been a fracturing of the local NDP constituency association.

From this nonpartisan's point of view, I can see why. Our former NDP MLA, one DOUG Routley, was forever helpful. BILL Routley not so much. When a constituent (me) requested his assistance regarding a government service, there was no response. Doug, who moved one riding north, would have fallen over himself trying to help.

How many other constituents of Bill Routley have been left without a response from their MLA?

Then there were signals of undemocratic process during the nomination of Bill Routley to NDP candidacy and, later, underhandedness and a not-so-wholly-honest campaign during the 2009 provincial election. Rumours floated of the campaign using Bill's connections with high muckety mucks in BC's labour movement. Throughout, it appeared that campaigners were trying hard to trade on Doug's good reputation and to confuse locals into thinking it was the familiar Doug for whom they were voting, not Bill.

Another distinction between the two Routleys is that Bill supports Carole James. Doug, whose constituency association was calling for a leadership convention in 2011, hasn't outright opposed her leadership, but he also has refused to express his support or to wear one of those famous yellow scarves at last weekend's NDP gathering.

With past shenanigans and current goings-on, one might understand, therefore, why there could be some hard feelings among the (still?) NDP party faithful in the riding of Cowichan Valley.

Recently, Sharon Jackson, a local city Councillor and dedicated political and social campaigner, was attending a local event celebrating former NDP Premier Dave Barrett's 80th birthday.

Jackson wrote the following in an email sent to me and to others:

Carole James and her entourage were there... Pity; because of that, all the really interesting people left early.

I think Carole and Moe and their power hungry in-crowd are destroying the party and dooming us to another Liberal Government.

It will be interesting to see if Gordon Wilson makes a comeback.

It's a sad state of affairs for the locals. Many of the NDP faithful have been disenfranchised by recent events and the rest of us - well, the ones without appropriate connections - are left without an MLA who will work for them.

Related - BC NDP: Both Sides Out of Mouth Syndrome

Recommend this post

BC NDP Numbers Show Rift between Powerbrokers, Grassroots

During the weekend "showdown" over Carole James' leadership of the BC NDP, a clear difference in the divisions between party officials and the NDP caucus became evident.

Yes, James was approved as leader by 84 percent. This vote included members of the provincial party executive, other party officials, certain members of the federal NDP and a stacked number of delegates representing organized labour.*

NDP MLAs are not permitted to participate in such votes.

MLAs are the elected representatives of the people in their ridings. The NDP currently has 34 MLAs.

No report mentions whether all of the NDP's MLAs showed up at the weekend event. However, we know that 13 of them, almost 40 percent of the NDP caucus, outright opposed or refused to show support for James' leadership.

If MLAs care about keeping their jobs, they'll have their fingers on the pulse of their communities.

Perhaps those 13 MLAs know something that their party officials, big labour management and others who circle the party backroom don't.

* I hated, hated, hated when I was a union member having my membership used to support a specific party. Wouldn't have mattered what party. Such practice is wrong and anti-democratic.

Recommend this post

Ten Percent of Riding Associations and Growing

... is not "a few folks," Ms. James.

That's what Carole James intimated in a recent radio interview:

"There are always people who are going to be complainers, ... a few folks calling for change."

When her interviewer asks about a momentum of riding associations calling for an "outright leadership convention" in the Spring, James discounts it, says she's "not concerned at all."

James should be concerned.

Ten percent of NDP riding associations have passed resolutions calling for NDP MLA Bob Simpson to be returned to caucus.

• Powell River-Sunshine Coast
• West Kootenay-Boundary
• Nanaimo-North Cowichan
• Penticton
• Fraser-Nicola
• Cariboo North
• Kamloops-North Thompson
• Kamloops-South Thompson

Other riding associations, including some of the same ones, are calling for a leadership convention in early 2011 (not just a 'review' which allows the fix to be in), if not for James' outright resignation

Each day, more riding associations announce similar resolutions. There IS momentum calling for a leadership convention.

Yet James is ready to discount these resolutions, these ridings, regardless of how many.

Why?

Because she expects "support from the provincial council."

That rather sums up the problem, doesn't it?

James may be a fine person (I don't know, having never met her), but she is not a leader. She failed to defeat GORDON CAMPBELL over two elections, for science sake!

Yet the inner circle props up this inept puppet, no matter what "a few folks," a growing number of members outside the inner circle, may demand.

Recommend this post

Delusional Carole James

Typical of a politician.

Carole James keeps repeating the same talking points in this radio interview, regardless of the question raised by the interviewer.

She's both delusional and disrespectful of the mounting criticism and call for her resignation, much of it coming from within her own party.

And James shouldn't be ignoring the mounting criticism from outside the party either. It's ALL the voters of this province, after all, whose support she would be seeking in the next election.

If you haven't signed this petition for a leadership convention and vote, what are you waiting for?

Recommend this post

BC NDP Leadership Convention & Vote - Petition

A local Cowichan Valley man, Richard Hughes, has just begun a petition demanding there be a BC NDP leadership convention and one-member-one-vote in the Spring 2011.

Good on him!

No matter how much you may like Carole James, you cannot deny that she has missed two opportunities to defeat Gordon Campbell, in 2005 and then again in 2009. Despite he and his government having LIED to the people of this province about BC Rail. Despite all cuts to programs and services. Despite so many errors, despite so much artifice.

Now the man James loved to target is, or soon will be, gone.

If James couldn't defeat GORDON CAMPBELL, how can she defeat a reinvigorated, rebranded BC Liberal Party under a new leader? 

Not only should James step down as leader of the BC NDP, but as suggested by a signatory to Hughes' petition, James' backroom supporters should be questioned or ousted too. 

Let the NDP start anew.

Along with the BC Liberals - and the Greens - PLEASE, give the voters of this province decent viable options when next we visit the polls.

Recommend this post

Draft Watts Campaigns Starts Up for BC Liberal Leadership

Popular Surrey mayor Diane Watts may have trouble turning down a run for the BC Liberal leadership. Not only does she rank first in all polls so far that have asked British Columbians who they favour, but now a Draft Watts campaign has begun.

Should Watts run and then win the Liberal leadership and therefore the premiership, she'll be a hard contestant to beat in 2013. A Carole James-led NDP as her major competition would generate less respect than laughter.

Of course, there's nothing wrong with laughter. Politicians - not to mention the rest of us - take themselves too seriously. It would be good for everyone if we could all relax a bit, even with respect to the serious business of politics.

However, the type of laughter James' NDP would trigger in 2013 against a reinvigorated, rebranded Watts-led Liberal party would have more the tone of derision than chortle. Which is why I and, it appears, many other BC bloggers, have been imploring for years that James follow Campbell's lead. James & Co. seem unable to differentiate good policy or good strategy from bad; a lack they share, incidentally, with the federal Liberals under Michael Ignatieff.

James should resign and through her resignation, encourage the NDP to do major additional housecleaning and some rebranding of its own.

Recommend this post

Carole James Should Follow Campbell's Last Act

Remember back, oh, about a month ago, when leader of the BC NDP Carole James ousted 'rebel' MLA Bob Simpson?

Simpson had dared mild criticism of her speech to the Union of BC Municipalities. Now Simpson is an Independent MLA.

Still a loyal member of the NDP, his new status has not stopped Simpson from saying that, just as Gordon Campbell's resignation could/should lead to a change in direction or a rebranding of the BC Liberal Party, so should rebranding be on the minds of his party's membership.

I don't hold out much hope for it, though, not when I read things like this:

"James has said Simpson can return to the NDP caucus if he apologizes for the critical remarks he made about her leadership."

Here are the 'critical remarks' in question:

The Leader of the Opposition likewise had little concrete to offer the delegates other than a commitment to be more consultative than the current government and a promise to explore the possibility of revenue sharing with local governments. This is a timely concept which has the potential to address the resource needs of local governments, but the lack of specifics was a disappointment to delegates.

As Simpson observed today:

The party's message under James up to now has simply been, "we won't be Gordon Campbell... There is a lot of 'we wont's.... [New Democrats] have to sit back and think about what they need to do to tell British Columbians what they would be like in government and actually win a mandate to govern this province in 2013."

See the comments to that article. A whole lot of people agree with Simpson.

The NDP, in other words, must formulate policy - good policy - and let the rest of us know what it is.

British Columbians will not elect a fence post with hair. It is no more beneficial to this province to have a Gord Campbell government than one headed by someone who has demonstrated, over the seven years of her 'leadership' that she can't lead, can't take criticism, can't give substantive speeches, is clueless about smart political strategy and what British Columbians care about, and does nothing but whine.

The people of this province need and desperately want decent, viable political options. Minimally, we need a Liberal party that functions democratically and sits at its traditional centre. We need a New Democrat party that functions democratically and represents the perspectives of the left (not just the left perspectives of unionized labour). We need a small 'c' conservative party that functions democratically and represents the perspectives of the right. And we need one or more parties that function democratically, don't fit neatly into the left-right paradigm - e.g., the BC Green Party - and represent major interests.

With a minimum of four decent options and an emphasis on government, not just parties, that must function democratically, British Columbians need proportional representation.

Meanwhile, what we need most urgently is the resignation of Carole James and elbow grease applied to the internal machinery of the NDP. The party clearly needs a major spring cleaning.

Recommend this post

BC NDP: Both sides of mouth syndrome

Party leader, Carole James, says one thing in public. Party president, Moe Sihota, says another thing in private.

New Democratic Party president Moe Sihota is encouraging members to help organize recalls against Liberal MLAs, according to an NDP executive's personal notes from a meeting of top party officials.

The move comes after NDP leader Carole James said her party will not get involved in the campaign organized by the anti-HST movement.

Am fine with recall campaigns to unseat BC Liberals. Am not fine with dishonesty in politics and the predilection for not saying what you mean. After all, it's the dishonesty and lack of dealing frankly with British Columbians that has most British Columbians so incensed against the Gordon Campbell government, regardless of where we stand with respect to the HST.

On a personal note... My joke of a NDP MLA was a disaster during the 2009 election and was far outclassed by the Green candidate Simon Lindley (a refreshing change for a Green - or any - candidate, Lindley received the most applause at the ACMs and excellent media reviews).

Still, Bill Routley - who banked during the election on the confusion about his relationship to DOUG Routley, the former local BC NDP MLA for this riding - is my 'representative'. Therefore, BILL Routley is the one to which I turn if I've a problem with the BC Government. So I wrote to him, twice, about the SAFER issue. Never got a reply.

I'll take an independent like Bob Simpson over such a useless party apparatchik any time.

Recommend this post

Another Politician - ahem - Borrows Content

Have Canada's politicians not heard of 'original content'? The BC NDP's Rob Fleming appears to be the latest in a string of politicians who, seemingly unabashedly, will freely swipe content from other people's work. The federal Conservatives have been the worst offenders.

Have none of them heard of, you know, copyright laws or fair dealing?

Recommend this post

Andrew Coyne's Suggestions for Resurrection of Liberal Party

Andrew Coyne has some excellent suggestions for the Liberal Party of Canada, six in fact, which the party might use to re-brand itself. All have merit, however the following are my particular favourites; I've suggested them all myself on this blog:

• The party of democratic reform. How we nominate candidates, how we choose leaders, how we elect members, how Parliament functions—there’s clearly lots of work to do here. This used to be a Conservative issue. Today, not so much.
• The party of taxpayers. Former Liberal MP Dennis Mills used to campaign vigorously for the flat tax, complete with postcard-sized tax form. A corollary would be reform of EI and social assistance, along the lines recommended by the impeccably Liberal Macdonald commission: a simplified, streamlined universal income guarantee.
• The party of the environment. Yes, that means a carbon tax. It’s a good idea, the only way Canada is ever going to come close to meeting its carbon emissions targets, and everyone knows it. Was it the carbon tax, as myth holds, that doomed the Liberals in the last election? Or was it because it was poorly designed and poorly presented? A better plan, better presented—a real “tax shift,” as implemented by Gordon Campbell’s Liberal government in B.C. - might be a winner.

True, that last.

Although the BC NDP tried to incite electors against the BC carbon tax, James & Company failed abysmally. In fact, the party's disingenuous (to put it politely) Axe the Tax™ campaign was among the reasons the party failed to defeat the Liberals in May 2009. British Columbians essentially agreed that a carbon tax was necessary. While the majority of us dislike the Liberals (again, putting it mildly), we are perfectly capable of separating the person or party from the essential principle.

Will the LPC re-brand itself with any or all of Coyne's suggestions? Not unless it's grown a spine, the lack of which has been evident these past few years.

I strongly recommend that all members of the LPC read Coyne's article in full.

Recommend this post

Tweeting the HST

The opposition NDP in British Columbia has been making a concerted effort, joined now by former premier Bill Vander Zalm, to organize British Columbians against the coming Harmonized Sales Tax. Vander Zalm is trying to get enough signatures to require the Liberal government to hold a referendum on the tax.

Am putting this out there because I just don't get why certain progressives are against the HST.

Or maybe I do.

Here's a series of tweets I posted a few minutes ago:

Re BC-HST, 1) ppl will ALWAYS protest a new/chg'd tax 2) NDP = big gov, more services/progs, more taxes 2 pay 4 same 3) HST gd 4 very poor

4) w/ rebate, HST gd for lowest 2 economic classes. Only 'bad' for incomes above mid-range & only if u BUY STUFF.

5) HST - like PST/GST - is a consumption tax. IMO, that's better than inc. taxes. W/ cons. tax, u get more stuff, u pay more tax.

So, Y is NDP against this tax, if not due 2 opportunism, to take advantage of knee-jerk reaction against all tax?

If you've trouble reading Twitter-ese, the long version goes like this:

As night follows day, people will always protest the introduction of a new tax. It doesn't matter that the proposed tax is meant to cover the costs of providing new or enhanced services x, y and z. People just hate taxes, period.

The NDP supports the provision of public services by government; not, or much less so, by business. It supports tighter and more regulation, a flatter incline among classes, and so on. The party therefore supports bigger government, and less business or corporate influence, control and interference in public affairs. (So far, so good; am pretty much in agreement with this.)

For government to provide more or enhanced public services, it must raise revenue. That means raising taxes - or fees, which amounts to the same thing.

The proposed HST comes with a rebate for the lowest two economic classes. The poorest in the province will get the most.

I, for one, am really looking forward to my quarterly rebates. Am already better off thanks to the carbon tax, which the NDP also protested in its failed 'Axe the Tax' campaign.

The NDP is purportedly the champion of the underdog, the homeless, and the desperately poor.

I don't consider upper middle-income earners and the wealthy to be underdogs. Yet they are the only ones who ultimately may pay more under the HST. It all depends on HOW MUCH STUFF THEY BUY.

The HST, like the PST and GST, is a consumption tax. So is the BC carbon tax. The more you buy, the more you pay in tax.

Well, boo hoo!

Unlike income taxes - which I prefer to see axed - consumption taxes are useful sticks to curb people's behaviour. That's the fundamental principle behind a carbon tax, which most industry leaders support.

It's no accident that the majority of politicians don't support a carbon tax ... publicly, that is. They haven't the courage. Former Liberal leader Stéphane Dion was one of those rare exceptions. Too bad the party elite lacked the spine to support him.

Anyway, given the foregoing arguments regarding the HST, it begs the question why the NDP is so against it. Unless that party's protestations have nothing to do with the tax at all and everything to do with political opportunism.

[cross-posted at economicus ridiculous]

Recommend this post