Madame Premier … what do you have to say?

Statistics Canada has released its latest Jobs Report for May.  That report shows that employment across the country is staying stable, however the largest reason for that may be the continued growth of jobs in Alberta and Saskatchewan, along with the province of Quebec.

So how did we fare in Western Canada? 

Alberta had an increase in employment with 9,800 net new jobs; their unemployment rate now stands at just 4.5 percent ... Manitoba basically remained the same as they went from from 5.3% to 5.1% ... and Saskatchewan still has the lowest unemployment rate in Canada at 4.1 percent.

And how do things look here in British Columbia? 

What is there actually to come together over? It appears what's left is becoming a carcass

Over the past several months, there have been many stories in the news, about Christy Clark's call for the big tent free-enterprise coalition to once again rally around her.  

“We’re different now” … “things will change” … “we want to have your input” … are part of a dubious and questionable rebirth of their enthusiasm to have suggestions and ideas from the people of BC.

Should that not be an on-going process that political parties are involved with – NOT just at the point of certain defeat at the hands of voters?

Over the past several years, BC Liberals have not been interested in hearing from the people of BC.  Instead, they seemed to believe they already had all the right answers.   

They have governed with what seemed to many, a callous disregard for the results.

Things like Community Living BC spring to mind … as does ever increasing fees and taxes for things like hydro, car insurance, medical premiums, ferries, and more.

Rural communities watched in shocked disbelief as schools and medical facilities were shuttered and closed.

These things are just the tip, of a long list, of reasons why three quarters of the people in BC are now indicating they will NOT vote Liberal in the next provincial election.

In my honest opinion this program was poorly thought out, poorly implemented, and it definitely unfairly impacts the people of BC … depending on where they live

Today we have a follow up to the post, “Any smart business person would have made those changes anyways. Why? Because doing them increases profits, and saves them money!” from last Tuesday (May 29, 2012)

This morning I received a comment from HB2cents, who said:

I just wanted to share one tid-bit of info with you that you might consider - the Carbon Tax is revenue neutral, and the PCT doesn't get a cent of it. Taxpayers get income tax breaks as a result of the tax (that's why it is revenue neutral, i.e. government doesn't keep the money).

The tax was implemented to price carbon so that people would give thought to using less. If you do use less, you benefit even more - by saving on fuel and income tax.

Just wanted to make that point of clarification.

You should also know that Carbon Neutral Government (the reason why public sector pays for offsets to the Pacific Carbon Trust) is an incentive for those organizations to reduce carbon so they pay less in offsets. As a result of this, busy hospital CEOs and the like have actually paid more attention to their energy use because they are required to measure their CO2 output. This forces them to see the opportunities to reduce energy use - and they are doing it.

Like you point out in your article, you would think that if there is the potential for a business or school to save money by investing in new technology or simply turning down the heat, they would. The sad truth is people see cost (new curtains in a greenhouse, solar hot water heaters) and they turn the other way... unless there is a discount or incentive or law.

CHOICE, OPTIONS, and CHANGE … vs ... SCAREMONGER, FEAR, and PEREMPTORY

Do any of the following words sound dangerous, scary, or unhealthy to you?

CHOICE … OPTIONS … CHANGE

In looking at the definitions ascribed to them by Merriam Webster, ‘CHOICE’, ‘OPTIONS’, and ‘CHANGE’ certainly don’t sound dangerous, scary, or unhealthy, as you will note by the following:

Definition of the word CHOICE

… the act of choosing … power of choosing

… a number and variety to choose among

… care in selecting

Definition of the word OPTIONS

… an act of choosing

… the right to choose (freedom of choice)

Definition of the word CHANGE

… to make different in some particular

… to give a different position, course, or direction

… to replace with another

… to make a shift from one to another

… to undergo a modification

To those who believe in a democratic society the words Choice, Options, or Change should never be considered to be scary … instead I think that most would consider them to be healthy.

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.