GenX. My politics are clearly left and I’m tired of compromise with the neo-liberal right. They’ve driven a wedge with their money based centrist politics. We used to be able to do great things and we can again; we just need the leadership to do so; and folks to say as much.
Its not a great look when a so-called green-light committee blocks an aspiring candidate from seeking a nomination or in this case, seeking leadership of a federal political party. Its not a great look, but its an absolute necessity.
Yves Engler was denied entry to the leadership race by this committee within the NDP was upheld on independent review…and look, if it was without cause, this would be outrageous.
B’nai Brith, Humura Association, Ibuka Canada, Page Rwanda, and the Memory Keepers Association of the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi in Rwanda issued a letter regarding public comments of Yves regarding his genocide denial.
I can understand some folks antipathy towards Israeli policy today as it relates to Palestine; this chapter will be recorded as one of the darkest ever in humanity. But the potential of platforming a guy who undermines the experiences of Jewish people and amplifying the term ‘holocaust industry’ and is apparently a Rwandan genocide truther, imagine this man leading the party..
No thanks.
We on the left should never be in the business whatsoever in minimizing genocide or undermining the experiences and trauma of survivor communities who are left to bare witness in their wake. It is morally repugnant that anyone on our side of the political map would try this…and it’s a political cash cow to our opponents.
Yes, the NDP struggles to connect at times. We get eclipsed in the broader red/blue endless battle where little actually changes. The Liberals steal our progressive ideas, campaign on them then abandon them once in power; the conservatives hone their blue-collar populist appeal to working class by their own version of intolerant identity politics – only to deliver neoliberal economics once in power.
The NDP needs to reconnect to the working class, but the platforming (at minimum) of someone with such views would force the party to fight fires they started themselves. This is so unproductive and a major disservice to Canadians looking for a voice outside the usual liberal vs conservative merry-go-round.
We’d get the electoral oblivion we’d deserve.
So the green light committee as such, while imperfect and doesn’t get everything right – got this right.
If it’s true that Yves was musing about joining the Greens, fill your boots.
To listen to some opinion makers and politicians of the far right in BC and Canada, you’d be forgiven in thinking that “the indians are tryin’ to take away your land” – because that is their narrative, and the previously faint racist dog whistle is now a defcon 1 air horn proclaiming in incoming calamity.
Ok. Calm the fuck down.
The Cowichan vs Canada case goes back in its origin to 2014, pre-dating the current BC NDP government by a couple of years. Not that it matters here, because the underlying issues underpinning the arguments extend 150+ years.
A couple of disclaimers here first. I am not a lawyer and I’m not of any First Nations ancestry. So my take on this is just my opinion. I would like to think that my views are relatively informed – even when stated through my political lense.
Now, please read this examination by the BD & P law firm. Another by MLT Aikins. More by JFK Law.
Next. Please view this commentary by Chief Aaron Pete. He gives some important historical context and discusses the legal journey this matter has followed to get to the decision.
From my very lay understanding, the Cowichan argument demonstrated that they had occupied the land in question since before the arrival of settlers, but was sold out from under their noses without their knowledge.
Now, given that I have no legal background, no known First Nations ancestry, I will tread carefully here.
I am also a private property owner in Nanaimo where I live with my family, so the questions regarding private land “fee simple” are of interest as you might imagine. Given the rhetoric lately by certain politicians of the right and far right, I could have been convinced that eventually, my house could be taken away. Gladly, as I read in the decision, that privately owned land (homes and businesses, presumably) were not on the table.
But I am a supporter of genuine reconciliation. What’s more is the fact that since most of BC is without any treaty, let alone modern treaties, its incumbent upon us to continue to pursue this path as it will finally establish the certainty needed for moving forward.
To be clear, we are the last province to have treaties sorted out.
I understand that all parties to the defense have filed notice of appeals on the outcome of this case, and will likely end up in the hands of the Supreme Court.
So be it.
But we need to talk about the gushing racism now flowing out from these racists of the far right. These folks range are almost exclusively from within BC’s conservative parties’ worldview, and it’s time to call them out for the repugnant positions they hold.
First Nations in BC have always faced racism and bigotry – ever since there were European explorers and settlers among them. But this case has ripped the scab off and unleashed a torrent of hate.
The ironic part here is that should we end up at a coherent conclusion of reconciliation, the various First Nations would be far better empowered to innovate and create prosperity for the folks of their communities; but the pathway there is seemingly blocked (or would be blocked) by the very folks who would then turn around and demonize the very ‘lazy indians’ that “cost taxpayers so much” (in various social program spending, etc).
Reconciliation is cheaper than litigation. Cooperation is better than confrontation. Now, I don’t know what happens next as far as this particular case goes, but we cannot go backwards.
I understand the anxiety and apprehension exposed by such headlines, but we should give absolutely zero moral license to those pushing hate and racism disguised in the narrative of “indians comin’ to take your land”. YOU are as vile and repugnant now as those making the poor decisions then. We see you, and call you out.
Sit the fuck down and let more rational people do the talking.
This was a moment. In the immediate aftermath of a very public assassination of Charlie Kirk, that more rational minds could have spoken up and unilaterally condemned political violence and encouraged the masses to put down their weapons and return to civility.
That did not happen.
To be absolutely clear, nobody deserves to be murdered for speaking their minds in public. I disagree, bitterly at times, with virtually everything that Charlie Kirk said and stood for. In my view, his positions on so many issues were so repugnant that they were ludicrous; deserving the scorn and ridicule they were rightly getting. But he did not deserve to be shot dead over it.
What’s worse is that the garbage that he spewed is now virtually untouchable in many circles because the shooter has made a martyr out of a man who spewed such bile. Now there’s a very public move to immortalize the man with public spaces renamed after him, streets named after him, state level governments partnering with his former organisation to install their politically charged material INTO the public education program.
There is no evidence that the shooter was actually a leftist, certainly no more evidence that he was a rightist, despite the hopes that he can be tied to one tribe or another. The shooter was born and raised in a traditional Mormon family, Mormon community and was surrounded in a conservative worldview. He went to college for a single semester, and dropped out of their trades program. But because we’re stuck in this toxic narrative that if we can blame a supporter of one side, then it justifies an escalation of political violence as ‘revenge’…and so the downward spiral continues.
If I were a betting man though, I’m sure when the evidence is fully revealed – that the shooter was probably subject to some undiagnosed mental health condition.
Again. Political violence is all wrong. It doesn’t matter the target, it doesn’t matter the motivations of the attacker. In a civilized society, we settle our differences at the ballot box; and if our side doesn’t win, we lick our wounds and try again next cycle.
Between elections, we’re supposed to put down the sword and learn to get along. It doesn’t mean that everyone and everything is happy and harmonious, it just means that we’re mature adults and we learn to agree to disagree.
But that’s not where we are at.
Look there is a problem with radicalization of our politics, but it is not an even split. There’s no actual equivalency, except to say that the radicals of the far left and the far right are very capable of violence. But it’s more complex than that.
The right could have had their moment here though. They could have been the side calling for calm, calling for dialogue, they could have been the ones dismissing all political violence as a means to settle differences; but instead they are giving into the most venomous voices of hate and revenge. Worse, the death of Charlie Kirk has allowed them to unmask their desire for fascism.
Instead, despite having suffered assassinations against liberal and left leaning politicians by well established right-wingers, it was the centre-left and moderates calling out political violence and for peaceful dialogue; and condemning the actions of this shooter – even if the “leftist” allegations are as yet unproven.
The extreme right controls the Republican Party. You’re free to prove me wrong, but you’re up against the record of your own President and both houses of congress who have rubber stamped everything promoted by Trump. What used to be the great value of America, the thing that folks around the world admired is the limited government version of administration. Where the President, while powerful, was not all-powerful. Every branch of government had checks and balances to constrain the temptation to rule like a dictator, but those guardrails are coming off – to the cheering crowds of the Trump MAGA people.
This was your moment to pull back the extremists on your side. You control the US government and Trump of all. Instead, you have chosen to lurch into a dark and dangerous future.
It will take generations to undo this damage. One can only hope that it isn’t too late.
Conservatives are really good at portraying themselves as the voice of the little guy when they’re not in power; they have this identity politics sewn up like pro’s. But working class voters, who’s grievances and anxieties are real, keep being sold a bill of goods that are at times opposite to what was advertised.
To be sure, the Liberals are an elitist party. They also say the right things and their strength is their appeal to emotions and the generic progressiveness of an overwhelming majority of Canadian voters. But its all a ploy. Say the things that they know will force a reaction – out of fear or anger, and you’ll have voters drinking up whatever swill you’re offering.
But here’s the spoiler: Conservatives are an elitist party too.
They both draw their economic philosophy from neoliberalism. That is to say, the least amount of government regulation and presence and the maximum amount of corporate influence and tax cuts, and the rest is just noise.
We’re seeing in live time what this political bait and switch looks like.
In America, Trump cultivated a following among certain working class demographics, harnessing their anger and grievances and won a narrow election victory because of it. He tapped into their frustrations over inflation and ever growing wealth gap. But his approach was to rail against immigrants and the trade deficit. Both misguided, but it sounded good to those needing a scapegoat.
So what has he delivered? Very dangerous things.
Setting aside the legality and constitutionality of such deportations, what was to unfold would shake the American economy to its core.
To be certain, there are large communities of undocumented immigrants who live in the USA. They are not citizens, cannot vote, cannot obtain many taxpayer supported benefits, ineligible for medicaid or social security, but they pay taxes and participate in the larger economy. Interestingly, its their participation in the economy, now being undone, which is doing some extreme damage.
Its no secret that many of your farm workers are undocumented immigrants; picking fruits and veggies, handling livestock, etc. Why? Because their labour costs were substantially cheaper than what a citizen with right could demand.
The result is produce rotting in the fields and the vines of farms that relied on this undocumented labour. To hire “legal” employees and citizens to do the same work (who have proper and enforceable labour rights), would cost said farmers exponentially more…if they can find those hard done by Americans displaced by illegals. Well, guess what: nobody wants those jobs.
And it’s not just agriculture; its construction too. Undocumented immigration has filled gaps in the economy to such an extent that by withdrawing them – it could fundamentally cripple it in their absence. These are not the only sectors where the blatant racism behind the mass-deportation agenda is going to cause some devastating and unintended consequences.
The fact that the undocumented send some of their earnings “home” to support their families elsewhere is the fundamental underpinning of the American Dream is it not? Work hard, save some cash, build a life and success. Who opposes this?
The next target in Trump’s rage, a pillar in his election strategy, was to demonize the trade deficit as a measure of his manhood, or by extension – the strength of the US economy. Nothing further could be the truth. In fact, blanket, kneejerk tariff rate increases have done nothing but damage the US economy. Its well documented that the tariffs launched in and around the great depression era – while not the instigating factor of the depression, assured that it would cut deep.
Every nation has a right to impose tariffs, and many do – for various reasons. But make no mistake – a tariff imposed by a country is forcing its own citizens to pay the premium. Its a tax, its always been a tax. The Trump administration is crowing about how many billions of dollars their tariffs are collecting in revenue; but its directly from American businesses and consumers…and its adding to the costs of said imports causing expanded inflation where it at all but died down.
Trump campaigned on cleaning up corruption and waste in government. To that end, he launched Elon Musk in his “DOGE’ campaign to discover where waste and fraud was hiding in the federal government and eliminate it. What did America get? Cuts to essential public services, gutting of medicaid and veterans services. Whole departments closed, oversight scrapped. Suddenly, the people voting for Trump to clean up waste ended up losing disability benefits.
What’s the point of this? Its illustrative to the extent of the betrayal of populist right wing governments when given power to do what they want. What do they want? To enrich their elite friends, insiders and top dollar donors – and themselves at the expense of the taxpayer and the forced sacrifice of the working class whom gave them the support to do so.
But why?
For the same reason that Liberals do it. Their version is just as repugnant though. They appeal to the emotional heart strings of moderates and liberals with often vague pledges around human rights and other performative matters; that they’re the antidote to the harshness of hard-line conservatism. While that might be true for social issues, they are indistinguishable from conservatives on economics. They’re both neoliberals.
Neoliberals. The modern way of marketing ‘trickle-down’ economics.
The essentials are; cutting social service spending and the public workforce, tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations, deregulation for heavy industry, and austerity for the rest of us.
But neither will campaign on this; they campaign against each other on things that either scare you or anger you. What should anger you most is that they both answer to the same elitists and make you suffer even more.
Look around you.
In every major crisis requiring government intervention, the massive taxpayer bailout benefits the 1% and not you. Big companies, big financial institutions, heavy industry, big tech, big pharma, automakers, oil companies, etc – they end up with the cash, you get the layoffs.
But the moment some real solutions come by that actually address the wealth and prosperity gap between rich and poor; its treated as a biohazard.
Its because once the centrist Liberals and hard line conservatives discovered that its very profitable to pander to the neoliberal elite, they had no use for working class people any longer. But they had to play the game with the same old rhetoric to grab votes when it seemed possible they’d win.
The answers are on the left. That’s always been the case. We ran western civilization with a largely free enterprise economy under Keynesian economic theory, which is positively leftist compared to what’s going on lately. We had a strong social safety net that cared for the destitute, we had strong unions that created the blue collar middle class, we had governments that cared for the arts and culture, seniors and planned for long term sustainable growth.
We don’t have that any longer. We have a system that rewards greed and corruption. and everyone can see it.
Please understand that your team barely won this election. A minority government where you’re to rely on opposition parliamentary votes to pass legislation.
To be sure, Liberals could have claimed victory in any case. The day before Justin Trudeau announced his resignation, his party looked like it was racing towards the electoral cliff and the CPC leadership were measuring the drapes to the PMO.
Mark Carney took the Liberals from certain death to a contender in a stunning turn-around, but know this: he didn’t do this alone.
But…the Conservatives almost won the election too. A handful of differently placed votes or candidate missteps, and we’d be looking at a far different outcome.
There was a moment where the NDP could have pulled the pin and forced an election in the fall that would have assured defeat of the Liberals, a substantial gain for the NDP – but a likely landslide win for Pierre Poilievre and the CPC.
The interceding time allowed for a leadership change for the Liberals and their fighting chance to turn things around. It largely worked. Even if they lost by a small margin, Carney could have claimed that they did the best possible in an unwinnable set of circumstances.
Jagmeet Singh knew what he was doing. The legacy of the progress made in the previous confidence and supply agreements made between Liberals and NDP would have been torn up by a MAGA fuelled Conservative government. The sacrifice of Jagmeet Singh might have saved Canada from Poilievre.
We took one for the team. Team Canada that is.
The polling started to reflect the shift as well. NDP, Green and BQ support (those who were progressive and swing voters) begun to move, and it saved the Liberal party.
There will be some smug reactions gloating over the near miss against the Conservatives, or the stunning losses of the NDP. But this historic rescue of the Liberals took place because large swaths of NDP voters shifted to the Liberals out of fear of the CPC.
In the coming days and weeks, the Liberals owe progressive Canadians for that rescue we gave them.
They can start with electoral reform.
I am sick to death of “strategic voting”. Its an undemocratic device used by both the CPC, but mostly Liberals to scare voters into choosing their party out of fear. What it does is monopolizes democracy down to two parties…just like the American system we’re not supposed to be like.
I would argue that any system is better than this, but generally something proportional would achieve results. We are grown ups. If we vote for parties that share a relatively similar worldview, they’ll find common ground in parliament to get things done for citizens in coalitions, CASA’s etc that serve the best interests of the country…and it won’t deny the electoral voice of the people’s will.
Now, before we get into “a proportional system would allow for extremist parties”, I’m sorry but that ship has already sailed. Have you seen the CPC lately? They’ve been shifting further and further right that they’re at a point that the party would not be recognizable to what used to be the PC Party only a generation ago.
The kind of electoral system we end up with is certainly up for debate. There are several variations of electoral systems that are generally proportional, without breaking down into chaos. But we should have that debate and the legislative follow-up necessary. For most Canadians across every demographic and political alignment, their largest gripe about politicians is that they “just do as they want” (implied: not what they promised to do). Changing the system and putting voters in more direct control ads a morality layer that has long since vanished.
I’m not one who would ever give a platform to separatists (regardless of the region in question), but I would argue that separatism at its core is borne out of a sense of extreme frustration with a central government. Well perhaps a better way of choosing our leadership nationally can serve as part of the national healing that needs to take place.
We’ll also be monitoring for the inevitable conservative shift that the Liberals now that they’re in office again. In fact, its already started.
So there it is. Another federal election done and gone, a new government chosen by voters for up to 4 years, one that will hopefully outlast the insanity south of us.
But not all is great.
I will start that I am a country-first progressive voter. That is to say that I value my country’s survival and viability above partisanship. So, I am genuinely grateful that the Conservatives lost.
But I cannot help but feel a sense of despair and gloom that Canada has become the same two party duopoly that we pretend to be different from in the USA.
Its just not democratically healthy to have only two viable parties that vie for power. We put value on having alternatives to the red/blue, and many of them had meaningful influence in Parliament – even as partners to power in one form or another.
To be sure, the Conservatives had to lose, and they did. They lost the most winnable election in Canadian history – for several reasons.
The Conservatives bet the farm on anti-Trudeauism. That was their feature and selling point. Though not part of their official script or campaign literature, the “fuck Trudeau” flags and banners were interchangeable as ‘vote CPC’ signs. They staked their identity on this…and not a single party official, MP, candidate, or high ranking advisor lifted a finger to disavow this toxic trait. It became their brand…and the Liberals knew it.
I would guess that the decision for Justin Trudeau to retire from public office happened far longer into the past than what we saw publicly. For all the flaws of the Liberal party, they are really good at strategy. They hung on as long as possible, flipping the script with the late stage leadership contest.
The Liberals benefitted from circumstances too. The chaotic behaviour of President Donald Trump made the Liberals a relative antidote against the MAGA leaning CPC here in Canada. With Trudeau stepping down and a seemingly moderate face in Mark Carney ascending to the leadership post, it was the brilliant reset they needed.
But the Conservatives made a critical mistake too. When Donald Trump unleashed his barrage of tariffs against Canada, instead of acting like nationalists pledging an absolute united front while keeping partisan differences on the back burner; the CPC decided to leverage their anti-Liberal hostility to attack the government as if to partially blame our country for the irrational behaviour of Trump.
This was a huge mistake.
This was a critical moment where the CPC abandoned any claim to being Canada-First, politics second, because they were literally undermining the attempt of an team-Canada approach to this very real threat to our national sovereignty. They let the Liberals become the party of TEAM CANADA, and it was a choice they made. To be fair, there’s a not-insignificant chunk of the CPC base who agree with Trump.
Pierre Poilievre would have alienated that group (who he needed), and that was a bridge too far. The problem though for the CPC is that it closed off an even larger moderate, centre-right (coherent conservatives) voters who were considering his party – from support because of this decision.
Campaigns matter.
At the outset of the campaign, nothing was guaranteed. The Mark Carney Liberals started out with a lead (dramatic turnaround from the depths of the Trudeau slump) but momentum matters; campaigns matter.
The CPC did not deliver the goods. They could not sell to the public, a plausible alternative to the Liberals and voters opted for the devil they knew, largely out of fear. For all the warts and imperfections of the Liberal party, voters stayed the course.
Which is disappointing.
Because we haven’t learned a thing.
Neither party deserves a majority, certainly not the Conservatives with their extremists largely in control of the party and driving the agenda, but same for the Liberals – for failure to deliver on the changes we needed. It took two terms of minority government with the NDP holding their leash in a confidence and supply motion to extract concessions enough to establish basic national dental care, the basics of a pharmacare program and others. Programs that would have never seen the light of day had the Liberals governed all this time with a majority government.
But the one thing they never did? Electoral Reform. It was a massive promise made in 2015 and could have eliminated the so-called vote split garbage we’re faced with in every election.
No form of electoral reform took place. None. Not the Mixed-Member PR as advocated by the NDP, not instant run off by the Liberals. None. So we have the same old system that produces lopsided results and total power without the appropriate popular support.
As previous elections where the stakes are high have shown, folks will abandon 3rd and 4th parties when either really spooked or really angry. The NDP got pinched thanks to the anxieties of the potential of a CPC government and real threats to our national existence by the Trump administration.
I am not a Liberal supporter, but I’ll respect the outcome of an election whomever wins – because that’s what adults do. But I cannot help but feel utterly disappointed that the more things changed, the more they stayed the same.
To frame in the discussion, understand that we’re in the late stages of a unusually long minority government under the Federal Liberals’ Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
Justin has been the PM since 2015 when his party was elected to a landslide win over Stephen Harper’s Conservative Party – on a list of progressive pledges of which included electoral reform. A promise broken, by the way; and a problem that seemingly might haunt the Federal Liberals…and was entirely preventable. But more about that later.
We’re at a state of political discourse where the federal liberals are hated by almost everyone outside their own support pool. Even then, their support has been cut in half; and of those left, many are lukewarm about the leadership of Justin Trudeau.
Worse yet, several federal Liberal Cabinet ministers have quit the big table, some MP’s of his party have openly called for him to resign leadership too.
The calls are coming from inside their house.
The federal Liberal minority government is held in place as a result of a confidence and supply agreement (“CASA”) with the federal NDP. The NDP have a reputation of using their electoral and parliamentary clout to bargain for improvements to laws and/or regulations; formally or informally.
The federal Liberals had little choice but to make an offer to the NDP after the last two elections which saw their party reduced to minority status. They offered to pass legislation (which the NDP campaigned on and the Liberals opposed) in order to remain in power.
Whether you (the reader) agrees or disagrees with this arrangement, that’s not relevant. Its what legislators are supposed to do. I would argue that its a uniquely Canadian thing to do; to reach across partisan boundaries to achieve results for the benefit of the country.
It doesn’t mean that it plays out according to plan. The opponents to such arrangements in the Conservatives and their allies were frothing mad each time; feeling that they were entitled to power. But they would have been in a minority spot too – and would have to seek out their own CASA deal with a smaller party.
So now that we have core of this understood, we’re living in a timeline where the federal liberal government is seen as a stale government, seen as corrupt and inept. That might be due to effective marketing by their opponents, but just about every pollster is measuring this too.
2025 is an election year. Its scheduled to happen because of our election laws require fixed election dates unless prematurely triggered by a non-confidence action in parliament…and really, the election law can’t undermine the constitution. If the Prime Minister asks the Governor General to dissolve the house and sign writs of election, then the law takes a backseat here.
As the junior partner in the CASA deal, it only takes the NDP to oust the government in a confidence vote.
That vote is coming in the new year.
Justin Trudeau failed in the biggest job a Prime Minister has: to work for people, not the powerful.
The NDP will vote to bring this government down, and give Canadians a chance to vote for a government who will work for them. pic.twitter.com/uqklF6RrUX
An election is coming. It was coming anyways, after this news item, its coming a little earlier than the law requires.
Of course voters will decide these things. They always do. Elections matter. But in this discourse, liberal partisans are trotting out their worst behaviour, and preemptively blaming the NDP for the presumptive incoming CPC government under Pierre Poilievre.
Elections matter, right?
Whether by an (earlier) election via non-confidence this spring, or by the planned one later in the year, voters will choose their next government. To hear some liberals whine, they’ve already surrendered to the CPC.
No thanks.
They’ve tried this before and its exhausting. They claimed that Jack Layton ‘made’ Stephen Harper the Prime Minister in 2006. That is such a misread of facts that its an outright lie. The then Liberal government lost a confidence vote and the NDP parliamentary votes couldn’t save them. The CPC/Bloc votes were enough to sink the government and trigger an election (where a govt in power since 1993 faced an equivalently tired voter).
Its a political copy/paste routine for Liberal partisans; blaming the NDP for their own mistakes and misfortunes.
Every. Single. Time.
The federal liberals are famous for campaigning on NDP ideas; the governing as conservatives once securely in a majority government. That’s why we never got electoral reform as promised by Trudeau in the 2015 election. The flaws of first-past-the-post got them a dramatic win with only 40% of the vote – so why change it despite having promised it?
But then minority government results forced them to do things reluctantly. Such as a national dental plan, national pharmacare plan, national childcare plan; all of which the Liberals opposed when they were in a majority setting, but had to make legislative promises to secure the necessary confidence from the NDP.
At any time in the last three terms of office, the federal liberals could have brought in electoral reform. They did not. Why? Because at their heart, they do not share power unless forced to.
They would rather lose to the Conservatives and give Pierre Poilievre the keys to power than any institutional change required to our electoral system that might compel cooperation and power sharing.
The precarious position the federal liberals find themselves in (in some polls – they’re tied or behind the NDP) is their own fault. Interestingly, the federal support levels for the NDP has largely remained intact – its the Liberal vote that’s shrunk by half – and they’re trending to the CPC.
Now, thanks to the Liberals failure to enact electoral reform, the same voters might give the CPC around 40% of the vote and 100% of the power.
The largest block of voters the Liberals have relied upon is the red/blue swing voter. The Liberals blame…the NDP for this.
I have a better idea. Have some better ideas, Liberals.
But if you’re looking to blame someone for your political woes – use a mirror.
We enter the BC Election campaign in 2024 starting today with a stark choice at hand. One side, imperfect, offers a new term extending out what its started. That means continuing the land reforms to speed up home construction; expanding supply rapidly to address both a housing shortage and affordability issue. This side also tackles the problems facing the unhoused, those facing addiction issues and climate change.
The sitting government, the NDP, has moved quickly with regulatory changes that streamline the processes for new home construction; blocking the obstruction put up by ‘nimby’ type local govt politicians who act as gatekeepers.
Homelessness and addiction issues have been a problem all over North America and beyond, yet the critics of the NDP will argue that its entirely a BC problem and the NDP (namely David Eby) is personally responsible for this mess. This attack is one of the most disingenuous attacks ever foisted by a political entity ever in BC…but it doesn’t stop there.
The opponents to this government argue that the NDP is a hotbed of antisemitism and hate. This would be alarming news for some in the party, like this candidate.
In the last few months, we have seen the collapse of the once-mighty BC United party; previously named BC Liberal Party. They saw their polling and fundraising collapse and it triggered an unusual response from leader Kevin Falcon. He suspended the party from running candidates under the party banner and endorsed the BC Conservatives (who had been poaching MLA’s and candidates from BC United).
Unusual because other than the negative trend the party was facing, it still had institutional strength and the mechanisms of a governing party. Even of yours truly was never one of their supporters. I have never seen such a stunt. But BC politics has its surprises.
Clearly however, a calculation was made that the supporters of one party would simply vote for the other should their own party not be on the ballot. This is folly, and supreme arrogance. That its been tried now is a cynical, naked power grab. Fortunately, BC voters are wiser than that.
It also makes no sense. Former BC United supporters aren’t uniformly socially conservative, which is the bedrock pillar of the BC Conservative party. They have other ballot options.
So now the voters in BC have an opportunity to do the most amazing thing. I purposely point to the example in the USA regarding their ballot choice.
One could vote for Trump, and endorse some of the most vile rhetoric, divisive politics, criminality and treason-like behaviour he has exhibited, or one could vote for Kamala Harris, the Democrat in the race.
What we’re seeing in the American Presidential race is a coalescing of varied interests within the American progressive universe along side moderates and anti-Trump conservatives. While at a policy level there may be little between them to share as common ground, they do hold the very essence of the rule of law and decency of the office of President as their unifying force.
The same paradigm shift is now in play here in BC.
The NDP, while far from perfect, face an opponent who has lurched so far to the right, they’re nearly off the cliff.
The BC Conservatives, at the leadership level, might not openly endorse incoherent and intolerant conspiracy theories. But as it seems, candidates and activists in their universe holding completely batshit ideas are not overly discouraged either. This is not a worldview that matches up with an overwhelming majority of British Columbians, not at all.
While we can argue about what policy shifts and nuances we like/dislike about the NDP, we should all agree that a government led by the BC Conservatives is a fundamental danger to our province.
So my call is to those outside my bubble and those outside the traditional NDP voting block who love their province more than they love partisan divisions. Unite with your neighbors and friends to vote for the NDP to save our province and halt forever the scourge of backward facing politicians who exploit fears and apprehensions for cynical partisan gain.
This time it’s the seeming crash of the BC United Party as several of its candidates and MLA’s cross the floor to the upstart BC Conservative Party.
Ordinarily I wouldn’t care as I support neither of these two parties, but I see a trend that should be talked about and called out.
Crossing the floor happens in politics from time to time, yes..but what of the voters who had counted on a moderate disposition of their BC United candidates and MLA’s only to see some of them flee to the party they once deemed so intolerant.
Is it pure ambition and the desire for power at all costs that drove these folks to abandon their electoral communities? Or are they finally being honest about who they really are..
The BC Conservatives haven’t adapted to attract these bcup candidates and mla’s; in fact they’ve dug their heels in on the very sort of intolerance that made them radioactive in the first place. The difference? Polling numbers. the bccp is benefitting from anxieties in the economy and antipathy towards the federal liberals.
So while some BCUP’s candidates and MLA’s feel the heat to abandon their party, remember that BC itself is not socially conservative. The BC Conservatives continue to position themselves as transphobic, opposed to BC’s Reconciliation Act, opposed to almost every housing reform made, deny climate change. These are positions WELL outside the prevailing mindset of average folks in BC.
To the average voter who might not have any warm feelings to any political party, will remember that BC, while facing challenges, is doing well relative to every other place in this country and is leading in economic growth and job creation. They’ll see the BC Conservatives and BC United scrap it out over their chosen narrative of trying to avoid ‘splitting the vote’, they can see that there is little reason to change to this experimental extremist party to govern.
This isn’t the 1950’s, we cannot revert back to a social order where some folks were underneath others. This also isn’t the BC of the 1990’s either – where conservative power brokers looked at the map of the province as a chess board.
Its my view that the BCUP and the BCCP have foolishly miscalculated in this ongoing drama and I’m not about to help them out of it. They can both get the rightfully owed drubbing they deserve.
But the politicization over the program is over the top.
It was always meant as a medically based approach to rampant drug use of certain products. Drugs that can trigger immediate addiction, but more likely – death.
Death to the user, death to the healthcare worker trying to assist, death to innocent bystanders.
The project was seen as an alternative to the ‘same old’ approach, which is to say, doing nothing different.
It doesn’t mean that the safe(r) supply program is wrong; countering toxic supply with safer supply has absolutely proven to work – combined with other aspects of a fully funded and staffed recovery program.
But at the end of the day, the rights of the general public and innocent bystanders are to be protected in the same sense that anti-smoking rules protect the public against exposure to secondhand smoke.
Politically, its a setback for the NDP. They clearly desired to be the government doing something proactively on drug use and abuse…but the side effects of this policy were too much for a public running out of safe space of their own out in public.
There are rules – with significant penalties – for consuming liquor outside of designated spaces. Or smoking. Its not unreasonable to require drug consumption be contained to your own dwelling or designated safe consumption sites.
I realize the stakes are far higher; lighting up a smoke or drinking a beer are different than injecting a drug out in the open; its not a straight across fair comparison.
What we have here is a government who tried a different approach to drug policy because its out of control. It didn’t go according to plan. They had little option but to change course.
There are those politicians opposite of government who were exploiting the problem before, now demonizing the government after. We could do less with the partisan attacks and more with the ideas on how to divert those affected away from the dangerous and deadly path they’re on.
We could also use some federal help. Given that the Federal government has the jurisdiction on international borders and trade, returning the Port Police to the many ports of entry to Canada – and pipeline of drugs, a substantial improvement to this file would do wonders to limit access to the various harmful drugs flowing into our streets.
And it needs to be noted, the Oregon pilot project started in 2020 – was repealed on April 15, 2024. The BC pilot started in January 2023 and looks to be wound down in the next couple of weeks.
Oregon experience
As things go, the NDP government tried something new, examined the data, talked to stakeholders involved, changed course to adapt to the reality of the situation.
BC experience
The opposition political leaders will seek to exploit every angle of this issue, but that’s seemingly all they’re capable of. The NDP however, gets credit for trying.
In the coming provincial campaign, despite the shortcomings and imperfections of the NDP, they have proven to be the only adults in the room.
The view from Pete 