BC Election 2013: What Happened?

Posted on by
2

I anticipated an NDP majority government, along with upwards of three elected independents (Bob Simpson, Vicki Huntington, and John van Dongen), one green (Andrew Weaver), and, zero conservatives. I was mostly wrong (we’re looking at a stronger BC Liberal party in the legislature) and a little right (Weaver, Huntington, Conservative shut-out), but that’s how it goes at the horseraces, you win some, you lose some.

I have recently been accused of being an NDP supporter, of having done an about-face and gone from Gordon Campbell to Adrian Dix, but that’s not the case. While I’ve talked to many NDP’ers over the last few months and talk with many on a regular basis, the fact is that regardless of who we elected yesterday, it wouldn’t be good.

No party offered genuine and, more importantly, real change. Each offered, sure, a change between leaders, but none offered the NDP’s campaign slogan: change for the better. Each was just different shades of awful. So, while I called a BC NDP government, I sure didn’t want one.

That said, the NDP totally dropped the ball here. It was clearly their campaign to lose, and they neglected to Get Out The Vote. With 52% of the population getting out to vote, the NDP clearly failed to get their supporters to vote, while the BC Liberals were clearly able to get their supporters out.

The NDP also failed by allowing the BC Liberals to run the campaign. With a 20-point lead, the NDP could have dictated every moment of the campaign. Instead of focusing on what the BC Liberals have done wrong since 2001, they focused on running a “positive” campaign, which in reality was just them responding to Liberal attack ads.

It was the NDP’s campaign to lose, and they lost it, that’s all there is to it. Sure, the turnout was pathetic — and why wouldn’t it be? — but consider this: the Liberals ran a negative campaign (or so they’ve been accused), while the NDP ran a positive one (or so the NDP claims). If that was genuinely the case, then the NDP should have been able to ramp up the vote and get their supporters out. That didn’t happen, so clearly they didn’t. The NDP’s campaign wasn’t positive, it was reactionary. As silly as the BC Liberals’s “Weathervane” ad was, it was right — it was absolutely correct in its portrayal, and that’s why the turnout was so low and that’s why the NDP lost.

What did Adrian Dix stand for? What did the NDP stand for? It was a complete mystery to everyone, and certainly unknowable to the 48% who chose to abdicate their vote to the remaining 52%.

In short, the BC Liberals won because they ran a stronger campaign and the BC NDP lost because they ran a pathetic, directionless campaign. Forget vote splitting, forget low turnout, forget that Clark didn’t win her seat, and forget the Greens and the myth of “vote splitting”, too: people voted Green because they wanted Greens, not because they were confused between the Greens and the NDP. Certainly, if 48% of the population deigned to vote, we’d have different results… but they didn’t, so we don’t.

The BC Liberals won and the BC NDP lost. That’s the tale of the tape.

—

05/15/2013 2:29 PM:

The Vancouver Sun released this data which suggest that the BC Liberals did play GOTV (Get Out The Vote) better than the BC NDP.

Independents Day in BC – Ten Indies to Watch

Posted on by
Reply

It’s hard not to get excited when an independent runs for office. While sometimes they espouse radical or otherwise out-to-lunch views that guarantee them a way-down-the-list finish, sometimes they’re smart, levelheaded people who actually deserve to be in office.

Here are some indies to watch out for at 8:01:

Mischa Popoff - Boundary-Similkameen: You may remember Popoff from the anti-HST thing, who stepped down as a vice president of the BC Conservatives at the time. The Conservatives didn’t have a clear position on the tax at the time, and according to Popoff, they had secret meetings to support the tax while deriding it in public, “riding on the coat tails” of Bill Vander Zalm and Chris Delaney, who lead the anti-tax movement. It’s no surprise then that Vander Zalm endorsed Popoff earlier this month, and even Delaney — who resides out of country — offered to donate to his campaign. According to Vander Zalm?

“I’m confident the constituents of this riding, appreciate a candidate who says what he believes and stands for, who represents voters, and is not subject to party dictates. Popoff has my endorsement and every wish for success in the upcoming provincial election.”

The seat is probably going Liberal, but Popoff might surprise.

Dayleen Van Ryswyk - Kelowna-Mission: Not too much to say on Van Ryswyk. Her defection was a pretty minor scandal and a subsequent poll found that her views were “shared” by BC’ers. This riding is probably also going to Liberal incumbent Steve Thomson.

Gary Young – Cariboo-Chilcotin:  I mostly like Gary Young. He seems like a smart guy, but I do think he could have used a much stronger campaign team — a problem that plagues tons of independents. Young is mostly running on the idea of being a voice for his constituents, which is great, but it is hard to see where he stands on certain issues. This riding is probably slipping out of Liberal hands and going to Charlie Wyse of the NDP.

Bob Simspon - Cariboo North: If you spend a few minutes looking at Simpson’s record, it’s pretty easy to see he’s thought independently years, even while with the NDP. Simpson is a stand up guy and has done a great job of representing his constituency, especially since his departure from the NDP back in October of 2010 when he spoke out against then-leader Carole James. Evidently, he’s never looked back. Simpson is getting re-elected.

John van Dongen – Abbotsford South: If there’s one person in the legislature who deserves re-election, it’s gotta be John van Dongen. His tireless crusade against the BC Rail coverup has made him a bit of a folk hero, and his penchant for speaking out has earned him a ton of respect inside and outside of Abbotsford South. He’s up against Liberal Darryl Plecas, but this riding is easily swinging back into indie territory.

Moe Gill – Abbotsford West: You may remember Moe Gill from when he accused the BC Liberal party of promising him Abbotsford South, but then giving the nomination to Darryl Plecas, instead. Gill has an uphill battle ahead of him against Mike de Jong, who is huge in Abbotsford. In 09, Mike de Jong managed to capture 55.81% of the popular vote, which suggests the riding is his to lose. Allegedly, there’s still a lot of anger in Abbotsford West for the double-crossing that went down with regards to Gill, so it’s really tough to say. My gut gives it to de Jong, but Alex Tsakumis is calling it for Gill, so you never know.

John Shavluk – Delta North: John Shavluk is a character, having run in the 2008 Federal Election with the Greens, he booted when it was found that he — perhaps out of context? — referred to the World Trade Centre as a “shoddily built Jewish world bank headquarters”. Shavluk claimed it was a bit out of context, but according to blogger and journalist Adrian MacNair:

Perhaps what is glossed over here is the fact that whether being quoted out of context or not, Mr.Shavluk did not seem to make a reasonable attempt to make sure readers knew that he wasn’t personally characterizing the World Trade Center as a Jewish World Bank. In fact it would appear that the would-be political candidate did not even make a reasonable attempt to avail himself of a spell checker.

Shavluk isn’t winning, of course, and Guy Gentner is easily holding onto Delta North.

Vicki Huntington – Delta South: Vicki Huntington rightly made headlines when she beat parachuted candidate Wally Oppal by a hair or two (32 votes — interestingly, John Shavluk ran here as well, and garnered 60 votes) and was elected the first indie MLA for 60 years. She has been pretty solid for Delta South — aside from voting for the BC Liberals budget, which was odd and disappointing – she’ll win again.

James Crosty – New Westminster: James Crosty is a bit of a local celebrity in New Westminster. A self-described “citizen advocate”, Crosty has a decent shot at election, so much so that someone even registered a smear website against him. Crosty’s an alright guy who does a good job of representing New West interests in his spare time, including opposition to expansion of the docks and opposition to coal transport. Nonetheless, I have trouble seeing this riding slipping out of NDP hands. Dawn Black has stepped down and Judy Darcy is a fairly unremarkable character, but history gives it to the NDP.

Ian Tootill – Vancouver-False Creek: To be honest, this is a very tight race between Sam Sullivan and Matt Toner. Tootill, who was recently kicked out for some off-colour comments, is at a pretty big disadvantage, but I do have to give him bonus points for being willing to speak his mind. The riding is going to Toner, however.

—

Obviously, this is hardly comprehensive but it doesn’t look the greatest for the independent candidates: many of the best are running in Liberal / NDP strongholds, which certainly hurts their chances and any parties to which they might be closely affiliated. Huntington’s upset wasn’t guaranteed in 2009, however, so I wouldn’t be too surprised if a few voters give their independent candidates the benefit of the doubt and vote them in — party fatigue could certainly play a huge role, and today might actually be Independents Day in BC.

This Election’s Big Losers: Part 5/5

Posted on by
Reply

Over the last few days, I’ve explained why you shouldn’t vote for certain parties this election.

You shouldn’t vote for the BC Conservatives because at its core, the party is completely hypocritical while its leader espouses outdated beliefs. You shouldn’t vote for the BC Greens because they lack any realistic policy and won’t form government, nor should they. You shouldn’t vote for the BC Liberals because they’ve spent the last few years betraying the trust of the electorate and continue to do so on a daily basis, days before an election. And finally, you shouldn’t vote for the BC NDP because while they haven’t had as many scandals recently as the BC Liberals, they still don’t have a realistic plan for governing the province.

That is the election in a nutshell. Not one of this province’s four major parties is deserving of a vote. There are tons of independents deserving of your vote (John van Dongen, Bob Simpson, James Crosty, and Vicki Huntington all come to mind instantly — I’ve spoken with Gary Young on twitter quite a bit and he seems like a solid guy too), and several members of the major political parties, but by and large, most aren’t worth voting for.

Our choices vary from riding to riding, but for the most part, we need to decide who is the least-worst candidate. We need to decide who is least likely to screw up this province, who is least likely to ignore us, who is least likely to misspend and mismanage in office, and who is least likely to betray our trust. For most of us, the decision is simply one of party lines, especially in ridings where each party is running a bland and otherwise inoffensive candidate. In those ridings, our choices come down to either Adrian Dix or Christy Clark (the two-headed monster Christy Dix, Ramesh Ranjan calls it). Not the candidates, but their leaders.

In some ridings, we’re lucky and the candidates have been running intentionally “independent” campaigns where they’ve bucked the party name and are mostly campaigning on their own appeal, but those campaigns are few and far between.

There are amazing people running this election, like the independents I mentioned, or people like Moira Stilwell or Matt Toner, and there are incredible people working on campaigns all across BC. But there are also bad people or people who are so bland and so ordinary that we can’t expect any real change from them and we can’t (nor shouldn’t) expect them to do anything in office. For every MLA we elect who actually listens to their constituents, we get, well, 75 or so who just follow the party line. Going off the platforms of the major parties? The party line stinks.

We’re stuck in a horrible status quo, in an awful game of chess where we elect mediocre people to do mediocre things. How long has it been since we’ve had a visionary in office, a man or woman who actually sought out and strove to change the very way we live our lives?

We don’t get that today — instead, we’re stuck with Christy Clark who unimaginatively wants to tap into liquid natural gas reserves (ooh! how visionary! let’s pull natural resources out of the ground and sell them!) and Adrian Dix who, well, doesn’t seem to have a plan to reinvigorate the economy. Jane Sterk and the BC Greens meanwhile have their wacky paradigm-shift plan in place that will “create” “green jobs,” with no real explanation of how they’ll do that or what those green jobs will entail. Meanwhile, the BC Conservatives are running a campaign a few years late to the party where they’ll somehow cut bureaucracy and budgets and improve business (excuse me if I’m skeptical).

It’s incredibly frustrating. Any time one of these four begin speaking, I’m at a loss and I seriously have to stop and think: are these people the best and brightest of BC? Are these four men and women seriously the cream of the crop, the best leaders, the best we have to offer? If they are, well, excuse me: we’re in trouble.

We have a seriously flagging economy. Our natural resources are finite and there’s only so much stuff you can pull out of the ground to sell to Asia. Look at the Maritimes or Quebec, two regions of Canada that stripped their resources bare for each and every penny. Now look at them — aside from tourist destinations, both regions are seriously lacking in anything else. The Maritimes have been fished dry and Quebec is high up on the “have-not” provinces list. We can only clear cut trees and pump LNG out of the earth for so long. LNG or building a pipeline from Alberta, these things are only temporary measures that are a drop in the bucket when it comes to jobs or finances. We need to be focusing on high tech industries, we need to be focusing on the film / video game industries, and yes, we need to be focusing on the arts, because let’s face it, these things are the future, while coal and LNG are the past. We can make British Columbia the cultural capital of Canada. We don’t need to be selling trees and gas in order to be a region of serious significance. Every single thing our leaders in this province want to do is sell us to other regions (BC Greens excepted). We’re showing off our resources and our labour and saying, “hey, you want cheap gas? We got it!” It’s pathetic, it’s unimaginative, and it’s bad for BC.

We need a real leader who will affect real change. Someone who will change the way the world looks at us and will change the way we look at the world. A leader who cares about this province and not about getting re-elected. A leader who looks to the future — not four or eight years from now, but twenty, thirty, forty. A leader who sees BC as a world leader, not just another cog in the machine. A leader who wants the world to look to us, not for our gas or our trees or whatever, but for our leadership. With world-class leaders, BC could be a world-class province.

But we don’t have that. We don’t have world-class leaders. We don’t have visionaries. We have the other guys: average leaders who envision an average BC.

So, who is this election’s biggest loser? You might have guessed it. It’s you, it’s me, it’s the electorate. Regardless of who wins on election day, we lose. And until we see real leadership again in this province, that song will remain the same.

BC Liberals Demanding Severance From 14 Years Ago

Posted on by
Reply

It’s really painful to watch, but the BC Liberals are again launching an attack at Adrian Dix, this time demanding he repay the severance he received after being fired for backdating a memo. What is it with these people and severance pay? The Clark government hands out severance pay like it’s going out of style, so when Kim Haakstad resigns and doesn’t take it, we’re expected to throw a ticker-tape parade. “Oh, wow! She didn’t take severance! She’s like Neil Armstrong and Abe Lincoln rolled into one!” Give me a break.

Is it any wonder why people hate voting in this province, and why people are so disconnected from politics? What are these people thinking? This has got to be one of the sillier moments of the campaign.

Marcella Bernardo asked (hilariously) if “they will also seek return of $6 [million] from Basi and Virk… [BC Rail] guilty pleas?”

I’m guessing not.

This Election’s Big Losers: Part 4/5

Posted on by
Reply

In the run up to the May 14 election, I’ll be talking about this election’s Big Losers. Stay tuned!

—

I have done my best to make it abundantly clear that I’ve had unwavering loyalty to the BC Liberals in the past. Part of being a party hack obviously involved writing letters to the editor, calling into radio programs, and of course, attacking the NDP. I can, with only referring to talking points of the last six years, explain dozens of reasons why you shouldn’t vote for the NDP.

Part of my political reawakening involved realizing that not all the NDP are bad. Some of them have good ideas and some of them have great ideas (and yes, some of them have horrible ideas). But that’s academic in parliamentary democracy, because in parliamentary democracy, all opposition ideas are either:

  1. swept under the rug as “bad ideas;” or
  2. reappropriated or perverted by the ruling party to make it their own

All too often, of course, government picks option number one: they scrap the idea and toss it aside because if an NDPer thought it up, it can’t be useful. Sometimes the disgusting result is that very good ideas are discarded as useless and we all suffer for it. It’s hilarious that here in Canada, you can choose a legislator who ends up with no legislative abilities. If your candidate is not sitting in government, you can forget about them passing meaningful legislation that will improve your life.

With my new outlook in political life, I was happy to see Adrian Dix and the NDP campaigning on “Change for the Better” (while Christy Clark was touting the bland “Strong Economy, Secure Tomorrow,” which sounds like it was picked from David Letterman’s “Top Ten Cliché Campaign Slogans”).

Maybe, I thought, we would see change for the better.

Maybe we would be able to vote on election day for the person we wanted the most, not the person we hated the least.

Maybe we could vote across any party line and expect to be fairly and reasonably represented by that MLA.

Maybe our legislators would meet for more than three weeks a session.

Maybe they would pass meaningful legislation that would improve our lives.

Maybe Question Period would become less of a dog and pony show where grown men and women yell at each other like children, hurl insults at each other from across the room, slam desks like neanderthals, and generally make asses of themselves for the sake of a soundbite while a berobed politician quietly whispers “order.”

Maybe instead we would have civilized discussion where our legislators held themselves and their peers accountable to the citizens that elected them.

Pfft.

BC NDP

If I had Adrian Dix’s ear at the start of the campaign, I would have told him three words:

Don’t Say Anything.

This was Dix’s campaign to lose — he had it in the bag. He could have pointed at a picture of Christy Clark and shouted “HST, Quickwins, HST, BC Rail!” to a crowd of screaming fans and he would have been elected Premier of British Columbia.

Fortunately for people who care about the future of the province, he started talking and demonstrated that the NDP was not a better choice than the Liberals — he was just as bad.

The BCNDP are obviously making some smart moves, such as courting the film / tech vote, but they’re making a lot of bad ones, too, such as racking up billions in their fantasy budget. They’re promising a lot and they’re promising to raise taxes to do it, which is more restrained than the NDP typically is, but is hardly reassuring.

Much to their credit, they also promised to eliminate donations from corporations and unions. While Mary Polak claims this is shifting the burden onto taxpayers (which is absurd alarmism at best), unions and corporations shouldn’t be allowed to donate to political parties.

While the BC NDP make more money from unions than do the BC Liberals, they also make less money from unions than the Liberals do from corporations, so it’s not exactly tit-for-tat. The BC NDP gets most of its money from individuals, so again, you can see how it plays out better for the BC NDP, but ultimately it serves to even the playing field. It’s also important to remember that for every corporate or union cheque a party receives today, 9 times out of 10 it’s signed by an intimate party insider — now they’ll need to donate money in their own name, which is obviously better for democracy (see Sascha Peter’s breakdown for more detailed statistics).

Of course, this great policy proposal is offset by the fact that the NDP have been “shaking down” companies that donated to the BC Liberals, thus proving — as if there was any doubt — that the best way to get government to look at your proposal is to give them money at election time. The arrogant NDP, confident in their swagger, are fine with asking corporations for money while proposing an end to corporate donations. Companies that do cough up money stand to win in the long run, per the NDP’s shakedown, so that has to make you queasy.

The NDP are hardly practicing what they preach, too, as they’ve been staunchly against the Northern Gateway Pipeline but also accepted over $9000 in donations from Enbridge. Political parties routinely return donations from less-than-desirable people, be they companies or individuals, just due to optics, because a returned donation doesn’t need to be reported to Elections BC (obviously). Why the NDP didn’t do this with Enbridge — which is synonymous with “wrecking the environment” — is an absolute mystery. Seriously, they couldn’t have been hurting for cash that bad?

Ultimately, the shame of it all is that important issues are being left aside in favour of discussing who did what, when, and who is better at managing the economy. Oh, did Christy Clark cheat at SFU? How many memos did Adrian Dix backdate? Zzz, wake me up when an actual leader decides to run.

Dix and Clark have been slinging mud at each other since the word go. Important issues are being discarded (aside from Dix occasionally saying we need “better healthcare”  – thanks for the update — healthcare and education have all but been left out of the debate) and instead we’re looking at imaginary platforms based on imaginary budgets. Gone from this election is any real debate, any real revolutionary policy decisions, and any real idea of collaboration. Instead, it’s like we’re all being asked to imagine we’re a CEO and we’re hiring the world’s lamest middle manager ever. We need to pick someone who isn’t stunningly incompetent, is kind of OK with people, won’t rock the boat, and can kind of stick within a budget.With these two especially, it’s a race to the bottom of the barrel.

I can’t say unequivocally that a vote for the NDP is a bad choice. They have a few good candidates running — David Eby is a star, for example, and Matt Toner actually knows and cares about BC’s fledgling video game industry and struggling and film – but by and large, the choices aren’t great. We’re left with a slew of mediocre men and women who probably won’t end up representing anyone because the BC NDP, like every other party, will run such a tight ship in caucus that it’s a moot point. I’m not voting for the NDP in my riding and I’d say there’s a 95% chance you shouldn’t vote for the NDP in yours. You could do worse than a BC NDP government in BC, I guess, but that’s hardly a ringing endorsement.

—

I’ve saved the best for last! Tomorrow, Sunday, May the 11th, just two days before the Big Day, I’m going to detail who the biggest loser of this election is. It might not be that big a shocker.

This Election’s Big Losers: Part 3/5

Posted on by
14

In the run up to the May 14 election, I’ll be talking about this election’s Big Losers. Stay tuned!

—

Full disclosure: I’m not a fan of the BC Liberals. I volunteered for the party for six odd years, the vast majority of it in senior positions in the youth wing (the BC Young Liberals). I’ve worked for the party on and off and have volunteered for many candidates, MLAs, and ministers. Since the leadership race I’ve seen the party go in another direction and finally had enough with “quick wins”. In summary? I’m not a fan.

BC Liberals

Where do you start with the BC Liberals?

Pick (almost) any single one and you’ll have a solid reason for not voting BC Liberal. It’s really appalling when you dive into any one of these things, and it’s unreal that not only are we being asked to vote for these people, but that they’re actually running and haven’t resigned in shame.

There’s a few good BC Liberals running, but the whole party is tainted — the scandals since Gordon Campbell’s departure have all been the result of actions by either Clark’s team or ministers appointed by her. The buck stops somewhere, and it has to stop with Clark. While there might be a few good people running, you do have to wonder the wisdom of running under the party banner — even being associated with the BC Liberals should cause even the most hardened of politicians to cringe. I wish a few the best of luck, but far too many have spent the last few years apologizing for the party’s mistakes instead of fixing them, and even more have been denying them instead of facing up to them.

This is without diving into their budget – it’s suspicious, to say the least, with the bulk of the surplus made up by a sale of government assets. Probably due to the 2009 budget, it’s hard to see this one as credible. Of all the hilarious things in the document, the one that elicits the biggest guffaw is the LNG Prosperity Fund. It’s a hilarious pipe dream that will eventually result in money literally raining from the sky as LNG is pumped out of BC and sent on to Asia. It’s patently absurd and isn’t set to start paying dividends for years, with the promise of paying down BC’s $56 billion debt in a single decade.

The BC Liberals are also attempting to straddle a weird line of taxing and spending while claiming not to, which is in itself absurd. Never mind anecdotes of Clark promising the moon and Falcon screaming at her, a peek at the debt numbers (in billions) is all you need:

  • 2001 debt: $36
  • 2006 debt: $33
  • 2011 debt (Clark made leader): $45
  • 2013 debt: $56
  • 2015 (projected) debt: $69

So while a budget is “balanced”, that doesn’t explain the debt: the “balanced” part is a question of revenue in minus revenue out: if a government spends more than it makes, it has a deficit. The deficit is then tacked on to the debt. If the government makes revenue, that’s a surplus and is (hopefully) used to pay down the debt. The fact is that while we’re told the BC Liberals are fiscally responsible, they aren’t. It’s hard to justify an extra $11 billion in debt between 2011 and now (and this doesn’t include such costs as BC Hydro deferrals).

All told, Christy Clark has racked up the debt faster than any other Premier in the history of British Columbia. Isn’t that mind blowing? It’s really staggering that Clark can go on the air and claim that government spending is under control — if that were really the case, we’d either see a decrease in the debt, or just a minor increase in the debt (in the case  of a minor deficit, for example). So while Clark is talking about balanced budget legislation and so on, it really doesn’t explain the huge debt. If you round BC’s population to 4.4 million, that’s about $12,727 for every man, woman, and child in BC. That’s absurd and the sign of a spendthrift, not a penny-pincher.

Getting to the campaign, it’s hard to see there’s anything worthwhile there. It’s been negative attack ad after negative attack ad punctuated by blatant copyright infringement (though the Liberals are trying to make it seem like they’re fighting censorship by keeping it up). And there’s Clark accidentally spoiling her own ballot, which doesn’t exactly instill faith in her as a premier.

In summary? Vote like Christy Clark: spoil away.

—

Tomorrow is Big Loser 4/5 — sensing a pattern here? Who do you think it’ll be?

801 Is A Legitimate Threat: But Who Is Behind It?

Posted on by
4

Back in March, I got in touch with a local campaign manager for a sitting MLA. He or she told me about the “8:01 Plan,” and said I should come on board the campaign because of it.

He or she described the 8:01 plan succinctly: the 8:01 plan is to clean out the malfeasance wing of the party. It was enticing: cleaning out I thought what made the BC Liberals so rotten? Great!

Jas Johal broke the story yesterday along with Keith Baldrey. Not only are these 801′ers serious, but they’re creating “801″ buttons! While hardly official, it does speak to some serious planning. Post BC Liberal leadership campaign, “Party Unity” buttons were handed out, essentially telling members that love or hate Christy Clark, we’re all on the same team. Seems a fitting way to end her tenure.

801

But who is behind 801? They haven’t come out, and Johal and Baldrey both say they have separate sources, which suggests that this is a real thing and not sensationalism or completely made-up. In fact, Baldrey says these guys are huge and well-known. My campaign source has denied involvement, citing being too busy with the campaign, which is something I believe (and why lie now?). Without Baldrey or Johal’s exact sources, it’s hard to say, but it suggests three separate sources at least.

First and foremost, we have to remember that whoever is doing this is doing this for the BC Liberal Party, not for Christy Clark. Someone wants to clean up the BC Liberal party with the understanding that they’ll either squeak by this election or not get elected at all. That said, we can rule out the hardcore Christy Clark supporters.

This knocks out Rich Coleman (who allegedly has his eyes on a Senate seat anyway), Harry Bloy, John Yap, Peter Fassbender, and a host of other candidates and MLAs. Pretty much anyone who has been a Clark cheerleader is probably not going to organize a coup: plus, anyone who has been pro-Clark will have shed a lot of friends in caucus and on the campaign trail anyway. There are two types of BC Liberals these days: those who support Christy Clark, and those who pretend to support Clark because their jobs are on the line. Coleman, Fassbender, and a host of other candidates sided with Clark as supporters, not as pretenders.

But aside from cleaning up the party, this is obviously for paving the way for a new premier. The 801 club is looking at putting in an interm leader for 1.5-2 years, which would be halfway through potential Premier Adrian Dix’s tenure. The new leader of the BC Liberals would need to revitalize a defeated and downtrodden BC Liberal opposition party, so they would need to have roots in the BC Liberals. An outsider like Dianne Watts is probably out of the question. They’ll need to have been seen as a leader, as a father or mother figure, especially. Coleman I’ve heard referred to as a father figure in the past, but again, he’s out.

So who will be leader of the BC Liberals in 2015? Let’s start with Kevin Falcon.

Kevin’s a great guy in person, despite how he might come off in the public eye. In addition, he’s revered by BC Liberals (let’s remember we’re talking about the BC Liberal membership, not regular voters). Kevin Falcon is in many ways seen as the natural protege of Gordon Campbell (Campbell, again, a celebrity in BC Liberal circles — a modern-day WAC Bennett, to most). Falcon of course came in a strong second place showing to Clark in the BC Liberal Leadership Race, and he was put in charge of the Finance Ministry by Clark. While never technically Clark’s number two-man, most people who voted Falcon watched his every move while in Clark’s government, expecting that if there was a coup, he’d be there to pick up the pieces. His resignation — along with fellow leadership hopeful George Abbott’s — telegraphed to his supporters that he’d let Clark run this ship aground and come back to pick up the pieces. His recent appointment at Anthem Capital Corp. is perhaps even more proof he’s ready to come back to politics: it’ll be just like when Christy Clark left CKNW.

There is, of course, an interesting connection between Kevin Falcon, the BC Liberal Party, and Anthem Capital Corp: Eric Carlson is the Founder and CEO of Anthem Capital Corp, and various Anthem companies where Carlson is either the principal or secondary officer (including Anthem Cloverdale Retail Limited Partnership, Anthem Campbell Heights II Limited Partnership, Anthem Latimer Business Centre Limited Partnership, Anthem Properties Corp, and Anthem Properties Group Ltd.) have donated $224,570 to the BC Liberals since 2005. Carlson himself has donated over $5,000, and Carmax Enterprises Corp. and Whistler Brewing Company (Northam Brewery LP), two companies where Carlson is the primary and secondary principal officer respectively have donated $10,655. All told, Carlson-related enterprises have donated at least $240,225.00 to the BC Liberals. That’s a ton of cash. Interestingly, $101,550.00 of it– about 42.3% — was donated since February 26, 2011, the day Clark became leader.

The second most likely candidate?

Mary Polak. It’s not hard to see that Polak has been carefully distancing herself from Clark and that since Clark’s leadership, she has taken on portfolios of higher and higher import. She has tons of cachet in the BC Liberal conservatives, too, giving her a ton of strength that Clark doesn’t have. Clark’s ties to the Liberals have hurt her in many ways, and Polak doesn’t need to worry about that. She is well enough liked in her riding, too, and if she winds up elected (and Clark not), expect her to immediately take on a leadership-like role (if not interm leader altogether).

Hurting the odds of it being her though are her close ties to, yes, Rich Coleman. The two combined might as well run Langley, but their close ties — as well as the closeness of their campaigns — and Coleman’s close ties to Clark make it slightly less likely that it Polak is the leader, waiting in the wings. Of course, if Coleman gets bounced or becomes a senator and can resign, that immediately becomes a non-issue. Adding to my suspicions are the odd timing of the 8:01 announcement: the Todd Hauptman thing and Polak’s horrible press conference were just picking up steam. Then the Hakstaad thing came to light and then Johal broke 8:01. The timing seems perfect (it’s not clear when Johal found out about 8:01, but he reported it at 6. This means he could have found out about it yesterday, or even a week ago).

It’s not Falcon or Polak directly, and I doubt it would be someone who is either working on Polak’s campaign or currently working with Falcon. Heck, the 8:01 movement might not have even contact them at all, and are just going to oust Clark and let nature run its course. I have my hunches, but only time will tell and speculation serves no one. With just 5 days, 8 hours, and a little under 17 minutes until 8:01, we’ll find out soon enough.

This Election’s Big Losers: Part 2/5

Posted on by
Reply

In the run up to the May 14 election, I’ll be talking about this election’s Big Losers. Stay tuned!

—

I consider myself an environmentalist. I support the carbon tax, cap-and-trade — the whole gamut. I compost, recycle, and reuse religiously. I have compact CFLs everywhere, turn off fixtures when they’re not in use, and do my best to save energy wherever I can. I transit everywhere and suspect I have a smaller carbon footprint than most. In theory, I am the target demographic of the BC Green Party, but even I know a vote for the Greens is a wasted vote.

BC Greens

The Green Party has a very strong pool of candidates running, and admittedly dozens of no-names who won’t even come close to getting elected. Jane Sterk and Andrew Weaver instantly come to mind as candidates with a real chance at getting in — Sterk is up against Carole James, former NDP leader and beloved MLA of Victoria-Beacon Hill, while Weaver has a much better chance against Ida Chong in Oak Bay-Gordon Head. They don’t believe in a whip system and obviously their platform is aimed at helping the environment.

But some of their policies are far too long-term – a proposal, for instance, to ensure that 20% of BC’s land base is parks/protected areas… over the next 100 years (p. 27 of their “Green Book“). Obviously, one needs to temper goals with realism so when a party proposes something that is at least 25 elections away from fruition, well, you are entitled to be skeptical. The Greens are promising something over the course of 100 years, which means that if they form majority government, they’ll have 25 more elections before that clock runs out.

These are obviously the aspirations of a party that won’t form government and can’t; they’re not worried about getting elected, and having to follow through on these promises, because they know it won’t happen. Perhaps these long-term goals put them in a strong position in terms of policy, but they mean little to the electorate because they’re not realistic promises. A more realistic promise would be to have set staggered goals over the years — ie, how many parks will open by 2014, 2016, etc. What people want to know is what government will do when elected, not decades from now. Pie in the sky fantasies — like the LNG prosperity fund — don’t attract voters.

With regards to the economy, many of these policies seek to shift jobs out of dirty industries and into the green economy. Their proposals require a shift in thinking, which is asking quite a bit of the electorate. Projects like LNG or coal mining are tried and trued ways of building the economy; what Sterk is asking of BC, particularly its more conservative residents, involves a major leap of faith and a huge paradigm shift.

The Green Party does stand to make a huge win this election, much moreso than the BC Conservatives. They’re in the fortunate position of being able to attract disenfranchised BC Liberals who support their green policies as well as typical NDP supporters; those who feel the party under the direction of Adrian Dix is going in the wrong direction with regards to the environment.

Of the four parties, only the Greens want to close the loophole that lets “venting” emissions from gas/oil industries off the hook, to reinvest the tax money into green solutions, and to increase the rate. Compare that to the far right, where he Conservatives want to scrap the tax entirely. No-brainer there: the carbon tax was a huge piece of the 2009 election campaign for the BC Liberals.

Perhaps one of the smartest moves of the BC Liberals in the 2009 election was their careful courtship of the green vote. They worked on the Western Climate Initiative (a big consortium of provinces and US states) and they started talking about stretches of highway covered with electric vehicle charging stations and all sorts of amazing green dreams. There were talks of a full cap-and-trade system and, of course, there was the much ballyhooed carbon tax which won them more votes than it lost them. It was a  brilliant strategy that ended up stealing tons of votes from the BC Greens, who lacked a lot of credibility at the time, and from the BC NDP, who wanted to axe the tax. That’s not the only reason why the BC NDP lost, but it’s a large part of it. It’s patently absurd that folks like Tzeporah Berman were backing the BC Liberals in lieu of the BC NDP, but that was the case in 2009.

That’s gone, of course. Now, the BC Liberals are shedding environmental policies like it’s going out of style and are seeking to expand gas and oil in BC, thus chasing away green voters back to the welcoming arms of Jane Sterk and the BC Greens. Clark’s flippant attitude towards the environment and to tanker traffic in general is costing the Liberals more than they realize in that regard.

I’m going out on a limb here, but out of the four mainstream parties, Sterk and the BC Greens are the best of the bunch. They’re not incredible and they won’t be elected (that’s the pessimist inside me), that’s just it. If you don’t feel like spoiling your ballot, but are as irritated by the shenanigans of the BC Conservatives and the rest of them, give the Greens your vote. But do so realizing they’ll still lose.

—

Check back Friday as I go over the next Big Loser of this election.

—

Update: Tzeporah Berman wrote an article detailing why a green vote is a vote for the NDP.

You Can’t Keep a Good Kim Down: Haakstad Still Working for Christy Clark, Says Mike McDonald

Posted on by
Reply

What a farce.

I was speaking with the venerable Alex Tsakumis this morning on his radio show when he broke the news:

Kim Haakstad is working on Clark’s campaign.

The information hit twitter immediately and it wasn’t long until the mainstream media picked it up.

Cassidy Oliver of The Province confirmed it, along with CKNW and a host of other stations: eventually, even Mike McDonald confirmed it was true, Kim Haakstad is working on her campaign as a volunteer.

Unreal. Absolutely unreal. Haakstad , who Clark denounced and laid all the blame on, is still working for the same party after committing what amounts to a breach of public trust.

It’s absolutely unbelievable, too: why is Haakstad being let into that campaign office? She shouldn’t have been allowed on the same street as the office! Clark and her campaign team have the power to keep her from volunteering, so that means they want her.

That’s it: Haakstad wants to work on the campaign, and Clark wants her on board. There’s nothing else around it.

Political parties regularly refuse or return donations from certain companies (the NDP should have refused Enbridge’s donation); refusing a volunteer is easy.

So, that’s it. Haakstad has served her penance for a full two months, and she’s back on the team. Adrian Dix, who backdated a memo over a decade ago, can’t catch a break — but Haakstad? Welcome back on the team!

Honestly, do these people have no shame? Just watch — if, through some miracle, the BC Liberals are re-elected, it won’t be long until Haakstad gets a senior government posting. That’s BC politics for you!

Todd Hauptman Victim of Homophobic Bullying

Posted on by
Reply

It was with some sadness I read about the resignation of Todd Hauptman from Mary Polak’s campaign. I have met Hauptman once or twice over the years, and know his reputation: he’s an incredible worker and very well known in his community. He’s also, as it happens, very Christian. A quick perusal of any of his publicly available social media will lead you to that.

Hauptman resigned today with a very public letter as Mary Polak’s campaign manager. Hauptman writes:

Today, I am asking politicians of all stripes – including Mary – to speak up for the gay community. We live in a day and age where we must be willing to embrace our fellow human beings, regardless of their sexual orientation. I have had enough of being marginalized and I am tired of politicians making endless excuses for political gain.

Hauptman’s request is very fair, and I totally see where he is coming from. The BC Liberals in particular have been pathetic with regards to “gay” issues, despite gay marriage having become legal in BC in 2003. Not only that, but even symbolic gestures have become few and far between: although she was a staple at the Pride Parade before becoming leader (while she was with CKNW), Clark hasn’t been to a Pride parade since (she’s usually on vacation). The BC Liberal contingent is rarely in force: in 2011, no BC Liberal MLAs attended and even last year only one did. It’s pretty pathetic when you get right down to it, regardless of what you think about the Pride Parade or gay rights in general.

That’s obviously not the crux of Hauptman’s problem. It is much more severe:

While I can say without hesitation that Mary has always shown me respect and love, and was a source of strength and encouragement when I ‘came-out,’ I have been conflicted beyond words these past weeks. You see, the very base of voters who will likely help Mary get re-elected in just one-weeks time are made up of individuals who hold hateful attitudes towards the community I am a part of. It is knowing this that I simply cannot in good conscience support a campaign made-up of people who think of me as less of a person because I am gay. It is for these reasons that – after considerable thought and deliberation – I have decided to step-down from Mary’s campaign effective immediately.

Hauptman blames the electorate and others who make up the campaign for his resignation. It’s a bold claim, and I can totally follow it. “The gay vote” is often coveted, so it only makes sense the opposite would be. A friend of mine was asked some years ago, for example, to be a campaign chair for a certain MLA. He refused because he felt that being picked because he could “bring the gays” was downright insulting. What Hauptman faced is much worse.

I have it on good authority, in fact, that Todd Hauptman was the victim of bullying by John Cameron, who is the campaign manager for Rich Coleman. Allegedly, Cameron has been calling the Langley Township to complain about Polak’s signs being in breach of local bylaws: that’s right, one campaign manager is complaining to the township about how another campaign manager is running a campaign. Unbelievable, petty infighting.

According to the same source, it wasn’t just the campaign managers: allegedly, party boss Mike McDonald refused to speak with Hauptman — he’d refuse his calls and not return his messages — until Polak made him. Even politicians wouldn’t cut Hauptman some slack! Peter Fassbender, candidate in Surrey-Fleetwood and former mayor of Langley, shortly after Hauptman “came out”, allegedly approached Hauptman to tell him that “his religious beliefs don’t agree with Todd’s lifestyle”: all this after Hauptman supported his various runs for office.

As if it couldn’t get worse, Polak today on CKNW threw Hauptman under the bus. The allegation? That Hauptman was slipping secrets to the NDP. Hauptman was apparently involved with a current NDP staffer and had been slipping “campaign strategy” to the staffer. Apparently, Polak was recently at a town hall debate where the NDP staffer asked Polak about the books she famously failed to ban from Surrey classrooms some years ago — her answer was less than satisfactory to Hauptman, according to Polak. Apparently, she intended to discuss the leaking of campaign secrets with Hauptman this morning before he resigned.

But it gets worse. It gets much, much, much worse. Today, in front of reporters and apparently in a hastily-planned press conference, Polak really said something unbelievable:

That’s right. Hauptman is a sinner, and that’s that. This is what she is saying about her friend. First she accuses him of the First Sin of Politics (leaking party information), and then she advises us that his lifestyle is a sin in the eyes of his God. It’s unbelievable and absolutely gutless. Hauptman has been avoiding the media and only put out a single statement that was more flattering of Polak than anything else, and she gutted him like a fish. Polak doesn’t deserve friends like Hauptman, and Hauptman sure doesn’t deserve friends like Polak.

What initially seemed as a personal issue has become something much, much bigger. This could have been avoided with a carefully worded press release on Polak’s part, or even a much more elegant press conference. She didn’t have to start calling people sinners or anything: she could have walked in, said Hauptman made a personal decision, and been done with it. Hauptman’s letter expresses only love and respect for Polak (which appears to have been a mistake on his part), and aside from the suggestion that she should do more, everything was fine. In fact, Polak could have just said, “we’ll try to do more for the gay community” and kept quiet until the election.

Polak and what remains of her campaign team is hedging their bets, no doubt. I don’t know how strong the “gay vote” is in Langley (guess: not very), but this whole affair is a black mark on the BC Liberals who are already wildly unpopular with the “gay community,” even with Lorne Mayencourt working from behind the scenes.