Tag Archives: BC Liberals

“Splitting the Free Enterprise Vote” and the By-Elections

Posted on by
Reply

Photo courtesy of World Economic Forum

The dust is finally starting to settle after two controversial (and some might say prophetic) by-elections in the valley yesterday. In both elections, the NDP’s candidate triumphed over their liberal and conservative opposition.

In the case of Port Moody-Coquitlam, the NDP’s Joe Trasolini captured about 54 per cent of the vote pushing him far ahead of BC Liberal Dennis Marsden and the Conservatives’ Christine Clarke who combined only took 45 per cent of the vote. It was a decisive (though not overly uprising win) for Trasolini who was a well known former mayor. He was also formally a liberal.

More controversial was the NDP’s win in Chilliwack-Hope. Gwen O’Mahony, who had twice run unsuccessfully, took 41 per cent of the popular vote. Meanwhile, Laurie Throness from the Liberals and John Martin of the B.C. Conservative Party shared about 58 per cent.

Throughout the afternoon, BC Liberal politicians and their allies repeated ad nauseam how the Chilliwack-Hope by-election was going to be the perfect case of splitting the “free enterprise” vote. They pointed to this polling as the reason anyone right of centre should be voting for the BC Liberals.

What’s not acknowledged in these tactics is the genuine difference in all matter of things between the BC Conservative and BC Liberal parties (and their supporters). While many BC Liberals seem to hope these differences could be smoothed under a single economic banner, the fractures are much deeper and more socially driven than they give credit. Whether its the HST, environmentalism or social beliefs, the reality is that there are many British Columbians (especially in rural BC) who believe the BC Liberal party is not sufficiently socially or fiscally conservative. They look east to Alberta’s Wildrose (a party vying to be more conservative than the progressive conservatives) in envy. These voters should not be seen as simply “free enterprise” voters as BC Liberal party strategists would hope, but rather fundamentally as “conservative” voters. No one should mistake them for anything else.

When one looks at federal or municipal politics, no one complains about vote-splitting the “free enterprise vote” in either of those arenas. It’s clear that 3-4 parties legitimately represent the political spectrum and that if I vote for Prime Minister Harper’s party, I’m not called out as a closet Liberal who should vote for that party instead to avoid a vote split. People acknowledge that the different parties stand for different things and everyone moves on trying to convince their opponents swing voters to come over to their side.

Right now we’re witnessing a titanic shift in provincial politics similar to what we saw the last federal election and earlier in the 2002 (with the ascendency of COPE) and again in 2005 (with the rise of Vision Vancouver). Whether you support this change or not, one should at the very least acknowledge it.

 

Dix vs Clark and the new BC NDP

Posted on by
1

On Sunday, April 17, Adrian Dix won the NDP leadership race, edging out Mike Farnworth by around 700 votes: 9,772 votes to Farnworth’s 9,095. His win prompted excitement from some and groans from many other. The Province newspaper labelled it a “a hard turn to the Left” for the provincial NDP. The photo featured Dix wooping it up in a less-than-flattering pose. The headline contrasted with the paper’s earlier cover of Christy Clark decked out in Canucks gear and a hockey stick, smiling broadly cheek to luminous cheek. The contrast couldn’t be more telling.

Some NDP insiders are already blaming a skewed media for fawning over Clark’s style while ignoring Dix’s substance. While almost everyone I’ve talked to lauds Dix for his work ethic, intelligence and scrappiness, that may not be enough. Unfortunately, often what matters most in politics it seems is a strong blend of both style and substance. Often (like it or lump it) the mix is 2 parts style for 1 part substance.

Since policy so often takes the back seat to politics and perceptions, it will be interesting to see if Dix can avoid the “left wing radical”-branding, though recent actions in the past week do not bode well.  During his convention speech, he talked at length about 1.5 million mystery voters he intends to reach out to. The plan of attack? Introduce more aggressive government redistribution programs. Roll back corporate tax cuts. Ruthlessly attack the HST. Focus more money on childcare programs and advocacy.

This strategy is not focussed on the moderate “progressives” that vote federal Liberal and could be swayed to support a centrist NDP. Rather, it targets British Columbians who are politically disengaged because the major political parties haven’t been aggressive enough with instituting big changes in provincial economics. This presumption ignores another explanation for low voter turnout. That people who don’t vote are apathetic cynical and generally disinterested in who rules the province as long as grocery prices stay reasonable, jobs remain (relatively) plentiful and gas doesn’t get too expensive. I suppose we’ll soon see if Dix is right on this front.

Regardless, it seems likely his agenda will appeal the union movement which strongly supported Dix in his leadership race. It will also ring true to many community activists and more “left-wing” organizers who’ve long been frustrated with Carole James’ perceived outreach to big business and the “powers-that-be” in Vancouver. It may not have the same resonance among the progressive business and green-oriented supporters drawn to the Farnworth camp. Meanwhile, outside the party sphere, it’s unlikely we will see Dix making any forays to the BC Chamber of Commerce, UDI luncheons or Board of Trade Meetings. While such outreach may be painful (and perhaps useless) it does represent a first step to making an NDP government more palatable to the progressive business community and young professionals whom the party must attract for both funding and support. Ultimately, the province’s political sphere has progressed beyond the polarized workers on one side and bosses on the other.

Clark also has some significant hurdles to clear in the coming months. The Premier’s first challenge will be to first sell and then survive the upcoming HST-vote. Added to that is the (possibly) resurgent right wing BC Conservative party led by former MP John Cummins. With a realistic alternative, word among many BC Liberals in the lead up to the leadership race was that a Clark victory would lead to a split of the party’s right wing. Apparently, people have already started to walk and while power is a strong magnet for people to stick around, it only works if the leader can win and is willing to placate the defeated with political/policy nuggets they can call their own. Expect some right-wing appetizers to compliment the Premier’s more liberal “Families First” main course in the coming year. Despite these challenges, Clark will remain in the eyes of many voters (and thanks chiefly to the leadership race coverage)  firmly ensconced in the centre of the BC political spectrum.

With a provincial election predicted Spring of next year, it’s likely we won’t have to wait long to see how these new leaders will reshape the political landscape. If Clark is dragged to the right of the “free-market coalition” to keep the BC Liberals together and if Dix does end up taking his party more to the left of the political spectrum though, there could be room for a new force. In such a case, a provincial version of Vision Vancouver, a progressive party that has made itself sufficiently palatable to the Vancouver business community and the unions could fill the void. Or even more likely, it might be a perfect environment for Gregor Robertson – Vancouver’s popular Mayor – to jump back into the NDP fray. In any case, it could be a new era of BC politics and would certainly be exciting times.

 

 

BC’s Political Twilight Zone

Posted on by
6

Dramatic events of yore

It has been a whirlwind ride here in the BC political world. In the past month, both major parties have seen their foundations’ shaken, first by open and often embarrassing dissent and then with the resignation of their leaders after years of service.

For Gordon Campbell, resignation came only after a last ditch significant tax cut he announced on Global TV at vast public expense. A week later, his final gambit having failed to put any dent in his rock bottom popularity (around 12% according to a Angus Reid poll), he called a surprise press conference and announced he was quitting. Then Bill Bennett happened. The Liberal Mining Minister was furious the departing Premier wouldn’t be going anywhere until a future undetermined leadership convention could be called. For Bennett (and truth be told many other party members), a lingering Campbell wasn’t going to help anyone – especially considering his toxic approval rating. Each time he’d show up, it was another reminder of the hated HST, the legacy of which the BC Liberals were forced to carry around like a political Bubonic Plague.

Never one to be pushed around, Campbell made an example of the dissident. Through cabinet, he arranged to have him tossed out. His Deputy Minister Colin Hanson swore it was caucus solidarity that got Bennett ejected. But the writing was on the wall; and so was Campbell’s signature on Bennett`s cabinet decapitation. Incensed, Bennett headed to the steps of the legislature and unleashed a tirade that left even longtime government watchers like Vaughn Palmer aghast.

He’s a bully who’s left spittle on my face because he was yelling so loudly at me, he said. The liberal caucus suffers from “battered wife syndrome”, he complained. For 40 minutes he ranted and raved. It was manna from heaven for political reporters.

As the BC Liberals continued to implode, something strange was happening on the other side of the political river. Polling told a story that everyone watching BC politics knew. Carole James and the BC NDP’s popularity seemed contingent only on the ill-will the public held towards the Premier. With Campbell promising to make himself disappear, suddenly, approval ratings for the NDP started to slip. Soon there was not nearly the same approval gap that was the signature of the Premier’s nightmarish HST-days (though the NDP was still ahead at the time). A dissident group of MLAs, who had only uttered a peep (or three) of protest after MLA Bob Simpson was booted for not apologizing for a mild criticism of the fearless leader in a small online publication a month or so earlier, began to organize and vent. Blood was in the water and the party was struck by a series of high profile resignations – first caucus chair Norm MacDonald and then caucus whip Katrina Conroy. Standing mutely by and refusing to answer any questions of whether she supported James or not was Jenny Kwan – legendary MLA of Mt Pleasant and one of the two survivors of the NDP electoral bloodbath following the deeply troubled  2001 provincial election. Kwan wasn’t a happy camper and neither were 12 other dissident MLAs who felt Jame’s style was divisive. As always in politics, you can be as abrasive and egotistical as you want if you’re winning. However if you aren’t – watch out.

By November, polling showed James’ own personal approval at only 25 per cent, despite her party being favoured by 47 per cent of voters — leaving a massive 22 per cent credibility gap. It was becoming increasingly obvious to many watchers that James wasn’t going to be able to carry them to victory in the next election. Add to that the disaffection many of the party’s staunch left wingers felt for James’ efforts to move the party away from labour activism and towards the business community leanings and you had a recipe for mutiny.

Following the round of resignations by Conroy and MacDonald and the growing rumblings among a number of constituency associations calling for a leadership convention and/or her head, James used the year’s provincial council meeting (which brings together local riding delegates from around the province) to try to somehow shore up support. Pro-Carole forces were handed out yellow scarfs (left over symbols from her leadership battle many eons ago) to differentiate them from the dissidents. The grassroots delegates overwhelmingly endorsed James, who summarily turned around, called for unity and denounced any future mutinous rumblings. Time to come together as New Democrats and show the people of BC we’re fit to govern, she said.

Unity? Not for long. A few days later, not content to let sleeping dogs lie, Kwan released a statement to the press that was 10 times more critical than Simpson’s. She attacked James’ leadership, her style and her methods. Ironically, it had been Kwan who had first nominated James to be leader. Brutus stuck the knife in deep and many people frustrated with James’ leadership silently cheered.

Rallying support, James took a weekend to consider what to do with the Kwan and the rest of her Baker’s Dozen rebels (as they had been labeled). She was between a rock and hard place. Boot Kwan and it was apparent 1/3 of her caucus could walk to, crippling the NDP and the leader. If she let Kwan stay, her power and authority would be hobbled like never before. In the final hours of labour initiated  negotiation with the dissidents proved unfruitful.  Her ultimate decision to resign as leader nevertheless was even more shocking than Campbell’s decision to quit.

In her wake, she left her party divided and bitter, without any potential high-profile actors ready to step into the fray. Meanwhile the BC Liberal race was kicking into high gear as Kevin Falcon and talk show host Christy Clark jumped into the fray to compete with Moira Stillwell, George Abbott and Mike de Jong.

What does the future hold?

On the right side of the spectrum, Kevin Falcon has come out as the apparent front runner, sowing up a large number of BC Liberal MLAs and organizers – many of whom he’s worked with for much of the past decade. In addition to a hefty profile as Health Minister (and before that Transportation Minister), he’s got significant backing from the rural elements (note his dual announcement in Vancouver and then Prince George) of the BC Liberal party – that and lots of money from mid-sized BC business and certain big development groups. The heir apparent of the right’s main competitor is Christy Clark, who probably has an equal level of profile and the prowess of operatives like her ex-husband Mark Marissen, brother Bruce Clark (both of whom are well known federal Liberal organizers) as well as Patrick Kinsella, a well known federal Conservative strategist. Abbott, Stillwell and de Jong fall on the fringes, though Abbott has managed to snag a significant number of supporters early on before Clark entered the race.

Should Clark prevail it’s speculated many conservative members of the BC Liberals may walk over to the BC Conservative party. Bad news for the BC Liberals, but good news for the province’s political landscape if you ask me. If Falcon wins, it will only reaffirm what many progressives already know, that the BC Liberal party is a right of centre party (not a middle of the road one).

On the left side of the spectrum the lines are yet drawn. Some people are whispering the name of NDP MP Peter Julian as a future leadership contender. Mike Farnworth – a moderate middle of the road dipper hasn’t ruled it out. Spencer Herbert who represents the NDP stronghold in the West End has also said he’s considering a run. And then there is Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson, who despite being an excellent candidate for the job (if only because he’s distanced from the whole James mess) isn’t likely to jump in. Another couple years it would be a distinct possibility, but the timing just doesn’t seem right.

And what of Vision BC that people talk about moving into the vacuume that is BC progressive provincial politics? Don’t hold your breath. Vision’s appeal (and issues) – while powerful in Vancouver – does not necessarily translate outside of the Lower Mainland. More importantly in order to win in elections parties fundamentally need both money and organizers. Ideas are important, but they are often secondary. The challenge for any Vision BC wouldn’t be money – there’s a whole raft of business interests that could supplement the dip in labour funding the party would surely face should it have to take on both the NDP and Liberals provincially. The biggest issue would be organizers. While Vision has in the past relied heavily on the green/bike riding/eco-business/progressive professional crowd – outside of the Lower Mainland, there are far fewer of these individuals to draw on. These forces have traditionally been strongly augmented by labour organizers who are often seconded to a campaign. Most, if not all, are strongly connected to the NDP and do the same thing provincially and federally as they do in municipal elections. To effectively organize outside the Lower Mainland, a Vision BC would be strongly reliant on these skilled workers, many of whom are lifer New Democrats. Splitting them away from the mother-ship would be very difficult.

Ultimately, there are many big questions that should become more clear in the coming months. As the BC Liberal leadership race heats up, so to will the pressure on the NDP to get a new leader – and quick. Who that’ll be, and how that will effect the political landscape is anyone’s guess. But I for one am looking forward to seeing it all unfold.

Is the BCNDP finally heading towards the centre?

Posted on by
6

Last month an email invitation from the BCNDP dropped into my inbox. Expecting the usual “we hate Campbell, and so should you” key messaging, I was pleasantly surprised to see instead an invitation aimed at calling on the BC Government to protect a list of specific services and inviting me to a rally for a non-partisan group called the coalition to Build a Better BC. Interesting.

Equally interesting was a conversation I had a few months ago with the BCNDP’s new Provincial Secretary (read Executive Director) Jan O’Brien. We were at a brunch for the Action Team, a group running for the Vancity Board of Directors. Jan had just recently taken over the role as head staffer for the BC branch of the NDP and was canvassing people about their thoughts on the party and how it could be improved. The general consensus among myself and several others around the table was in order for the BC NDP to move forward and effectively challenge the BC Liberals, it needs to embrace the centre and hundreds of thousands of progressives, young professionals, urban greenies, small and medium sized businesses and even (gasp!) larger companies. In short it needs to become a coalition of the progressive left. Some of these people may even be Federal Liberals who drift to the left of the political spectrum – a group of activists whom if tapped, could bring a great deal of expertise and energy to the NDP at a provincial level.

It won’t be easy. For starters, the federal and provincial NDP remain connected at the hip. Even though they are very different political organizations, you can’t join one without being a part of the others. That makes it tricky for Federal liberals interested in getting involved.

Equally challenging for many people is the language and internal optics of the BCNDP. Many moderate voters have felt ignored or turned off by the old language of the NDP in years and elections past. During the last provincial election, citizens were bombarded by all sorts of NDPisms. “Working families are standing up to the BC Liberals”, “Gordon Campbell can’t be trusted”, “Ordinary British Columbians deserve better” were all phrases being frequently bandied around by Carole James, her MLAs and candidates, and in party communications. This language paid homage to the NDP’s traditional base, organized labour. But it’s apparent socialist/class-based terminology no longer seems to connect to the broad swath of the BC population it needs to attract. Many British Columbians don’t identify themselves as being part of “working families” or as “ordinary British Columbians”. Add to that the negativity of the entire “Axe the Tax” campaign and I must say it isn’t surprising that the party failed to win the 2009 election.

Although I vote for the BCNDP and have organized in the past for them, the union-centrism of the party has always been part of a world I have never really understood or felt included in. Don’t get me wrong, labour is and should remain important allies of progressives. It needs to continue to have a strong voice in a political party it helped form. But it shouldn’t be the only voice. Times change and these days the old workers vs. companies paradigm no longer seem to hold the same power that they once did. Green organizations, urban voters, and businesses committed to the triple bottom line all need to be embraced as a new coalition. And although Build a Better BC has a ways to go (the vast majority of the coalition is still union based with a couple environmental groups like the Wilderness Committee and the Sierra Club), it certainly seems to be heading in the right direction.

I must say it’s an exciting thing to see and long overdue. Something that leaves me hopeful that someday soon, progressives like me may be able to find a comfortable place under the BCNDP umbrella.

BC’s Conservatives and Political Diversity in BC

Posted on by
5

bc-conservatives-logoThe implosion of political parties isn’t anything new to BC politics.

Over my lifetime, we’ve seen the total destruction of the Socreds and the near total destruction of the BCNDP a half a decade later here in BC.

All of this has left Gordon Campbell and the BC Liberals sitting pretty on the centre right of the spectrum, unchallenged and secure in power in Victoria. But like any party, as they rule, they’ve slowly, but surely, managed to alienate many right wing voters who’d rallied to their cause in the early years due to total lack of options on the political right.

Hate the BC Liberals and their iron clawed fiscal management style? Fair enough. However, you’d be hard pressed to peg the leader (Mr. GC himself) as especially socially conservative fellow.

The Once Glorious Leader.

The Once Glorious Leader.

Enter Wilf Hanni – now former leader of the BC Conservative party – a upstart political entity loosely aligned with the Conservative Party of Canada.

That’s right – BC really does have a conservative party. Didn’t know they existed? Neither did I until fairly recently.

These folks are interesting. According to the party website, they’re in the game to: “strive for a province that is progressive for the benefit of all individuals. A long-term objective of self-sustaining government that does not rely on personal income tax for its operating needs.”

How this conservative crew plans on offering health care or a decent educational system without income tax is beyond me – but perhaps that’s the point. If you’re rich and aren’t paying taxes, what do you need public education for?

Anyway, Hanni has a past you’d expect of a conservative politician occupying, not the centre right, but the right of the political spectrum.

He’s a former leader of the Reform Party of BC and oil industry consultant. In 2006, he was elected to lead the BC Conservative Party. At that time the BC Conservatives were about as well known as the Nude Garden Party. They lacked just about everything (organizers, funding, big name endorsements, grassroots members) that a contending political organization requires to make a good showing in the polls. Unsurprisingly, they went on to lose the next election badly. However, despite their defeat, they managed to triple the number of votes they got this time around.

However, only a few months after their latest defeat, fearless leader Hanni himself decided to take off, bringing what seems like half the organization’s board of directors with him. That’s bad news for any organization, but for a fledgling political party, a split like that can be devastating. Hanni references personal and political differences and an inability to work with some of the more uncompromising elements of his party. This regularly seems to be the case with many fringe parties.

To be perfectly honest, I’m very disappointed in this news. Not because as some might think (I’m looking at you co-editor) I’m a closet conservative. No, my disappointment is rooted in a somewhat more convoluted reason.

For one thing, having more legitimate, rather than fringe choices is a good thing in a democracy (ie. It’d be great to see more/any BC Greens in the legislature). More importantly though, I’d hoped that if BC had a real right wing party, the BC Liberals might be persuaded to becoming a bit more, well, “liberal”. That’s the dream anyway, one which seems to be becoming more of a pipe dream than anything else. Ultimately, as long as the centre and right wing of BC politics remain united, Mr. Campbell’s BC Liberals will continue to shy away from a progressive agenda. Afterall, when your cart works fine, why re-invent the wheel?

Despite all this I continue to hold out hope that one day fortune or backroom deals (either one, I’m not too picky) will yield a bit more diversity in our political community.  That’d be a good thing for everyone.

You Get What You Pay For

Posted on by
7
A burden we all need to carry.

A burden we all need to carry.

Right now there is an uproar over the provincial government’s plan to introduce HST. The plan is to harmonize provincial sales tax with GST bringing PST into a whole bunch of industries (restaurants, grocery stores among others) which had up to this point avoided them.

Business points to this new tax and scream about layoffs and jacked up consumer prices.

The NDP is rallying signatures. Editorials are lamblasting the Premier. People are griping to each other about how a) stupid and b) unfair the whole tax is.

What gets me about all of this is the seeming disconnect people have about why the HST is being introduced int he first place.

Taxes, as any political strategist (or person on the street for that matter) can tell you, aren’t popular. Why do governments bring them in? Because they can’t afford to supply the existing level of services (read education, health care, transportation infrastructure, etc) without a larger source of revenue.

Right now, BC, like the rest of the world, is in the midst of a recession. Profits are down, people are making less money and spending less of it. That means all sorts of traditional government taxes aren’t generating income like they used to. Yet at the same time, there aren’t fewer people going to the doctor (like is probably the case in the US’s privatized system) nor fewer people riding transit or going to school.

Canada and British Columbia have a terrific education system, and despite a lot of griping about hospital lines and other medical headaches, one of the best health care systems in the world. I don’t know about you, but I want to keep it that way and (ideally) continue to improve it. You don’t do that with less money – you do it with more money.

So when the provincial government looks at the balance sheet at the end of the fiscal year, they’re in an unpleasant conundrum: Keep services the same and yet somehow do so with withering profits. How can they do this? This simple answer is they can’t – at least not without figuring out a new revenue source.

Enter the HST.

While unpleasant, this new tax will go a long way to adding billions of dollars to the budget. In the end that will mean fewer cuts to the core services we all value. And that’s a good thing.