First Editorial!

Do you enjoy rants about pointless infrastructure construction in Langford? Do you enjoy my biased opinion on this matter? Do you get the Goldstream News Gazette delivered to your home? If the answer to all of those question is yes then you'll be able to see my first published letter to the editor. But have no fear ladies and gentlemen, my editorial is just below:

"Beautification poor use of tax dollars

The Goldstream Avenue beautification project is an awful waste of money.

Council has no right to use public money on projects envisioned exclusively in Mayor Stew Young's head.

Do you remember giving the right to Young to build a roundabout in the middle of a busy street on a major road for BC Transit operators?

Do you remember giving the right for a fountain to be erected costing exuberant amounts of money? Oh, and we can't forget about the speakers blasting music down to the confused citizens below in a manner similar to that of the world in 1984. How about the sign proclaiming the entrance to Goldstream Village?

Rather than wasting our money on unnecessary infrastructure projects that are little more than eye candy for the elite of this city, we should attempt to create a culturally vibrant, environmentally-friendly community, while protecting the lower and middle classes.

Don't get me wrong there, there are still plenty of improvements to be made in Langford, but we should be focusing on safety by creating speed bumps, sidewalks and crosswalks where necessary rather than completing Young's distorted vision of what the true citizens of Langford want and need. This is our home, let's never forget that.

Grant McLachlan
Langford"

Hooray!

The Land of Over Indulgence

Over the past few years, my hometown of Langford has changed dramatically. The city that was once known as "a place to let your dog run" is now the commercial hub of the West Shore. Development of not only homes but also businesses was expanding rapidly before the period of economic despair we are currently entangled in, began. As the city changed, the Mayor and Council were more determined than ever to change Langford into something similar to Victoria.

You now cannot go a block without seeing flowers sporting our flag colours of red and yellow along with eloquent street lights. But it doesn't stop there; the City of Victoria and Langford have had numerous public disputes between each other often ending in a reminder of the property tax rates in each city. At the end of the day, Langford Mayor Stew Young has made it clear that he wishes for provincial government buildings to be in Langford, and not the capital of BC. He hasn't had any success with getting that dream to become reality.

Unfortunately, beautification doesn't stop at flower beds, stoned sidewalks, and newly paved roads. The local government is currently fixated on the centre of town. In pursuit of this they have erected a round-about containing a fountain, along with a large sign reading "Welcome to Goldstream Village". I have a problem with infrastructure development like this, not only did it cost $1.9 million that the city doesn't have, no one was asked if they wanted this outside of the councillors running our town, and the City neglected to inform those who could be effected because of this (cough, BC Transit drivers and large vehicle operators, cough). The project is little more than eye candy for the Mayor and his wrong vision for our community.

Perhaps this is my inner middle-class speaking, but the last thing we should do is spend money we don't have on things that we don't need. That seems to have been at least part of the reason families are struggling to make ends meet all over Canada. It's wrong for a local government to refuse to listen to the concerns of its citizens, and that's exactly what has happened here. I understand that Langford wants to change the perception of itself, but edging off the grass near the road won't remove the negative connotations that often are associated with our town, nor will throwing money at the problem in the hopes for it to disappear.

Let's stop the useless construction of these infrastructure improvements, solve the issues that are affecting the people in our town, and avoid that dreaded word: bankruptcy, which we are slowly edging towards. It's time to take back our city.

Consumption Tax Rates: The Wrong Move

I met the not-so-famous and struggling to cling on to the leadership of her very own fringe party Elizabeth May just over a month ago. She was there with all four of her supporters, and I asked her about the position she would take if a bill concerning the harmonized sales tax was brought forward in the House of Commons. She told me that she wouldn't vote for it in its current form, and noting the interesting wording, I asked under what circumstances she would vote in favour of the HST. Ms. May then responded saying that she would support it if it shifted to consumption based transportation fuel (read: gasoline). Let the raising of the left eyebrow commence.

So let me get this straight Green Party, you support raising taxes for gasoline, which we all use? We have no alternatives the middle-class can purchase that will help save the environment without destroying our financial future. So in essence, the Greens support raising taxes for us because we use vehicles. Thus, if I understand Green policies correctly (I probably don't to be honest, policies that fail to become full circle just don't click in the old brain), they would eliminate taxes on most other products such as groceries.

At first glance, this doesn't sound too bad. But when you think about it, you realize that this is another burden that out of touch politicians want to dump on the middle-class. Groceries among other products are driven, flown and even shipped into Canada, and they all use fossil fuels. The corporations running this, all will be taxes as well, and as a result for the corporations to make a profit, they will raise the prices for us. I fail to see the positive light in this poorly thought out Green policy.

I'm amazed with platform points like this that the Green Party has done as well as they have. People must be converted simple due to name only. Ask any Green voter and they'll tell you they are supporting them "because they care about the environment." Yet, they fail to articulate how the Greens will initiate this change of heart toward the environment, and also don't mention about the protection of the middle class. The reason? They don't care about families like yours and mine. They're similar to PETA in that manner; they are so supportive of a cause, that they are willing to harm other aspects of society to get their point across.

The Greens along with the Liberals and Conservatives support raising taxes for hard-working families. But besides this new tax shift, do the Greens have any other policies about the economy? Of course they don't! The unemployed aren't important, at least in their eyes they aren't. No economic policies to get us out of the worst period of economic despair since the Great Depression; a sure fire way to win votes.

Why, Oh Why, Can't I?

With only two days to go until my 17th birthday, I am just over a year away from achieving enfranchisement. Voting, while a simple process, appears to be so beautiful. Simply knowing that your vote is part of the total that united together for the social democratic candidate seems unbelievable. Some countries though have taken the next step and lowered the voting age to 16.

Austria, Brazil, Nicaragua, and even Communist Cuba have lowered their voting ages to 16 years of age. They feel that at the age of sixteen, we are capable of making important decisions. They feel that we are in every way adults with the sole exception of voting, so why should we restrict that right?

At sixteen, you can drive, have to pay taxes, can leave school permanently, seek employment, and as much as my teachers hate to admit it, we have made important decisions that have drastically altered our future before, we can make them again. Besides, allowing sixteen year olds to vote would allow many parents to register their children before leaving the home. This could increase voter turnout among the younger demographics, which I think we can all agree would be fantastic for not only our generation, but society as a whole. Everyone needs to have a voice in politics, including us.

It comes back to that simple saying: no taxation without representation. The government takes my tax dollars to pave the roads I use, so why can't I choose who should determine how to spend those dollars? It's as simple as voting for a party that supports lowering the voting age (cough, NDP, cough) that could initiate change, and bring us to the forefront of progressive, 21st century policies, Canada has long been known for. So give us the right; we'll vote, join parties, let our issues be known, and if we're rebellious enough, we might even run for public office...

Deja Vu

Since the fallout of the BC Liberals, many voters have called for a centrist alternative to be present in the Legislature. These calls are humorous to me because this will not happen. My proof of this, you ask? Many voters were also calling for this back in 1991 with the collapse of the SoCreds. It's a near repeat of the late 1980's.

The SoCreds in 1991 were the right-wing vote, while the NDP was the left-wing vote. Those looking for a protest vote went for the then centrist Liberals. The Liberals formed the Opposition and the SoCreds died a painful death, leaving a power vacuum in BC politics. Someone needed to fill the void of a conservative voice in BC, and the BC Liberals were just that party. The election of Gordon Campbell as BC Liberal Party leader solidified their turn to the right. While they were the centrist voice for about two years, the party had to change in order to become the principle opposing force of the governing New Democrats.

Today it's the same story, but the parties are different. Instead of the SoCreds dying, the Liberals themselves are, soon to be replaced by the Conservatives. While I doubt the complete destruction of the Liberals, then slipping into third party status within the next election or two is very plausible. The Conservatives will at first appear to be centrist in comparison to the NDP and Liberals, but they too will turn to the right-wing as their name implies and embrace the shrinking size of the population opposed to NDP leadership.

Centrists don't work in provinces like ours with deep divisions, high turnovers, and plenty of scandalous events. They haven't worked since 1952, and I doubt they will work for the first time in over six decades by 2013. I hope you're listening BC Refederation Party!

Another Twist...

The initiative to end the harmonized sales tax in British Columbia was declared successful today, which makes it the first initiative petition in Canada to be successful. Those against the HST breathed a sigh of relief knowing that the ball was once again the government's court forcing them to either have a vote in the legislature or a referendum on the issue. What no one saw coming was the decision of the Chief Electoral Officer not to proceed further because of the court battle over the initiative.

This decision will stop the HST Extinguishment Act from going to a legislative committee to determine how it will be treated until mid to late August. Bill Vander Zalm clearly irritated remarked "We will recall every Liberal MLA in the province if that's what it takes." Those are beautiful words from the former Premier, and his supporters behind him were quick to begin chants of "Recall, recall, recall!"

It is another stall tactic in this already incredibly drawn out issue of a sales tax from hell. The Government is failing to acknowledge the people of British Columbia screaming in its ears to stop their actions. Regardless of the court battles over the initiatives legality, or determination of where to send the bill, recall is now a new horizon for FightHST. People were angry enough, but this is throwing gasoline on top of the burning tire fire, there's no putting it out. If the Liberals are smart, they will look to retirement to end their political fortunes, and not being removed from office by a group of anti-tax crusaders making up all political stripes.

There are over 700,000 signatures on the initiative, and yet it took only one sympathetic Liberal to stop us; unbelievable.

Uniting the Right

The right-wing in Canada is a strong political force to contend with. Today it forms a strong minority government in Ottawa, majority governments in British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec, Newfoundland & Labrador, and the Yukon. It took a long time for conservatives to get to this point. For a long time, the right-wing was divided, splitting the vote not only federally but also provincially. In an attempt to curb this and to stop the Liberals and NDP, organizers attempted to merge these parties. They labelled it as "Unite the Right."

Brian Mulroney was not the most popular Prime Minister for obvious reasons. It appears that the GST was the final catalyst for a mass exodus of Progressive Conservative voters to turn to another right-wing party that didn't abandon the values that build the PC Party. Canadians elected 52 Reform MPs in 1993, 51 of them were in Western Canada. It was the new voice of western discontent, replacing the now federal NDP. Since the Progressive Conservatives still existed, right-wingers had to choose whether or not to vote PC or to vote Reform. Together, while they could not have defeated the Liberal Party, they could have been a very powerful opposition, thus avoiding the Bloc Quebecois from holding another one of those dreadfully close referendums on sovereignty association.

When 1997 came by, the Reform Party and Progressive Conservatives gained little ground, and still split the right-wing vote. This was their closest opportunity to rip the clutches of government from the Liberals, by being within 1% of the vote if united as a single party. Right-wingers were becoming desperate to remove Chretien from power, and were willing to do anything to form the government. Indeed, they did take drastic action, but without much success.

Reform was dissolved, and the Canadian Alliance was created. It was intended to be the true voice of Liberal opposition, while also losing its status symbol as a "Western" party. Their attempts were futile, as the party dominated solely in the west and was nearly completely shunned eastward of Manitoba. Here, a few Alliance MPs left the caucus in protest of their leadership, and eventually Stephen Harper became leader of the Canadian Alliance.

With Stephen Harper as leader of the CA, a leadership convention was also held for the Progressive Conservatives. Future Defence Minister and right-hand man of Harper Peter MacKay was elected leader promising not to merge with the Alliance. In true conservative fashion, he went against his word and merged with the Canadian Alliance to create the Conservative Party we know and despise today.

A split in the right-wing is present in provincial politics, too. In BC in the early 2000's, conservative parties merged together to create the Unity Party against the BC Liberals radical take on conservatism. The loose coalition of the Unity Party fell apart shortly after it formed though, and was met with failure. Alberta is the only other province with serious issues in its right-wing ranks. The Wildrose Alliance is now immensely popular, beating out the Progressive Conservatives who have controlled the province for over three decades in many polls. If the vote-splitting gets bad enough, the Liberals could return to power for the first time since 1921.

A divided right-wing; a left-wingers dream.

Whataya Want from Me

Remember the dispute between the Vancouver School Board and the Minister of Education? Yes, it was a few months back there, and it involved the Vancouver School Board attempting to create a balanced budget (which they simply couldn't do), and the Minister of Education threw a hissy fit.

The Government has increased funding for Education, but when taking into account inflation, the actual amount of funding per student has dropped nearly every year for the past decade. The Vancouver School Board felt these hits just as everyone else in the field did. They attempted to create a balanced budget, but the only way they could do it was by closing schools, something they were going to avoid like the plague. The Minister was upset, so to ruin the legitimacy of an elected body, she appointed the Comptroller General for recommendations on how to save money.

First, the Vancouver School Board, just like any other school district, should have the right to run a deficit. Continual dropping of funding justifies it, and the government doesn't seem to have a problem with running in the red either. The elected individuals on the Vancouver School Board are there to represent the people, and while I can't speak on behalf of the citizens of Vancouver, I do believe a majority opposed the necessary steps to be taken to ensure a balanced budget. Finally, the Comptroller General has no right to recommend money saving measures when they are most likely unaware of the challenges not only facing the district staff, but also the students. An individual from Victoria has no right to make an important decision concerning a municipality outside of their jurisdiction without accurate information.

The Minister of Education was wrong on so many fronts in this battle, it was ridiculous. I suggest that rather than stomping her feet when achieving a balanced budget is near impossible under the circumstances, she should listen to the people. The Minister should listen to the student's who's schools will close, she should listen to the parents who will have to drive further and receive different teaching styles that could affect their child's learning ability. She should also listen to the teachers, custodians, and administrative staff that are now out of a job.

The Party of Sex

Odd political parties go hand in hand with elections in British Columbia. The Sex Party is probably the best example of a relatively small, insignificant issue being blown way out of proportion and being taken under the wings of a party lacking an ideology.

The Sex Party pushes for nudist beaches to be larger than one hectare, a Sex Worker Empowerment Program for sex workers, treating sex toy businesses fairly to other businesses, changing Victoria Day to Eros Day, making Valentine's Day a statuary holiday, and finally a candidate in the most recent election pushed for prostitution to be completely legal.

I'm not an expert on the subject, but I don't believe there is a significant amount of the population pushing for nudist beaches to consider extending them beyond their current boundaries. A Sex Worker Empowerment Program sounds like it encourages people to get involved in the sex trade, and those that are already involved to stay in it. In a perfect world, prostitution wouldn't exist, and while I know and accept it always will be a part of our cities, that doesn't justify its decriminalization. Treating sex toy businesses fairly seems reasonable, but I question whether or not I would want young children to go through the paper and see advertisements for "questionable" objects. Changing Victoria Day to Eros Day is a complete reversal of our acceptance of the Monarchy as a part of Canada, adjusting it to praise a Greek god is a step backwards, not forwards. I will admit that more holidays are needed in the year, and February is a good example of this, but I think something like Family Day as seen in other province would be more widely accepted by both labour and business as a legitimate holiday then St. Valentine's Day.

So, as you can tell by the size of that paragraph, a few of the Sex Party's policies have flaws... well, most of them do. The Sex Party is right in principle to push for a smaller government influence on the lives of its citizens, more holidays and equality among the business community, but its direct policies regarding these issues present significant problems themselves. Most parties that lack a real ideology such as this die within a decade or two of forming. My guess is, the Sex Party while not following suit of finding sex to be taboo, will like the majority dissolve within the next decade. Whatever will we do without a sex-positive voice to support? I guess we'll have to vote for political parties which have policies that address issues that are of concern to all of us. How tragic.

New Brunswick '10: The Writs

The only provincial election this year is slowly approaching its September 27th deadline. Yes, the New Brunswick general election of 2010 is just under two months away until voters cast their ballots. The election is a good test of provincial political waters since the 2009 Nova Scotia NDP victory and Liberal strength since sweeping into power in Prince Edward Island three years ago.

2006 was the last election in the province where the Liberals got 47% of the vote and 29 seats, while the Progressive Conservatives got 48% of the vote and 26 seats. The NDP meanwhile was unable to win a seat with its new leader and dropped to 5% support. Much has changed since then: the Green Party is now a registered party, along with the right-wing People's Alliance of New Brunswick. They will split the vote on the left-wing and right-wing leaving the centrist Liberals open to winning more seats.

The polls since the last election have had the NDP triple support to just above 15%, the Liberals drop about 10%, the Conservatives drop 5%, and the Greens picking up 5% support. These numbers appear to be solid, but the People's Alliance is excluded due to the fact that no polls have been conducted since its creation, and its validity as a major party is put into question. Still, the Progressive Conservatives will feel any gains made by the People's Alliance this fall, and that could cost them the government.

The Liberal fallout can be attributed to the economic recession response by the province, but perhaps more importantly the proposed sale of NB Power to Hydro-Quebec easily divided the party and its supporters. Even after the deal was announced to have fallen through by March, the Liberals still have yet to regain its popularity before the policy announcement. The Progressive Conservatives didn't really state their position on the issue until the deal was declared null and void, leaving a large wing feeling disenchanted with the party. At least a portion of them went on to form the People's Alliance of New Brunswick. The Greens are the protest vote in this election, while the NDP perhaps feeling a boost of popularity from not only a new leader, their opposition to the NB Power/Hydro-Quebec sale, but also the election and good stories from Nova Scotia in 2009 is the party with the largest amount of positive swing since 2006.

If my methodology is correct (which involves comparing the most recent election results to an average of current polls and adjusting them based on differences), then the Progressive Conservatives should win 30 seats, to the Liberals 24 and one seat for the NDP. Should these results prove to be accurate, that would end the Graham Ministry which has governed New Brunswick since 2006, and remove the Liberals from control by pushing them into opposition status, while the NDP would return to the Legislature with a single seat as the third party.

You read it here first, David Alward, the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party of New Brunswick will be the next Premier of the Province of New Brunswick.