Some people will simply want those seeking political office, to say the things they want to hear

Here's a question for you ... "Who do you think wants to find out about what the BC Conservatives stand for, and how we would govern?" 

Well off the top of my head, the easy answer would be, “People that are small ‘c’ conservatives” … but who are those people?  The problem is, how do we know who those people are?  I certainly can’t tell by looking at them.  

With that in mind, I decided to send out an email to some of the people who, last Fall, let their names stand for elected office in the Kamloops area.

Here is part of the message I sent:

Because of a commitment by BC Conservatives to provide a common sense alternative, to the New Democrats and the BC Liberals, I have gone from being a member of the party ... to working with others to create Constituency Associations for both Kamloops riding's ... to also become the Regional Director for the Kamloops, Thompson, Fraser Nicola area. 

Last year you let your name stand to become an elected representative on Kamloops City Council.  That tells me you are interested in, and sincere about, the well-being of our community ... and our province.  With that in mind, you may be interested in taking a look at the policy document for the BC Conservative Party.

If you would like to find out more about what our party stands for, I'd also like to encourage you to look over the information you’ll find at http://www.bcconservative.ca/what-we-stand-for. You can also read a piece I was asked to submit, on why I believe people can and should support the BC Conservative Party, which ran in Kamloops This Week on May 29th.

I believe that the BC Conservative Party is one that can and will be both fiscally responsible, and have a social conscience.  That is why I support the party, and why am working to its continued growth in our city.

Thank you for your time; please feel free to contact me if you would care to discuss party policy on any issues you feel of importance to the people of BC ……

One of the people, I sent this message to, replied by saying:

Bring back the Eco-energy program and you'd have my support. I look forward in reading your platform more closely.

Regards…

Here’s my response:

Good morning __ xyz ___ ... I appreciate you taking the time to get back to me ...

I did take the time to have a fresh look at comments you made in the lead up to last year’s municipal election.  One of the things that stood out was the need to not only have “... economic growth and big companies, but we have to look at the environmental impact".  I couldn't agree with you more.

Like you, I also want to see good high paying jobs that can support families, and provide the royalties and taxes we need to fund government services and programs -- but not at the expense of our environment.  Our leader, John Cummins has stated publicly, on many occasions, that we need to proceed with expanded resource development while continuing with environmental assessments. 

Here is a recent direct quote from Mr. Cummins;

"We have to balance that environmental assessment, as well, with the social and economic necessities of the province. We want these companies to know that we’re supportive. We need that investment. We’re prepared to work with them to make it happen. But at the end of the day, if they don’t pass muster, they don’t pass muster. That’s always the possibility.”

To be honest, I am not aware of any policy position we have taken with regards to a return to the 'eco-energy program', however I do know that we are currently in the process of reviewing and updating existing policy in advance of our AGM which takes place in September.  I am going to forward your email to the head of our policy committee, to find out if this is one area being looked into.

Thank you again for getting back to me ... if you have any further comments, or questions, once you've had a closer look at our policies, please feel free to give me a shout ... alan

I also sent the question, regarding the eco-energy program, to Al Siebring, who is on our Provincial Policy Committee.  He also responded by staying:

… we have no current policy with respect to a return of the EcoEnergy program, but then again, this kind of specificity isn't generally addressed in our policy documents.

Policy, by its very nature, is rather "high-level", and simply sets out the broad paradigm under which our leader is free to develop platform positions in conjunction with the Platform Committee.

(If we get into too many "specifics" in policy, we run the risk of having our competitors announce our policy positions as theirs, and we'd have to wait a full year to remove a potentially outdated policy from our booklet at our next AGM.  This is why, for example, our policy doesn't address the matter of the Carbon Tax and the Pacific Carbon Trust.  But our platform position on this falls under the rubric of our broader policy statement which says we will "review" all taxes and Crown Agencies with respect to their efficacy and efficiency.)

Having said that, a return of this program would certainly not be outside the realm of possibility or the scope of our present environmental policies.   It is, however, not something that I've heard discussed.  In fact, __ xyz ___ , yours is the first communication we have had with this suggestion.

I have sent a copy of this communication to Ryan Williams, the chair of our Platform Committee, just to this issue on the radar there …

Regrettably, and for reasons I still do not understand, this was not what they wished to hear as they replied stating:

You just lost my vote with that generic response to a question unrelated to what you answered....

So how should we have responded, given that we do not have policy specific to the return of the Eco-energy program … and given this person appeared to be in favour of development, but with environmental protection in place? 

Should I have carefully crafted a response that ‘sounded like’, or gave the ‘appearance that’ we were going to do something, on an issue that needs to have more time to be considered, and looked in to?

Personally, I do not believe so, which is why I did take a few more minutes to respond:

Unlike others, who would have likely given you an answer they 'thought' you'd want to hear, I instead replied as best as I was able with the information I had available to me. I also, as mentioned, forwarded email to our provincial policy committee, and you have already (I believe) received a direct response from Al Siebring.

BC Conservatives are not going to make promises we cannot keep; nor are we going to give answers we think people want to hear, to questions they have asked.  We already have a high degree of voter apathy, and that is something we do not intend to add to it.

If there is anything you feel that perhaps we may wish to address within our policy, please feel free to give me a shout.  The door is always open to input ...

I believe the most important part of those 3 short paragraphs was, “BC Conservatives are not going to make promises we cannot keep; nor are we going to give answers we think people want to hear, to questions they have asked.”

From previous experience of having run for elected office before, I know that may not sit well with some people, and some will simply want those seeking political office to indeed say the things they want to hear, regardless of the consequences.

My hope however is that come BC's next General Election in May 2013, more people will want honest and straight-forward answers, to issues that need to be addressed.

I’m Alan Forseth in Kamloops, with the thoughts of one conservative.  The floors your now, what do you think?