How do we deal with the consequences of actions taken in the past? How can they be resolved in a way that is respectful to all? How will we conduct ourselves?

I appreciate when people drop me a note to ask about posts I have written, or questions / comments they have about the BC Conservative Party.

Yesterday, one of my Liberal friends (yeah I do have some) wrote me a note saying:

FYI - I have received two comments this morning about John Cummins comments on First Nations. In short - they think his comments say that he has "thrown in the towel" to become the next Premier of BC.... as a result of last week's interview (and likely his newspaper interview) on Voice of BC.... thought you should know....

Okay … that’s a fair comment; but I wondered, “What are those comments based on.”  So I responded by saying:

Unfortunately TOO many people listen to the comments / opinions of what he has said -- rather than his actual comments, and the facts behind them. It is NOT popular, but in fact he is 100% accurate in what he is saying based on ALL existing court cases.

Where do people plan to live when claims cover 120% of the province.  The First Nations governments can't even agree amongst themselves who's territory is who's ... 97% of the First Nations Fishery was SOLD when the fishery is ONLY to be for food and ceremony ... the land turned over to the Tsawwassen Band was undervalued 10 fold ... I could go on and on.

YES we need to settle these issues -- BUT -- it has to be fair and realistic. THAT is what John Cummins is trying to say and get across.

Here’s the response that I received from my friend:

I respect this point... but unfortunately the public is hearing another message … and I must admit - that the aspect of settling land claims is something I agree with John on … but his other comments around how to go about it is something I disagree with, in light of land claims and plenty of case law on this subject...

To which I replied:

Either we are all equal or we are not. It’s time to get out of the past --- move forward ... and provide realistic opportunities for each and every First Nations person so they can have every opportunity for success.

And yes ... the public is hearing another message ... but it is one being manipulated by those who take advantage of the dissension being created.

POINT / COUNTERPOINT: Elect an MLA who works for you

The following is an editorial piece I was invited to write for Kamloops This Week.  It was published in today's edition (May 29th).

BC’s next provincial election will focus on issues of big government, and its twin big spending … concerns about increasing fees and high taxes … trust … and accountability.   These have been issues which have drawn many to the BC Conservatives … and reinforced our commitment to present a clear and well-defined vision of how to deal with them.

                

Christy Clark BC Liberals proudly boast of being fiscally responsible, and yet they are well on their way to doubling our provincial debt.  By 2014 it will top $60 BILLION dollars!   Is it the hallmark of a fiscally conservative government, to make interest payments of over $6 million dollars a day, on this ever increasing debt?

 

That’s $6 MILLION dollars a day which is NOT available to:

… improve our deteriorating health care system

… go into classrooms and to build new schools

… provide better services for seniors

… provide programs to help our children get a good start in life

… better assist people in BC that face mental and physical challenges

… make making improvements to our highways and ferry system.

Our commitment, as BC Conservatives, is to provide government that lives within its means.

Here is something else you won’t hear from Christy Clark.  Last year more people left BC, for other parts of Canada, than moved here.  Our children, skilled trades’ people, and professionals are leaving because provinces like Alberta and Saskatchewan are offering more jobs … and a lower cost of living.

I could list many things which have created concerns in recent years; but you already know what they are.  Each of those concerns has added to an ever increasing number, who have a growing distrust of those who seek elected office.

Any smart business person would have made those changes anyways. Why? Because doing them increases profits, and saves them money!

It didn’t take long for the prompter of yesterday’s blog post, “The carbon tax was really nothing more than a tax grab, designed as a phoney green initiative, and the government knew that from the start”, to pose a follow-up question to me.

The response was:

That isn’t completely true. Initial design of tax was to have monies available for companies  to access for Research and Development etc

I noted their wording of the response, which included … “isn’t completely true” … and ‘initial design of tax’. 

So how much of what I said, did this person think was true?  I’m not sure, but hey, let’s take a look at just some of the grants, given to businesses in BC, by the Pacific carbon Trust.  And remember … this is money that has in large part come from each one of us, through the carbon tax, which we pay to the government.

Encana Corporation has reduced its greenhouse gas emissions by 85 per cent at a drilling program in northeastern British Columbia by conserving gas during drilling and reducing flaring. The system safely and reliably recovers up to 80 percent of the natural gas produced during a typical underbalanced drilling operation. This method reduces greenhouse gas emissions by about 1,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per well drilled.

IF they are now recovering 80% of what was previously lost, was it not to their benefit to do this anyway.  This recovery process provides them with more natural gas they can sell, so why was a freebie give-away from the government necessary?

Pacific Carbon Trust has invested in an Improved Forest Management project that will result in the conservation of select old growth stands on TimberWest's private land. This is the first forest project to use BC’s Forest Carbon Offset Protocol (FCOP). The project is located on a 26,000 ha of Timberwest’s old growth forest free-hold property on Vancouver Island.

Just in case you missed it in news reports sometime back, TimberWest had announced they were not going to harvest this wood, as they had determined it would be too expensive to do so.

PCT has contracted to purchase offsets generated from Randhawa Farms Ltd.’s greenhouse project. The greenhouse operator installed insulating curtains at its three greenhouse locations in Abbotsford to reduce the amount of natural gas used as a heat source. These offset activities reduce annual operating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions relative to the natural gas baseline.

Let’s see … they add the insulating curtains, and that then reduces the amount of natural gas they had previously required.  Seems like it should have been a project they would have undertaken in the first place, to reduce their production costs.

The carbon tax was really nothing more than a tax grab, designed as a phoney green initiative, and the government knew that from the start

The other day I was asked on Twitter what BC Conservatives would do about the Carbon Tax. 

Twitter allows for a limited number of characters to respond, far more that what follows, but basically what I said was … It’s bad for business, bad for people in the interior and north, and it adds to the cost of goods and services.  It has yet to show any benefit.  It is negative, unfair, and with a BC Conservative government it will be gone!

They responded by asking, “How would you make up revenue? It’s a huge amount.”

To which I said … “I thot it was 2B revenue neutral.  4 starters we won't have the PCT giving free$ 2 corps/ org

Again in case a translation is needed here is what that meant:

I thought it was to be revenue neutral?  For starters we won’t have the Pacific Carbon Trust giving free money to corporations and organizations.

I wanted to say more, and using Twitter wasn’t going to work, so the remainder of my reply was sent as a message via Facebook instead. This is what I had to say:

Rather than the BC government trying to convince me / us that the Carbon Tax is reducing our carbon footprint -- they should cancel it and let me keep MY money.  I can then spend it on something I want to purchase, which helps keep people employed and helps creates new jobs.  Because I am spending money I have earned, on real purchases of goods and services, government will get tax revenue via the HST (or soon to be GST / PST).

A bit of ‘This and That’ from the news

My apologies … I have been busy with CA meetings for the Kamloops North and South Thompson CA’s … the Public Town Hall meeting in Clearwater with John Cummins tomorrow night ... and the founding meeting of our Fraser Nicola CA which takes place on Saturday. 

That means todays blog post will be a bit of ‘This and That’ from the news over the past couple of days.  Let’s start out with a story from Jordan Bateman OF the Canadian Taxpayers Federation;

“Outrageous B.C. Gas Taxes Keep Economy in Neutral”

If the federal and B.C. governments are as hungry to spark job creation as their expensive TV commercials and overseas trips make it appear, they should cut the taxes on gas.

Taxes now make up nearly one-third of the cost of gasoline, which both penalize drivers and raise the cost of any good or service moved by a vehicle. Leaving more of that money in drivers’ pockets to spend anywhere but on government, simply makes sense.

Lower Mainland drivers pay the highest gas tax on the continent—more than 49 cents per litre. In Victoria, the tax burden is almost 41 cents, while the rest of British Columbia sits at the national average of 37 cents per litre.

CLICK HERE to read the full story.

Next up, is the “The great Hydro cost coverup” by Vaughn Palmer of the Vancouver Sun

As the B.C. Utilities Commission moved this spring to hold public hearings on the B.C. Liberals' controversial electricity plans, the government mounted a rearguard action to drag the process back behind closed doors.

… the process is the formal name for what is essentially a backroom deal, brokered by the regulator with Hydro and the industry and consumer groups that make up the bulk of the players at any public hearing.

Had the commission gone along, the public hearings, set for a minimum three weeks starting June 18, would likely have been cancelled. Much to the relief of the Liberals, who - I'm told - lobbied hard to make sure they never happened …

CLICK HERE to read the full story.

The issue of downloading services from one level of government, to the next, is obviously having a serious affect on municipalities

Last week in Penticton, mayors from 86 communities across British Columbia met to discuss issues they have been facing, and of concern, as more and more areas previously looked after (and funded) by Federal and Provincial governments, get downloaded on to them.  

In a story from the Okanagan’s CHBC TV News, Dianne Watts, Mayor of Surrey said:

“B.C.’s municipalities need a new deal with the provincial and federal governments to provide the services our constituents expect.  Municipalities provide the vast majority of the service in areas such as infrastructure while being given only 8 cents out of every tax dollar to do it.”

While Penticton Mayor Dan Ashton said:

“We all realize there is only one taxpayer and those taxpayers are challenged these days and that challenge is one that we as mayors and council have to address.  The analogy of people being able to support more services through taxation is not one that any mayor in this province wants to accept.”

A news release from the Mayors, following their meeting in Penticton, also brought up a number of additional areas of concerns, where local governments are:

• now providing land as a precondition for the Province to build social housing projects
• now responsible for ensuring residential tenancies are properly maintained by landlords
• paying more for policing as new federal laws require more work to gather more evidence to support charges being approved
• managing flood hazard areas and related liability
• dealing with the aftermath of psychiatric hospitals closures by the Province which has placed many vulnerable people on the street
• paying local fire departments to respond to medical calls, displacing the need for added resources by the provincially funded ambulance service

Those four things stand out to me, as having clear direction … a vision so to speak … of what government should do, and the role it should play in our society

I woke up on Sunday evening with the word “Vision” going through my mind.  Of course it was attached to something that is often on my mind, which is politics.  I believe that in BC we have suffered from a lack of elected officials, and leaders, that have had a real sense of vision on what our province can be for us, and the future it can hold for our children and grandchildren.

But first … what does the word ‘vision’ actually mean?  Here are just a few descriptions:

• a thought, concept, or object formed by the imagination
• the act or power of imagination
• mode of seeing or conceiving
• unusual discernment or foresight (a person of vision)

Each of the three main political parties in BC has a vision of how they would govern – and if you are interested you can see what they have to say by visiting their websites.  The one that has resonated for me has been the direction, and vision, presented by the BC Conservative Party.

The first four guiding principles of the BC Conservative Party say it will be guided by the following principles:

1. A belief in clearly defined public policies and programs that are affordable and effective and for which delivery is accountable to all the people of British Columbia.
2. A belief in managing the government to the highest standards of integrity and transparency and British Columbians are entitled to full knowledge of services rendered and their costs.
3. A belief in the rights and responsibilities of all British Columbians and that Governments at all levels are responsible to serve and respect all individuals and their families, including freedom from unnecessary laws and regulations and excessive government.
4. A belief that Members of the Legislative Assembly are primarily responsible to represent the interests of their Constituents.

Those four things stand out to me, as having clear direction … a vision so to speak … of what government should do, and the role it should play in our society.