UPDATE Jan 4/11: BC Liberal Leadership - Order of preference

[See ETAs below]

It's early days yet in the BC Liberal leadership race, but it appears there will be only the five contenders who have already declared - although a BC Liberal in good standing could run for leader as late as 13 days before the leadership vote. [See ETAs Dec 21 2:40 p.m., Jan 4 10:15 a.m.]

When evaluating the possibility of a new government, these issues rank as the top three for me:

Democratic reform. Outreach, meaningful engagement with the public, resumption of powers to MLAs, openness and transparency, electoral reform, support for greater independence and return of powers to local governments.

Taxation policy. Smartly applied carrot-and-stick consumption taxes designed to guide consumer behaviour. A gradual reduction of earnings taxes, which punish enterprising activity, behaviour that should be encouraged. I favour the HST, the carbon tax and the proposed-then-rescinded 15 percent reduction in income tax for the middle-class.

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.

Of the five contenders for the BC Liberal leadership race, this is my current¹ order of preference given the dominant themes stated above:

1. George Abbott. Said to be the least polarizing of the candidates for Liberals, Abbott is aligned with the old guard. He and Kevin Falcon have been playing catch-up in terms of who can get the most endorsements from Liberal MLAs and members of the current Liberal cabinet. Last I checked they were tied at 12 each. What I like about Abbott: his ability to bring opposing sides together, his support for the carbon tax, the HST and lowering the voting age to 16. Against: his Falcon-like response to cap 'n trade: best to wait for more partners. [See ETAs Dec 18 5:00 p.m., Jan 4 10:15 a.m.]
2. Mike de Jong. de Jong appears to be the most real in terms of outreach, in trying to engage not just Liberals but the general public. He truly appears to be listening to the ideas presented to him at his Open Mike sessions. Among those I like: lowering the voting age to 16, a call for an online vote of the HST referendum, support for the carbon tax. I've yet to get an answer from de Jong about cap 'n trade and I'm disappointed in his early lack of vocal support for and pessimistic messaging re the HST. In my view, a defeat of the HST in the referendum is not a given. Opinion appears to be changing, more British Columbians are sitting on the fence hoping for more information about the tax, and the anti-HST commitment has lowered in numbers. [See ETA Jan 4 10:15 a.m.]
3. Kevin Falcon. Falcon suggested lowering the HST first to 11 percent then to ten percent. So far there has been no proposal for making up the shortfall. Falcon also is backtracking on the carbon tax and cap 'n trade in tune with demands from big industry, including oil and mining. [See ETAs: Dec 18 5:00 p.m., Dec 21 11:00 a.m.]
4. Christy Clark. A huge demerit for Clark is the secrecy regarding her possible role in the sale of BC Rail, otherwise I might have ranked her #1 or #2. A huge plus for Clark: She was a late but strong vocal proponent of BC-STV, the new, elegant electoral system that was defeated by referendum in 2009. Other points in Clark's favour: support for the HST, the carbon tax and lowering the voting age. Like Stilwell and de Jong, Clark has avoided answering the cap 'n trade question. [See ETAs: Dec 18 4:00 p.m., Dec 21 11:00 a.m.]
5. Dr. Moira Stilwell. Stilwell has been the most direct in answering my questions, for which I give her mucho kudos. She supports the HST and the carbon tax. Her answers so far waffle or are lacking regarding cap 'n trade and lowering the voting age. [See ETAs Dec 18 4:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m., Dec 21 11:00 a.m.]
6. ETA Jan 4 10:15 a.m. - Ed Mayne. New entrant to the race. Not enough information yet to assess him as Liberal leader or Premier. One thing I like is his support for the HST referendum to remain in September. British Columbians could need time to assess the impact of removing the HST and to make an informed decision.

Supporters of the lower-ranked candidates will work to poke holes in this ranking. That's fine; fire away on Twitter.

To some candidates, my opinion won't matter. I am a non-partisan and hence have no vote in electing the leader of the BC Liberal Party and this province's next Premier.

To other candidates, the smart ones, my opinion and that of other members of the voting public, will matter.

In the end, it is not just about winning the leadership of a given political party. It is about winning over the majority of British Columbians.

¹By "current" I mean as of 11:00 a.m. December 18 2010. That is, "subject to change without notice." I'll be adding ETAs as required to explain inevitable shifting of ranks.

--

ETA Dec 18 12:05 p.m.: Latest response from Stilwell: on #capntrade It's a great idea, but we need to find more partners for it to actually work well. My reply: Unless 1 govt starts cap 'n trade, wht's incentive 4 others? Who takes lead in Cda? Relevant: http://bit.ly/h2Ie4g. Subsequent Twitter conversation. Still waiting for response on voting age. In the meantime, Stilwell is still ranked #2.

ETA Dec 18 4:00 p.m.: First change! The rankings of #2 and #3 have switched.

Christy Clark came out early in favour of Mike de Jong's proposal to change the voting age to 16, one of the important facets in a democratic reform package. I've heard back from Stilwell regarding both cap 'n trade and the voting age. Regarding the latter, Stilwell wants to hear from the public; which plays right into the status quo and the vested interests that will fight to keep the electoral system (not to mention party discipline) as is.

Stilwell's answer on voting age is as much a waffle as any other. If you can be elected leader of your party by votes from 14-year-olds (yes, the BC Liberal Party Constitution permits this), then you're a hypocrite not to defend a policy position that would allow 16-year-olds to vote in provincial elections.

ETA Dec 18 5:00 p.m.: My foggy brain recalls a tweet from someone reporting on George Abbott's telephone town hall yesterday. Apparently, he was asked if he supported Mike de Jong's proposal to lower the voting age to 16. He said Yes. Trying to find that tweet or get other confirmation. [Dec 21: Got it - see last paragraph]

Spotted a rumour on Twitter that Falcon also supports lowering the voting age. Trying to get confirmation on that also. [Dec 21: Got it] If true, then Stilwell stands alone.

ETA Dec 21 10:00 a.m.: Yesterday, Falcon introduced a plan for BC's northern regions. Kudos not so much for the plan - that's up to northerners to approve -, but for its specificity. As far as I've been able to track, no other candidate has presented a (detailed) plan for northern BC. Then today, the Falcon team announced this. Gotta admit that's pretty cool and could be part of coming changes to engage the public in political decisions.

Clark has been and continues to suggest she'd call a snap election. From the perspective of the electorate, it's a bad idea and reeks of political opportunism. Voters need time to assess the new Premier and his/her style of governance. We'd also benefit from observing the NDP Official Opposition under its new leader. The two years until the next scheduled election would be ideal. Clark also so far has come out with no policy. In this video, she gives a general discussion regarding fiscal responsibility; says her government would strike up an "economic advisory panel" and only then decide on a taxation policy. Voters are to elect a Clark-led Liberal government on this basis? That she'll strike up an advisory council on monetary issues? Not good enough.

Given i) the latest Falcon announcements and the additions to the ETA of Dec 18 5:00 p.m. regarding Falcon, and ii) the issues with the Clark campaign, rankings have changed. Clark has fallen from 2nd to 4th and Stilwell from 4th to 5th. Abbott and Falcon have moved up, from 3rd to 2nd and from 5th to 3rd place, respectively.

ETA Dec 21 2:40 p.m.: Interesting development yesterday re entrants to race. Parksville mayor "seriously considering" entering and filed letter of intent to party last Thursday.

ETA Jan 4 10:15 a.m.: Just finished watching George Abbott's announcement. "It's as much about the how as the what." Was impressed with Abbott's passion (!) about open government and greater involvement by, and better representation of British Columbians. Among the policies Abbott proposes is including a vote on the carbon tax along with the HST referendum. I think that's fair, given how the scheduled hikes in the tax will impact British Columbians differently. I favour the carbon tax and its continuation as previously set. I also favour more involvement by the people in the determination of such policy. Was impressed sufficiently and have been less impressed by Mike de Jong lately, that I've moved Abbott to the number #1 spot.

Am waiting for an email response to this question, which I asked via Twitter: Munis must chg laws, allow not public hsg but low-cost hsg dev. How wld u persuade? http://bit.ly/gkBmU.

Abbott team has responded quickly to my reminder. I grant that today is a busy day and understand the delay, appreciate response.

Ed Mayne, now former mayor of Parksville, has entered the race. See list above.

Recommend this post

I Support the HST

... but I don't support the way our Liberal government foisted its particular brand of the HST onto British Columbians.

In principle, I consider taxes on consumption to be a good idea and a harmonized sales tax an improvement over two or more separate taxes. Simplicity is better; additional paperwork and process for the collection of money from the same source introduces needless complication.

However, the HST being rammed down the throats of British Columbians now, wouldn't likely have been the HST British Columbians ultimately got - and supported - had the process been vastly different. Indeed, had the May 2009 election been decided in a different manner, then the process surrounding the HST decision WOULD, in fact, have been vastly different; and so, likely, would the election campaign itself.

I am referring to the way the Liberals and other MLAs were elected.

Had BC-STV been the system by which voters elected their government, the likely result (all else being equal) would have been a coalition of the Liberals and Greens.

In a coalition government, one political party cannot arbitrarily ram through its favoured policy in a legislature. It must negotiate with MLAs of other parties. They, no less than MLAs who are members of the party who got the most votes, are elected to represent their constituents; and in a coalition government, they can do so more effectively.

In the present case, the BC Greens have come out in support of the HST, but say it should have been set at 10 percent.

Had our political representatives been elected in a fairer manner, closer to proportionally representing British Columbians' voting preferences in the legislature, our government's policies would likely have better reflected the majority's own values. We'd likely still have the HST starting in July 2010. But it's form and the process by which it was implemented and presented to the public would likely have been considerably different.

Recommend this post

Carole James: In Her Own Words

Here is Carole James, (not) responding to direct questions I'd asked in the second of two emails, this one sent in December 2008:

Dear Chrystal Ocean,

As I wrote before,* I think this crucial debate is too important to get mired in partisan politics, so I will not be commenting on STV prior to the referendum.

However, I am firmly committed to implementing STV if the referendum passes. And, if it does not pass, I remain committed to offering British Columbians the opportunity to vote on MMP.

Sincerely,

Carole James, Leader
Official Opposition

Congratulations! Your failure to support BC-STV has effectively helped kill any electoral reform in this province for at least a generation. The next time your party** forms the government, it will not credibly be in a position to implement a new voting system, not after this massive defeat of BC-STV at the hands, no less, of two talking-head, back-roomers of your party's close acquaintance.

As for topics being "too important to get mired in partisan politics," the environment doesn't qualify? I ask because such considerations didn't appear to concern you regarding the carbon tax. Your opposition to it was unconscionable.

* You can trace our conversation here.
** NDP apparatchiks like to complain that I never target the BC Liberals on this issue. The Liberals don't pretend to be a progressive party, now do they? It's the hypocrisy of today's NDP which so stuns the mind.

Recommend this post

Fear, Lies, Innuendo, Now Hypocrisy

The No-STV campaign claimed to have among its proponents not only people who supported first past the post, but also those who supported mixed member proportional representation "or some other alternative."

Well to anyone in that camp who allegedly did or does support MMP or some other system, Congratulations!

You've effectively killed off any chance at electoral reform in this province for at least another generation. No credible government could go through with implementing a new voting system - or setting up yet another referendum, this time favouring MMP - with the populace so clearly having trashed the idea. Additionally, for those in your camp who favoured MMP, that you used the larger ridings as one of your fear tactics would work against you. Because, as you so carefully avoided admitting, MMP requires larger ridings too.

Now, to add insult to injury and a hefty dose of hypocrisy, on the day of the referendum Bill Tieleman writes an article advocating compulsory voting.*

As I wrote in reaction to this on Twitter: "We're to take Tieleman's advice re compulsory voting? The same man who worked so hard to maintain FPTP? No thanks."

The NDP back-roomer and talking head, the man who championed the defeat of British Columbians for STV, a democratic grassroots movement which had virtually thousands more volunteers than the No-STV organization of which he was President, arrogantly supposes to instruct us on democracy. I think not.

* For articles written by Bill Tieleman or David Schreck discussed in this blog, readers will have to find the links themselves. This blog will not be providing them.

Recommend this post

Getting Out the Vote

Went to the library (in the same building where voting is taking place), trundling my little shopping cart behind me, suitably decked out in my BC-STV t-shirt and buttons, with my cart containing flyers and more buttons. As I approached I did put on my coat. (Didn't want to be thrown out!)

Passed by one young man on my way. Spotting my t-shirt, he shouted "I voted!"

Once at the library, left the last of my flyers (8) there. Yea, sneaky. But taking an important step toward improving our democracy is worth it. Besides, people going to the library expect to find information.

After leaving the library, walked over to the back of the food bank. People tend to congregate there, soaking up the sun and enjoying having a full belly for awhile. Met a young couple, neither of them having voted before. Got them excited about changing the system. As I was leaving, they were walking over to the voting place.

Then almost home, as I was walking along a back laneway, I began chatting over the bushes with a man who was doing some beautiful landscaping in his back yard. Near the end of our conversation, he slapped his forehead and exclaimed: "I almost forgot! Your t-shirt! I've got to vote! - And I'm going to vote for that."

All in all, an hour well spent.

Recommend this post

UPDATE - Watch, Learn, Distribute Widely

UPDATE: Last night, I sent the link to this video to ALL my contacts on Gmail. Didn't bother with filtering, so it would have gone to Staples, the Upton Tea Co in the US, etc. etc. Just got this response from someone I've not been in touch with in years: "Hello Ocean. Thank-you for sending this my way. I have listened to it and am passing it onto family."

Makes it worth my likely being removed from some people's contact list.

--

If you haven't seen this video yet and you're still unconvinced that this province needs the democratic reform which BC-STV would start, then watch it now. It's of former Deputy Premier Christy Clark speaking on CKNW last week. She openly confesses why she voted against BC-STV in 2005: her personal interests as a politician were best served by first-past-the-post.

CTV last night reported that the tide is turning in favour of the reform, with online polls showing over 60 percent support of BC-STV. We CAN win this. Let's do it.

Please distribute the video, or forward a link to this post, to everybody you know, regardless of whether they live in BC - their friends may know people in BC... This really IS a small world.

Other must-see videos: The Choice, Fair Results, BC-STV in Action.

Recommend this post

Victoria News Reporter Endorses BC-STV

She adds a different perspective and some interesting observations.

While travelling through Tehran, I met an Iranian woman in her early 20s in a teahouse.

We shared a hookah stuffed with sweetly scented banana tobacco and talked politics while lounging on big, woven pillows. She was well aware of Iran’s limitations and pitfalls and was fiercely craving change.

Then our conversation switched to Canada. I explained the different levels of government and the voting system and when I finished, she asked one simple question.

“So is it truly democratic?”

The question blew my mind.

Recommend this post

From Dedicated BCCA Alumnus to Campaign Letter Writers

... of which, by last count, there were 568!!

Thank you so much for the tremendous effort that you have all put in letter writing over the last weeks, months, dare I say years for many of you!

In the last seven weeks of daily media tracking positive letters accounted for 70% of all STV letters. In these times of distrust in the political process hearing the opinions of friends and neighbours in local papers makes a huge impact.

I know that for every letter that got published there were dozens more that didn't - those letters also made a difference. They told editors that there was a huge public interest in BC-STV and it warranted more coverage. They told editors to think twice about running a negative editorial that would be out of step with their community. They told editors they should keep their eyes peeled for what the BC-STV campaign was doing, because it was a rapidly growing grassroots movement.

Thank you for all your letter writing, media monitoring and call ins to talk shows. I know for many of you, your contribution extended far beyond this as you donated, mainstreeted, canvassed, put on public forums, put up lawn signs and helped in dozens more creative and inspiring ways. We are all be very proud of the positive, energetic and unifying campaign that we ran. Thank you very much for all your work to bring British Columbians together.

Now go vote! (And of course if you can put in a last effort handing out brochures - you can download and print yourself if you have none left - just remember that the only restriction on Election Day is that you cannot campaign within 100 metres of a polling station entrance.)

Shoni

(Emphases mine.)

Recommend this post

Les Leyne, Times-Colonist, Endorses BC-STV

More and more endorsements coming in. Here's Les Leyne, in his own words:

My own make-or-break issue is voter turnout. Despite a marginal uptick last time, the number of people disengaging from politics and tuning the whole thing out has been increasing for years. When just over half the eligible voters are bothering to take 15 minutes out of their day to vote, we've got a problem.

STV seems to maximize the value of the vote. Listing several preferences on a ballot, rather than going all-or-nothing with one candidate or another, might hold some appeal for voters.

And both camps seem to agree that the different system would open the door for more parties. If that shakes up establishment politics, if it freshens up the game and brings more people into the political sphere, then it's worth giving it a try.

Recommend this post

Tales from the Trail 3

This is lovely...

From an email I just received:

Yesterday, my wife Jayne, delivering brochures, came to a home with a No Junk Mail sign which she always honours. However, she noticed a garden ornament nearby with the words "Plant Your Hopes Here.”

She promptly left her brochure right there.

Recommend this post

I want my, I want my, I want my STV!!

This Dire Straits song has been playing in my head all day. Here they are, performing live in 1985 at Wembley Stadium.

I want my STV!

Recommend this post

Funnies from a Naysayer

Commenting over at The Tyee, I wrote:

I'd rather a complicated system that delivers a better democratic result than a simple system that fails to represent more than half of voters. Besides, if the naysayers are claiming BC-STV to be too "complicated," "confusing," even "baffling" to them, why should anyone believe their interpretation of that system?

Subject heading of a follow-up comment from a naysayer:

Spoken like a true banker/mortgage lender.

Gotta go! My stockbroker's calling!

Recommend this post

Another Major Endorsement

Sean Holman, of Public Eye Online, has today endorsed BC-STV.

Do you prefer politicians who put their party ahead of their principles? Do you like legislators who only represent your interests behind closed doors - if at all? Or maybe you want to live in a province where democracy is treated like a Christmas ornament - taken out to be admired once every four years and then stuffed back into whatever box or closet it came from. Because that's what a vote against electoral reform means.

Our present first past the post system may not be the cause of all these ills.... [But] our politicians seem to have come down with a case of lockjaw. And the only way to cure that disease is to change the way we vote - adopting a system where free thought is less likely to be shackled. So please, consider casting a ballot in favour of electoral reform on election day.

Recommend this post

Gordon Campbell on Motion for Citizens Assembly

'Tis interesting to go back in time to see what our politicos said and did. Historical records are such useful things.

When Gordon Campbell introduced the motion to form the BC Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform back on April 30, 2003, it was a momentous occasion for the province and Canada. Not only was the proposed motion backed unanimously by all three of BC's major parties, but the BCCAER would be the first such body ever to be created in this far-ranging land.

It was a proud moment and important words were spoken.

Here are some choice comments from that speech which I encourage all politicians and political insiders to review, especially those fighting to maintain the status quo and against the change recommended to British Columbians by the BCCAER.

[I]f you go back to 1858, this is the first time in 145 years we are actually giving the people of British Columbia a direct say in how they should elect the MLAs that are meant to serve them. After all, in a democracy, we should remember we are here at the service and the pleasure of the people of this province....

There is no more fundamental tenet that we agree to as we seek office than that in a democracy, the rules of the democracy should be designed by the people they serve, not by the power brokers who may wish that the democracy worked in their interests. It is by turning to the people and trusting the public that I believe we can re-establish the critical link between our democratic institutions and those that they are supposed to serve.

Full speech is over at Dan Grice's place.

Recommend this post

Citizens Assembly Alumnus Speaks from the Heart

The following presentation was by Brooke Bannister, a former member of the BC Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform, on the occasion of the 5th anniversary of the BCCAER and conference on BC-STV which took place January 2009.

Hope. My dictionary defines it as "to intend with some possibility of fulfillment." It’s been written about, talked about and sung about since we inhabited this great planet.

Emily Dickenson wrote

Hope is the thing with feathers;
That perches in the soul;
And sings the tunes without the words;
And never stops at all.

Joseph Addison quipped: “The grand essentials to happiness in this life are something to do, something to love, and something to hope for.“

And from Christopher Reeve: “Once you choose hope, anything's possible.”

So, when I think of all the things we’re trying to do at this Conference, I think it’s mainly to sell hope to the BC voter. It’s hope that from May 13, 2009 on, voters will have a more direct say in what our politicians do … before, during, and after an election.

This is why this campaign is so important. And why we must have the following focuses when tackling this job: more positive action and less negative distraction … more on the future and less about the past … more focus about how many spirits we’re going to rise as opposed to how much money we’re going to raise … more about the Citizens’ Assembly and less about the Legislative Assembly. We need more passion and less inaction … more information about Ireland and less about any other land. We need more Shoni Fields and less Bill Tieleman. In other words, more yea-sayers and less nay-sayers.

Once we do all of these positive things, democracy will prevail on May 12. Then we can promise ourselves and fellow British Columbians a future with much more than greater choice, fairer results, and better local representation. We’ll get legislatures with greater proportion and less distortion … more democracy and less hypocrisy … more optimism and less cynicism … more diversity and less perversity … and more independents and less co-dependents … government by coalition instead of constant competition … and maybe best of all, more women and less men.

When I wake up May 13, I want to feel like our democracy was given a new lease on life. This is our chance to make history … not just for British Columbia, but for all of Canada as well. (Do you have any doubt that when BC votes for a unique, new voting system, the rest of Canada will be watching and taking notes?)

The BC-STV Vote isn't just a referendum for an electoral system. This is our Barack Obama, our Nelson Mandela, our beacon of hope from a world scarred by political misuse and mistrust. Somehow we've lost respect for the process and the people in it, and I sincerely hope this is a way to get it back.

We’re not doing this for ourselves; we’re doing it for our kids and grandkids, and their kids and grandkids. Let’s make them proud. Let’s give them hope.

This, my Dear Friends, is a battle we can’t afford to lose.

The world is watching.

Recommend this post

How to Show Your Support for BC-STV

The following are 1-minute ways you can show your support online.

1. If you live in BC and are an eligible voter, update your Facebook status with this message: I’m voting for BC-STV on May 12 - You should too!
    If you are not eligible to vote in this BC election, update your Facebook status with this message: I support BC-STV. If you live in BC, vote for BC-STV on May 12!

2. Change your Facebook profile photo to one of these (right-click to Save, or drag and drop to your desktop):

3. Post this BC-STV television ad to your Facebook profile and/or embed it in your blog.

4. RSVP the BC-STV vote day event on Facebook.

Recommend this post

Northern Politicians Endorse BC-STV

... including the mayors of Fort St. John and Dawson Creek.

They've added their names to the growing list of BC-STV supporters.

According to Fort St. John mayor Bruce Lantz, the new voting system will allow us to move away from the antiquated party system and vote for the person, not the party. He calls it democracy in its purest form and says it will ensure our political representation will be more fair and equitable.

Dawson Creek mayor Mike Bernier says that, after looking into the proposed change, he too thinks it will offer all British Columbians the opportunity to ensure they have proper representation in the BC Legislature.

Recommend this post

MUST SEE - Watch, Learn, Distribute Widely

If you haven't seen this video yet and you're still unconvinced that this province needs the democratic reform which BC-STV would start, then watch it now. It's of former Deputy Premier Christy Clark speaking on CKNW last week. She openly confesses why she voted against BC-STV in 2005: her personal interests as a politician were best served by first-past-the-post.

CTV last night reported that the tide is turning in favour of the reform, with online polls showing over 60 percent support of BC-STV. We CAN win this. Let's do it.

Please distribute the video, or forward a link to this post, to everybody you know, regardless of whether they live in BC - their friends may know people in BC... This really IS a small world.

Other must-see videos: The Choice, Fair Results, BC-STV in Action.

Recommend this post

Paul Wells, Macleans Magazine, Endorses BC-STV

Andrew Coyne, National Editor of Macleans and a champion of electoral reform, did so previously. (Here's the shorter Coyne, if that's too much for you.)

Paul Wells, editor senior columnist of the magazine and a fairly new convert to electoral reform, agrees with Coyne:

Let me take this chance to endorse his argument entirely. But I also want to add two other broad arguments of my own.

Go read the rest of it. I especially like Wells' second argument. Hint: It's something to do with chickens.

ETA: More Coyne and to correct Wells' position at Macleans.

Recommend this post

Show Your Support for BC-STV

Click box to the left of this landing page and learn 1-minute ways you can show your support online.

Recommend this post