Census Consequences

If you follow federal politics, you would know that the issue of a voluntary long-form census is huge. It's so big that the Conservatives are defending it in the summer, when they are supposed to be off having barbecues with their constituents and spreading the grace of Harper.

In true Conservative fashion, on a quiet, twiddle-your-thumbs Friday afternoon in Ottawa, the government announced that for the 2011 census it will be optional to do a long-form version of it. It fulfills another step the Conservatives wish to achieve: making government as small as possible to the point where it's unworkable, and nearly anarchy. They feel that a long-form census barges in on an individual's basic rights of privacy.

Up to this point the issue was purely political: conservatives bashing heads with socialists. Left-wingers not agreeing with right-wingers is about as common as the sun rising in the east tomorrow. Shortly after this though, the head of Stats Canada resigned, saying that a long-form census wouldn't work for NGO's (non-governmental organizations) to collect accurate information. He's right to think so, if only extroverts reveal information about themselves, it doesn't exactly paint an accurate picture of our nation.

This move is another small step in Mr. Harper's quest to create a truly conservative Canada. It appears that the opposition is united to fight this move, which is nice to see after months of the Liberals voting with the Conservatives on numerous fiscal and social policies. They are right to be opposed: voluntary cannot replace mandatory. This information isn't being used to track you down like GPS, but rather this data can help us deliver more effective health care treatment, education on a provincial scale, and other social services.

It's examples like this that prove why we need to ensure that Harper doesn't get the coveted majority he has envied for since entering the political stadium.

Lottery Lollapalooza

A new year in our province, and with the BC Liberals in power, you know what that means: a new lie! I'm talking of course about the expansion of online gambling in our province. The recent fallout from it is similar to the HST. The party said they weren't going to do it before the election, but after the ballots were counted they had a sudden change of heart. How convenient.

Solicitor General John Les had this to say in the Legislature on February 21st, 2007: "There will be no internet gaming conducted by the B.C. Lottery Corp. - period ... We are not going to entertain Internet gaming."

In 2007 Mr. Les was against the expansion of online gaming. In 2010 his party did just the opposite. I don't care how you spin it: that's flip-flopping. If John Les were a true man of character, he would stick to his words and come out publicly against this expansion. But I wouldn't expect a Liberal to do something good for the common people of British Columbia: it's just not in their blood.

The BC Liberal election platform of 2001 had this to say about the issue: "Stop the expansion of gambling that has increased gambling addiction and put new strains on families." There are a few things wrong with that sentence, but I'll cut to the chase. They pledged not to expand gambling in 2001, and now don't much care about putting additional strains on families. Could this possibly be a new chapter in the book of broken promises these fine politicians have crafted since 2001?

Kevin Krueger: "Women in British Columbia will die because of gambling expansion; that's the prediction of some of our experts at UBC. Some 37 percent of the spouses of pathological gamblers abuse their children. So children may die as a result of gambling expansion..." (Hansard, June 12th, 1997)

The BC Lottery Corporations newest website isn't just putting lives at risk; it's putting your financial security at risk. Less than a day after it's opening, the website was shut down because twelve players playing money had been compromised. The website is still down, but it took us near a week for the government to tell us the truth about why it was shut down. In case you're keeping count at home that is lie number 947.

This government is willing to risk the lives of women and children simply to make a profit. What the hell is wrong with these people? Some British Columbians have serious gambling addictions that must be dealt with, but when a casino appears in front of them on their laptop, that's asking for trouble. Once again in something that unfortunately is becoming common, they are putting profit before people. Thanks Liberals, thanks a bunch, we can always trust you to do the right thing.

Green Giant

Sylvie Lemieux is becoming quite the shit-disturber in the Green Party. Ms. Lemieux plans to challenge Elizabeth May for the spot of leader at the next convention in August. She spoke of moving the Green Party from solely environmental policies to more broad policies concerning all areas of politics. This of course sounds good to all Greens out there who are looking to become a more prominent party, but everyone before Ms. Lemieux spoke of the same thing. Even Ms. May said she was going to move the party to become more of a viable alternative.

As a New Democrat, this concerns me slightly because while they say they take policies from both the left and right wings, they are a contributor to vote splitting on the left. In another way though, this brings me great joy. Let's face it: if Sylvie Lemieux is running, she certainly isn't alone. Others are upset about the party's direction under Elizabeth May.

It makes sense for the Greens to be upset. In 2008 they got 7% of the vote, today opinion polls have them at 7%. That's not great for a party that is supposedly on the move. Now before I get a group of hopeful Greens complaining to me, let me point out that the most accurate pollster Angus Reid has since February had the Greens between 7%-8%. Unfortunately for them, 7% isn't enough for the party to win even a single seat.

Do I support Sylvie Lemieux's stab at leadership of the Green Party? No, but nor do I support Elizabeth May as leader of the Green Party. What I do support though is division in the Green Party. I totally support a hotly contested leadership review and possibly leadership convention to divide members of the party, and maybe the Greens will drop in popular vote. Hell, if Elizabeth May was kicked out, I bet her army of supporters in Saanich-Gulf Islands would "reconsider" their options.

The Greens, just like the Progressive Party many years ago are appearing to be nothing more than a fad. Plenty of parties including the NDP have policies regarding the environment, and with polling numbers at a standstill, their provincial wing in Alberta being deregistered and their leadership choice in division, they too might go like the Progressives, and sink into obscurity after a brief stint of appearing in politics.

The End Draws Ever Closer...

Gordon Campbell has been leader of the BC Liberal Party since 1993, and Premier since 2001. That might change by the end of this year though. The BC Liberal Party plans to hold a convention in November, and while there a leadership review will be conducted. If Mr. Campbell fails this leadership review he must either resign or be removed as leader of the party.

Leadership reviews occur in every party, and while they usually don't result in their leader being removed, it can happen, and has before. It could amount to that here, and if it did, I would dance in the streets.

To be fair though, the party is controlled by corporations rather than people and they're whipped into thinking Gordon Campbell is just shy of God like qualities. But with support for the party down to 23% and anger as high as it is about the HST in Liberal held ridings, they might look for someone new. If they wanted any hope to win in 2013, they would be smart to remove the member from Vancouver-Point Grey from a leadership role though.

If he were to resign or be forced from the spot though, the Liberals would have to elect an interim leader until electing someone permanent at a later date. If anyone is going to be the interim leader of the BC Liberals and subsequently Premier it's going to be Linda Reid, the Deputy Speaker and member of the Legislature since 1991. I would expect her to be Premier from November 2010 to March 2011, when the next leader comes in. As much as it pains me to type this out, Colin Hansen probably will be that person.

Here's to hoping that the Campbell Ministry has four months left to live until death becomes it.

Crazy Conservative City Council

Many years ago, back when I had youth on my side, I supported the direction Langford Council was taking us down. Now though, I think it's time to, in the words of Wacky Bennett: "Take a second look."

Development has gone a little crazy lately. Sure, I see the want to make Langford the commercial hub of the West Shore, and I can support that, but let's slow down and look at the environmental destruction we are causing by handing out development permits and neglecting to investigate the consequences. Then there's the Spencer Interchange, which is being developed faster than the speed of light. Well, it was many months ago... Now, it's a stand still because of some poor financial decisions by both parties (cough, Len Barrie and Langford Council, cough).

We've also recently seen some expensive infrastructure projects prop up all over the place. I don't know about you, but I don't recall the people being given a choice to decide where their tax dollars will be spent. It seems to me these endeavours are once again wants of Council, and little more than unnecessary slabs of concrete for our city.

Perhaps the most irritating thing though about are council is their ego. People with legitimate concerns have been shot down and humiliated at council meetings. Council also seems to think they are in a league of their own, and what they think is best for Langford, is best for Langford. It ain't so Stew, it ain't so. This is our town, not theirs.

We seem to have been fulfilling a lot of wants of Council, and not the needs of the people in our town for quite some time. What we need is stricter environmental standards. We need development to slow down, and be thoroughly discussed. We need the pet projects of Council to stop. Most importantly though we need Mr. Young and his whipped Council to listen to the people that elected them. Then and only then can we reclaim our city...

Ministry of Astrobiological Studies

The federal and BC government are currently suffering from a terrible disease: bureaucracy. Pointless regulations and procedures (red tape!) are causing our elected representatives to fail to perform to the best of their abilities. A good example of bureaucracy is present in the cabinets of both governments.

Canada's Executive Council has over 35 members to lead the country from 2008 until the next election. Meanwhile the province has over 20 members to lead British Columbia. Both of these ministries are lead by conservative ideals, which in essence pushes for smaller government, or libertarianism. Yet since confederation while the population has grown, the size of these ministries has as well, but by too much.

Positions in the BC Cabinet like the Minister of Community & Rural Development, the Minister of Healthy Living & Sport, the Minister of Small Business, Technology & Economic Development, the Minister of Tourism, Culture & the Arts, and the Minister of State for Climate Action are little more than titles. I have yet to see any positive contributions these ministries have made that could not have been made in other ministries. It's the same story in the federal cabinet with titles like the President of the Queen's Privy Council, the Minister of State for Democratic Reform, and the Minister of State for Western Economic Diversification. With flashy titles like that, you would think they would actually get something done.

The problem goes beyond their ineffectiveness as departments of government. Those who are actually heading these sad ministries are not qualified for such jobs at all. They are little more than a figure head for the leader of the government to appear as if they are going to solve a long standing issue. I would like to see an important, influential bill introduced in the legislature by the Minister of Tourism, Culture & the Arts, rather than simple being a target as Question Period, and a spokesperson for everything done by their party since winning the election.

Finally, the last problem with these ministries are the leaders themselves. Stephen Harper and Gordon Campbell often remove their ministers from each position after an election. That's great if they were resigning or because they did a bad job, but perhaps we shouldn't have to wait four years to see a new face heading the Ministry responsible for Multiculturalism. Unfortunately for the two their jurisdictions health and financial balance is not interchangeable. If they do a good job, they should remain there, rather than being moved to a new position they have no idea how to perform in.

I'm not saying that all of these ministries are pointless and should be abolished but rather, they could all be part of the already existing ministries. The Ministry of Healthy Living & Sport sounds like it could easily fit in with the Ministry of Health Services, the same goes with the Ministry of Sport and the Secretary of State for Sport amalgamating together; they should go together like strawberries and whip cream.

Smaller government, larger government, all I want is smarter government. But it appears that unless positions like the Minister of Official Languages and the Minister of State for the Economic Development Agency of Canada for the Regions of Quebec are folded into other departments, are government is doomed to be living with the symptoms of bureaucracy and government expansion for a long way to come.

Get well soon Canada!