SO ... just which political party actually DOES support the hard working men and women that pack a lunch bucket to the job site?



I'm wondering ... does Adrian Dix and the BC NDP support the 'leadership' of the unions which make large campaign contributions --- or the actual men and women that pack a lunch bucket to the job site?

I'm wondering this because it seems ONLY the BC Conservative Party actually supports development of new high paying, family raising, union jobs in the resource industry (ie: mines and Northern Gateway)

From the Globe and Mail ... with regards to Adrian Dix and the NDP:
"With a regulatory review for the contentious Northern Gateway project still under way – and a provincial election on the horizon – British Columbia’s New Democratic Party is already looking at ways to stop the $5.5-billion project should it be approved."

That includes a legal team considering strategies to prevent it from being built, NDP Leader Adrian Dix says.

“You can do a whole pile of stuff on the regulatory front that will increase the price to where it makes it economically prohibitive,” said one former bureaucrat, who did not want to be identified because of current contracts with industry. “The smartest thing to do from a political perspective would be to fight the thing in court because the delays will kill the project.”

And in the National Post with regards to, Christy Clark Yes today and NO tomorrow??
"Clark’s real weapon is political: the opposition of much of the B.C. public to the project, and the price the federal Tories would likely pay at the polls were they seen to be overriding the government of B.C. on the matter — her own, or her likely NDP successor’s.

The list of demands she has suddenly produced, are
an obvious attempt to inoculate herself on the
Gateway issue, without actually coming out against it."

The list of demands she has suddenly produced, far behind in the polls with less than a year to go before the provincial election, are an obvious attempt to inoculate herself on the Gateway issue, without actually coming out against it."

Now let's look at the comments of BC Conservative Party leader John Cummins, spoken just a week ago:
"The BC Conservatives, alone among our province's four major political parties, support the economic development and high-wage job opportunities that will come with construction of the Northern Gateway pipelines," said Cummins.

"Of course, the project must adhere to our nation's stringent environmental laws and regulations. A fair and objective analysis will conclude that the economic benefits to Canada and British Columbia are real and tangible."

The reasons behind the support for the pipeline centers on job-creation and resource management.  “If we don’t do something with these resources,” he said, “someone else will”.

Meantime, if anyone thinks the BC Conservative Party position has changed in any way, I invite you to check out this link to a video which was done by Integrity BC.  It features BC Conservative Party leader John Cummins, and confirms our position has remained the same.

Do BC Conservatives support development at any cost -- NO of course not ... although we have, and will again be alleged, to have that policy.  Here however are the facts of BC Conservative Party policy regarding jobs, the environment, and resource development:

She has no legal leg to stand on, and she is simply posturing to try and regain the support of an electorate that is rapidly choosing to support other options

Alberta Premier Alison Redford and BC Premier
Christy Clark.  Clark is on attack mode with
both Redford and the Federal Government

I hope Premier Christy Clark is aware of the applicable Constitutional Provisions, that would apply to Principle 5, which she said must be addressed if, “… we are to consider support for such pipeline developments in our province.”

That principle (#5) was that, “British Columbia receives a fair share of the fiscal and economic benefits of proposed heavy oil projects that reflect the risk borne by the province.”

Now it should be noted that the two Constitutional Provisions, which apply in this and any other similar case, state that:

 … the exclusive Legislative Authority of the Parliament of Canada extends to all Matters coming within the Classes of Subjects next hereinafter enumerated; that is to say,

 2. The Regulation of Trade and Commerce.

 10. Navigation and Shipping

Additionally there is the following: 

Export from provinces of resources (Authority of Parliament)

92(A)2) In each province, the legislature may make laws in relation to the export from the province to another part of Canada of the primary production from non-renewable natural resources and forestry resources in the province and the production from facilities in the province for the generation of electrical energy, but such laws may not authorize or provide for discrimination in prices or in supplies exported to another part of Canada.

Marginal note: Authority of Parliament

92 (3) Nothing in subsection (2) derogates from the authority of Parliament to enact laws in relation to the matters referred to in that subsection and, where such a law of Parliament and a law of a province conflict, the law of Parliament prevails to the extent of the conflict.

The exception to the above would be for pipelines which lie completely within the borders of a single province; these are regulated by that province's regulatory body.