Category Archives: Provincial

Consider, Media, Provincial

Ironic Economic Reality

Leave a comment

On Mondays Global news cast was a story about the rebirth of Mackenzie, a forestry mill town in northern BC. It is a story that contained a number of ironic twists.

There is a certain irony in the part that demand from China is playing in the rebirth of forestry, in the economic benefit as lowest cost provider to China that is a result of BC’s location and in the fact that the Liberals will undoubtedly claim credit for what is, at it’s core, blind luck.

There is a higher level of irony involved in the fact the hated HST, which the people of the Prince George – Mackenzie riding (and people throughout BC who will benefit from the returning health of the forestry sector) signed a petition to repeal, contributed to the rebirth of the forestry sector.

But the largest and most darkly humorous irony in the report is the reality of life reflected in a seemingly small but very significant change between the 6 PM and the 11 PM Global newscasts.

On the 6 PM newscast the products of the forestry industry were referred to as BC’s most valuable export.

On the 11 PM newscast the products of the forestry industry were referred to as BC’s second most valuable export.

This change is reflective of the reality that BC Bud (marijuana) is, by a substantial margin, BC’s most valuable export. A further irony is that it was the substantial size of the marijuana business and the recession proof nature of the export market for BC marijuana that protected BC’s economy from the hard, deep economic downturn that would have hit had BC been forced to rely on its traditional (and legal) economy and exports.

Reality does not care what we want to be nor is it changed or affected by denial; Reality simply is. A very ironic truth for politics, politicians and many others in BC – and Canada.

Provincial

Leadership is …

Leave a comment

The TV news coverage on Monday November 15, 2010 (or what passes for news reporting these days) of Vander Zalm’s announcement of who was the first target of Vander Zalm’s attempt to force his agenda on the majority of BC citizens, highlighted why I would never vote for a party of which Carole James is the leader and why, as big an ‘evil’ as the BC Liberals are, they are still the lesser ‘evil’ as compared to the NDP.

In case it has escaped Ms James, the NDP and Vander Zalm we live in British Columbia Canada not Afghanistan or another country ruled by threats, intimidation or thugs.

Vander Zalm’s action in seeking to misuse the recall legislation to force Liberal compliance with his demands are no different than that of any petty little warlord. Like any warlord Mr. Vander Zalm has a list of demands that must be met by his deadline – OR ELSE.

Or else Vander Zalm misuses the recall legislation that was intended as a tool for the constituents of a MLA to be able to recall their MLA.

Recall legislation was never intended to be a weapon used by the unscrupulous to force the government to follow their agenda and ignore the opinions and/or wishes of the majority as Vander Zalm is attempting to do.

To abuse the recall legislation in this way is to deal a blow to democracy in British Columbia. That Vander Zalm is more concerned about himself and getting payback on Mr. Campbell and the Liberals for their part in the death of the Social Credit comes as no surprise in light of his record while Premier. It was why his title was ‘disgraced former premier’ Vander Zalm in the press – until he became a way to sell advertising by attracting viewers/readers and thus advertising dollars.

There is no reason one would expect something other than self serving behavior from Vander Zalm or the media.

But from someone who wants to be premier and the leader of the Province of BC? From a party that wants to form the government of BC?

On issues of this importance to the democracy and governance of the province of BC you would expect a leader and a party that wants to govern to put the interests of the citizens of BC ahead of their own interests.

That is what real leadership is about.

When Vander Zalm first issued his extortion demands Ms James and the NDP were silent. When Vander Zalm announced the first victim in his extortion manoeuvres Ms James was nowhere to be seen and Mike Farnworth of the NDP was stating that the NDP were not part of the recall.

A leader and a party that were the type of leader and government this province needs to overcome the challenges BC, Canada and the world face would have been standing up and telling Vander Zalm to go home, that misusing the recall legislation to impose Vander Zalm’s agenda and ignore the will of the as yet unheard from majority of BC citizens was unacceptable.

Instead James and the NDP were silent; demonstrating they are so desperate for power that the best interests of BC and its citizens come after winning power on the priorities list of Carole James and the BC NDP.

Which is why Carole James and the NDP are undeserving, are unworthy, of being entrusted with the leadership and governance of the Province of BC.

And no doubt reflective of why a recent poll showed the Liberals under ‘anyone but Campbell’ in a dead heat with James and the NDP if an election were held now.

While on the subject of Ms James and the NDP thirst for power at any cost…

Somehow I have come to inhabit a spot on the BC NDP fund raising e-mail list. I suspect that this is a result of the questions I have sent to Carole James by e-mail concerning statements or positions taken/made by the BC NDP.

It would appear in light of the nature of the content of those e-mails, that the level of attention Carole James and the BC NDP pay to questions and/or comments directed to them by citizens of BC is – none.

Whatever the faults of the Liberals, and they have many, they have at least done me the courtesy of not inundating my inbox with fund raising e-mails and at least at times reading my e-mails.

I can state with certainty that the Liberals have read my e-mails based on the replies I have received, even when I was challenging the Liberal’s actions or policies. This is more than can be said of Carole James and the NDP from whom I have received no response – outside of automated acknowledgements, and repeated requests for money.

One would have thought that it might it might occur to someone in the NDP that sending requests for donations to homelessinabbotsford.com was not at all likely to gain one any funds. Unfortunately this lack of a connection to financial reality for citizens of BC is reflected in all too many statements and policies of Ms James and the NDP.

Anyhow, I came to receive two emails from Carole James and the NDP.

The first was an invitation to tune in to a NDP meeting where “On Saturday morning, I’ll be addressing a meeting of the BC NDP Provincial Council, giving an update on the state of our province, …”

The second e-mail made the question of watching the address moot, opening as it did with the statement “The NDP Caucus is ready and willing to begin a fall sitting of the Legislature so that the HST referendum can take place right away.”

If Carole James had any understanding of the financial reality that many British Columbians face and are dealing with or any appreciation for the reality of BC’s financial and budgetary state she would not be rushing lemming like to rip $1.6 BILLION out of the BC budget.

Ms James and the NDP propose spending hundreds of millions dollars more on healthcare and education while at the same time they advocate ripping $1.6 billion [paid by the federal government to the BC government to implement the HST] from the provincial budget and returning it to the federal government.

The proposed action establishes beyond any doubt that speaking of Ms. James and/or NDP is antithetical to speaking of the concepts of fiscal reality and/or fiscal responsibility.

Still as worrisome as the conspicuous disconnection with fiscal responsibility and the clearly demonstrated lack of any understanding of the financial realities facing the province of BC is in light of the possibility of the NDP forming the next government, it is not what is truly disheartening in the possibility of James led NDP government.

It is Ms. James’s statement “You and I know what British Columbians think of this tax. Why doesn’t Gordon Campbell?” that makes the thought of a James led NDP government unpalatable.

That statement reveals that when it comes to the matter of the HST James and the NDP are making decisions and urging government action, not on the basis of what is the best course of action for the province of BC (and its taxpayers) but on the basis of what they perceive will help them win the next election.

Even as disconnected from the ordinary citizens of BC as Gordon Campbell and his Liberals are, they took note the anger of the people of BC on the matter of the HST.

Unfortunately for Mr. Campbell he was also aware of the dire financial consequences of repealing the HST (removal of $1.6 billion from BC’s provincial coffers) and thus had no choice but to stay the course on the HST.

Even to the point of resigning as leader of the Liberal party.

Whatever his other faults, Mr. Campbell demonstrated sufficient grasp of financial reality and care for the province of BC to resign rather commit the financial suicide Ms. James has declared the NDP anxious to embrace in stating “The NDP Caucus is ready and willing to begin a fall sitting of the Legislature ….

A further demonstration of why Carole James and the NDP are undeserving of being entrusted with the leadership and governance of the Province of BC.

Addiction, Caveat emptor, Federal, Provincial

Seek an Understanding, not an Enabling Abettor.

Leave a comment

The fact a judge, or retired judge, tells a forum what those in attendance want to hear does not make what is said factual, useful, informed or reflective of reality. They can be as misinformed as anyone. A fact Judge Craig demonstrated repeatedly as he spoke at October’s crime forum in Abbotsford.

Craig said the concept of rehabilitation has replaced the idea of penal consequence when it comes to sentencing, and described it as an abstract process where judges try to transform evil into docility and tractability.

Those who deal with the human cost resulting from the actions (and inactions) of the legal system can tell you that, other than paying lip service to the concept, the legal system is NOT about rehabilitation.

Rehabilitation may be the buzzword currently in vogue in the legal system but the legal system fails to provide anywhere near the levels of housing, programs, services and supports that are needed for recovery and rehabilitation. This failure to provide what is a needed to grant a person a significant opportunity for, or probability of, recovery and rehabilitation reflects the systems lack of an actual commitment or interest in rehabilitation.

An actual commitment to rehabilitation would see increased funding to the corrections branches, not cuts as were made at the federal level.

What the legal system is actually about, as defined by its actions not its words, is cost control.

The system is currently operating at or beyond its capacity. Increasing the level of capacity would require major ($billions$) capital investment in physical plant and significant ($billions$) yearly increases in operating expenditures.

Since this would require either yearly tax increases or large reductions in funding for popular programs such as healthcare, governments have so far talked the talk but failed to provide the needed funding.

The legal system is forced to operate within the constraints imposed by capacity and economic reality and so has become about cost control rather than either rehabilitation (the least costly policy over the long term) or incarceration (a prohibitively costly policy over the long term). These constraints have made cost control the operational imperative of the legal system.

The ‘revolving door’ cited in levelling criticism at the legal system results from cost management – there is no money in the system for incarceration of an ever increasing number of people for longer periods of time.

Judge Craig also said any ideas of legalizing marijuana as a way to stem the tide of money to gangs was ludicrous, and cited the horrific burden on Canadians from alcohol consumption.

This statement leads one to conclude that Judge Craig is sadly lacking an ability for logical analysis and/or that Judge Craig believes that illegal marijuana imposes no cost or burden on Canadians.

If one is to use the costs/burden of marijuana on Canadians as the basis for making the legalization/keep illegal decision you need to be comparing oranges (marijuana) to oranges (marijuana) not oranges (marijuana) to apples (alcohol).

The important burden/cost comparison is what the costs/burdens of having marijuana illegal (which would include the cost of gangs, legal system, incarceration etc) versus the cost/burdens that would result from marijuana if marijuana was legal.

The cost/burden of alcohol has no bearing on the cost/burden of marijuana analysis and therefore should have no bearing on whether marijuana is legal or illegal.

Judge Craig’s statement assumes that the costs/burden of legal marijuana would be higher that the costs/burdens associated with marijuana when it is illegal; a highly questionable conclusion.

Given Judge Craig’s statement that “Alcohol is already a madness on society,” one is left wondering why Judge Craig is not calling for alcohol to be made illegal as marijuana currently is?

If, as Judge Craig asserts, alcohol is a costly burden on Canadians and keeping (making) something illegal (marijuana) results in a lower cost/burden shouldn’t Judge Craig be seeking to add alcohol to the list of illegal drugs?

Of course US prohibition demonstrated clearly the high cost of making a widely used popular product, for which there is a strong high demand, illegal – gangs, gang wars and creation of a highly profitable criminal business.

The high cost being paid by Canadians in dealing with addiction and illegal (or legal) substance use is a direct result of trying to use the legal system to address what is a health issue by criminalizing the human weakness of addiction.

We might as well try to solve obesity and the burden the growing epidemic of obesity imposes on society by making being overweight a crime.

Since the legal system was never designed to address health issues the high costs and failure to make headway should be no surprise to anyone.

There is no such thing as ‘criminal’s rights’. There are ‘Canadian’s rights’ set out in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms that all in Canada are entitled to – rich or poor, male or female, young or old, Anglo-Saxon or other ethnicity, law-abiding or law-breaker, Canadian born or immigrant, citizen or visitor – these rights belong to all.

Before you tell yourself that you are not a criminal and don’t need your rights protected consider those released from prison, after years or decades, when it was found they were wrongly imprisoned. Consider incidents such as the lower mainland resident who was assaulted by police when they went to the wrong door and had the wrong person. With all the inquiries into police and government behaviours, with the changes in technology it is ever more important to have OUR rights protected.

The rights that are being protected are OUR rights, the rights of all Canadians. Equal Rights were created for everyone, which includes those accused (and those guilty) of wrongdoing.

To paraphrase Carl Sagan “with the Charter of Rights and Freedoms comes a certain decency, humility and community spirit that stands between us and the enveloping darkness.”

I say darkness because when the rights of the victim, the victim’s family or society are evoked it is not rights that are being spoken of but vengeance.

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind. Gandhi

Vengeance speaks to the darkness inside us, is rooted in destruction and is a very unhealthy, unwise choice to use as one of the basis of a society.

I have a friend who is so focused on vengeance that this friend wants to bring back the death penalty so Clifford Olson and others can be put to death. When I pointed out that what happened to Guy Paul Morin and others clearly demonstrated that if we had the death penalty innocent people would have been put to death by us (the government on our behalf) this person said it was an acceptable price to pay so Clifford Olson could be executed.

This person goes to church and considers themselves to be a good Christian and feels that killing innocent people is fine if that is what it takes be able to kill Clifford Olson and others like him.

Christian as in Jesus Christ who when asked said to turn the other cheek, who preached forgiveness and love your enemy as thyself.

Focused on vengeance on Clifford Olson and others who have committed heinous crimes this person, and many other Canadians, are willing, even eager, to accept the death of innocent victims as an acceptable price to pay in order to put Clifford Olson and his ilk to death.

To execute Clifford Olson (a killer of innocent victims) they are willing to become killers of innocent victims; in essence to gain vengeance on Clifford Olson et al, they are willing to become Olson – killers innocent victims.

Vengeance is a poison that destroys from within whether it be a person or a society.

Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves. Confucius

What we need to know, to the core of our being, is that what we need to base the discussion on is not the addicts, the criminals and crime but on ourselves.

Talking about what ‘they deserve’ is merely a way to justify our inaction; a justification to let ourselves off the hook for doing what is needed to aid rehabilitation, recovery and wellness.

The decisions we make and the actions we take in dealing with these issues is not about Them, but about Us and the society we want to create, live in and pass to the next generation. The real question is whether we will base our society on the worst in ourselves or the best in ourselves.