New Brunswick '10: The Results

The black cats have seized control in New Brunswick after an election many thought would be close, resulted in a strong majority government for the now former opposition party.

The Progressive Conservatives in a near repeat of the 1999 election have 42 seats of the 55 in the Legislature with the opposition Liberals at 13 seats. The NDP, Green Party, and People's Alliance all failed to win a seat. The black cats managed to get 49% of the vote, while the Liberals captured their lowest result ever of 34%, the NDP at 10%, the Greens at 5%, and the PANB and independents at 1% each.

From the beginning it appears that this government was doomed to failure. The 2006 election gave more votes to the PCs then the Liberals. Even before they took office, the Liberals were already leading without the confidence of the people. Although things calmed, and polling numbers hit up to the 60's for them, and the former Premier, Bernard Lord resigned. Things were going well until someone mentioned the elephant in the room, the debt. The debt had grown at an ever increasing rate even during times of economic prosperity. Mr. Alward attacked the hell out of this, and then the NB Power-Hydro-Quebec deal came about. While it could have tackled the debt, it proved to be very unpopular due to a loss of sovereignty. This was the nail in the coffin for Shawn Graham and many of his ministers as well.

The campaign was marked with a shit-load (actual unit of measurement) of promises from both sides. Fiscally incompetent pledges were made by most parties (read: Progressive Conservatives, Liberals and the Greens) that involved spending more money and taxing less during a time of economic despair. I'm not a fan of fiscal austerity and I'm confident that the people of New Brunswick aren't either, but I don't think they want a bigger debt either. This was the primary issue of the campaign, and during my occasional visits to the PC Party's website before the election, that was the primary concern, so it is natural that they would address this quite head-on. It appears to have been much more resonating to the people then a promise of 60,000 something laptops from the Liberals for students.

Each party has its own set of problems to face in the not so distant future. How will a thirteen member opposition caucus attack the government with the former Premier still in the wings? I smell a resignation from the Liberal leader soon. The NDP while increasing its vote count still has yet to hold a seat since 2004, which effectively silences the party in the Legislature. The Green Party did not achieve the national standard for the federal party, and they too will need to find candidates in every riding if they wish to be viewed as a major party by 2014. Finally, the People's Alliance is now in a crucial state, will it grow and prosper from possible PC Party fallacies, or will it demise like so many other fringe parties?

The PC Party is now faced with the immensely difficult task of governing. Reducing government size, cutting taxes, and somehow eradicating at least part of the debt are priorities for the Alward government. While their numbers seem to be incorrect to achieve this, I do wish them the best with addressing these problems, and the many more that are sure to come about in the next four years.

This marks another victory for the black cats, and while I'm saddened by the NDP's results, I feel humbled that nearly 40,000 took the stand for the middle class, and voted for a positive future for the province. While today is a defeat, I know the people of New Brunswick are smart, capable individuals, and they too will one day realize that there is no difference between red and blue. One day they too will elect a government that offers social democratic solutions to the problems New Brunswick faces today in order to solve the challenges of tomorrow.

Mouseland

A young Kiefer Sutherland using 1990's graphics along with the help of the UFCW transforms Tommy Douglas' epic fable into visual images for all to enjoy. The people of British Columbia, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario, Nova Scotia, and Yukon have seen the positive results of a government comprised of the middle class. Will the people of New Brunswick be next? We can only hope so...

Silence

It's been a while since I've heard of the "accomplishments" from Langford City Council. In fact, I can't remember the last update to the people. There was one during the civic campaign in November 2008, and even then all it contained was a small card that listed the current councillors. Surely they must have accomplished something in the near two years since their current mandate... right?

Other elected officials send out newsletters or updates about what they have done and what they are fighting for. It's great; too many citizens are disengaged with the democratic process and are unaware of the achievements or lack thereof from our Member of Parliament and/or Member of the Legislative Assembly. Is it so much to ask that councillors state what they have done during their three year mandates as well?

I can understand the cost might be a deterrent especially if in paper, but that's where the beauty of an electronic version comes in. It doesn't even need to be that often, perhaps once every season, or if they were that lazy, biannually. I don't want a novella; I just want to know what you've done, what you're doing, and why you're doing this. Considering that we haven't heard from them since 2005 about their individual accomplishments, I don't think this is an unreasonable offer. Besides at the end of the day, our taxes are paying for their salary.

So come on Denise, Winnie, Lanny, Matt, and Roger, what progress have you as individuals done for Langford, and what battles are still yet to be fought?

It's True...

For the past few months I've heard rumours that the NDP secretly supports the introduction of the harmonized sales tax in BC. It's comments like these that cause ex-Liberals to consider voting for the Conservatives. While these voters are simply looking for an escape goat to avoid voting for the social democratic party, it's still quite puzzling how they came to this conclusion.

Back in July 2009 when the HST was first announced by the Liberals, we were the first ones to cry foul and state our opposition to the move. We held press conferences, organized protests and even spread the battle to cyberspace. There with us was former Socred Premier Bill Vander Zalm leading the former Liberal camp against the government. We set aside our differences in the fight for one common goal, to end the harmonized sales tax in our province.

Nearly every day in the Legislature, at least one member of the opposition stood up and questioned the government about its intentions with the tax. All 35 members of the BC NDP voted against Bill 9 which introduced the tax, and during the initiative led by Vander Zalm, the NDP provided the largest amount of volunteers against the tax. Today we are still opposed to the move.

But the main point these conspirators point to is a lack of a point addressing the HST in the official platform. It's true; there is no point about the HST in the platform simply because it hasn't been updated since early 2009 for the election. The next policy review (which I hope to attend) isn't going to be until 2011. Will it be introduced there? It's possible, but with the way things are going the government won't even be standing by the end of the new year.

The evidence is stacked against the Conservatives: the BC NDP has opposed the HST since day one. But if they want to play hard ball, I'll play hard ball. Did you know that the Conservative platform in 2009 indicated their intention to harmonize the provincial sales tax with the federal Goods & Services Tax if elected?

The Conservatives should take a page from the Liberals: the people don't like to be lied to.

Happy Times

Like the cleaning of a house, the story of the sales tax from hell never ends.

Today, the Legislative Committee reviewing the first successful citizen-led initiative in Canadian history voted for a provincial wide referendum on the issue to be held on September 24th, 2011. The motion was passed after the NDP's proposal for a free vote in the Legislature was defeated. Sad faces be had by all in the fight against the tax.

The referendum is expected to cost about $30 million. However, as the BC NDP and Bill Vander Zalm made the point, the success of the initiative already showed clear opposition to the tax, so to use taxpayers money on a non-binding vote, a year from now is not only a waste of time, but money and resources. This is a ridiculous stall tactic that has nearly unachievable goals for it to be successful (50% of registered voters must vote against the HST) that could easily be disregarded by the Premier himself.

We all know why they're doing this: by September 2011, we all will most likely have given up on the fight against the tax. At least, that's what the Liberals can hope for... as Bill Vander Zalm and former proponent now opponent of the HST Chris Delaney stated in their storming off from the committee, recall is still a possibility. I never thought a two-syllable word like that could bring so much hope to so many. Recall is our last change for the removal of these slime balls we call BC Liberals from elected office, and it can't come fast enough...

Really?

The Long Gun Registry saves lives all across this country for only a cost of between $1.1 million and $3.6 million per year. That's pretty damn impressive considering its effectiveness. Unfortunately, all is not calm in the land of fire arm restrictions, as the debate has opened up once again since its inception in the 1990's.

It all started like this: a backbencher (read: non-cabinet minister member of the governing party caucus) introduced a bill that would abolish the Long Gun Registry. As per tradition, private members bills like this are never whipped votes. Thus, free votes are had by all and the voting intentions are determined solely by the Members personal beliefs and not their party's beliefs. Most Conservatives are voting in favour of its abolition, while Michael Ignatieff is whipping his caucus into voting against it. The Bloc I believe is also generally against the abolition, while the NDP has taken the high road.

Jack Layton, being the wise man that he is, understands the advantages and disadvantages of the programme (yes, I'm British) especially for those living in rural areas. There are numerous dangers out in the Great White North, and safety is the number one concern for every family here. Regardless of your location in the country, hunting should always be a viable option for recreational purposes granted it is performed in a sustainable manner. Getting the materials necessary for hunting shouldn't be incredibly difficult for a citizen without a criminal history. Among other things, the NDP plan also protects Aboriginal treaty rights, eliminates charges to register, protects gun owners' privacy, and allows municipalities to determine the future of hand guns.

Shame on the Conservatives for once again opening up another divisive issue as they have done so many times before. Shame on the Liberals too, and in particular Ignatieff for attempting to polarize this issue beyond what is necessary. I'm amazed that this is still an issue for Canada in 2010, but perhaps what's even more puzzling is the claim that this is the single most important issue affecting out great nation today. I guess they're right to say that: it's not like the economy or the environment are concerns at all for Canadians.

Same-Sex Marriage

I can hear the Conservatives groaning from here. Once again as I said with my "Abortion" blog post, if the issue in question is one to make your blood boil you are welcome to comment but please don't tell me that I am doomed to an eternity in the Lake of Fire, or that I am an awful person. Thank you in advance!

The issue of modern same-sex marriages is quite new on the scene. The first nation to allow them, the Netherlands, has performed and recognized same-sex marriages since April 2001. Since then Belgium, Spain, South Africa, Norway, Sweden, Portugal, Iceland, and most recently Argentina along with Canada in 2005 have also jumped on the bandwagon. I guess we know what the progressive nations of the world are.

Same-sex marriage extends the rights of marriage to homosexual couples. This ensures equality among both the homosexual and heterosexual community. I have no problem what so ever with two consenting adults making an informed decision concerning the person they love.

Unsurprisingly, the issue of same-sex marriage has caused plenty of controversy. Critics often point to three attacks. In some nations, the word "marriage" is defined in its constitution. Most of these nations also claim to be secular, they're wrong. A true secular state keeps religion and the government separate, and defining marriage tramples all over that. Next, critics point out that along with marriage comes parenting rights, and because of non-existent reports, homosexuals are worse parents that heterosexuals. Study after study has proven that you do not need straight parents to raise a successful individual into society, you need loving parents. Finally, civil unions are thrown out as a possibility for a supplement of marriage. Unfortunately, civil unions because of a loss of association, many rights are lost when a party to a civil union rather than a marriage.

Often religion is thrown into this debate, but while keeping with my tradition of remaining silent on religion, I must say that things can be interpreted incorrectly. Above all else, we are not on this planet to judge others for actions they cannot control, and we never will be.

Slowly the nations of this world are embracing equal rights for homosexuals. However, we still have a long way to go. Africa and the Middle East are the biggest offenders as they still consider homosexual intercourse a criminal act. It's time for the world to accept the reality, and allow homosexuals to marry.

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!