The point is, BC's resource wealth is derived from resource communities like Lillooet. Without them, BC's economy would be in dire trouble. Ergo, BC needs that wealth and access to those resource based communities. The concept of equity demands that some of this wealth be reinvested into the areas it comes from. And governments that fail to recognize this do so at their own peril. As the Liberals may soon discover.

Let's hope, let's really deeply hope that the people of the BC Interior have the guts to stand up and let their anger show. Lillooet is just one town of so many areas that were gutted; to a lot of people in the Kootenays, for example it began to seem like there was a conspiracy to move people out of rural areas so the big corps could move in and do some gutting themselves -- of the trees, the minerals, the water, and whatever else they could rip up. The BC interior has long been in the position of a colonized and ignored part of the province; people in the lower mainland think of it as a place you either go to camp and take a few pictures, or you drive through or fly over on the way to somewhere else. the split in the province in ter ms of culture, and community is huge. The NDP has never been that understanding of the Interior either, but at least they let their local MP's stand up for the local community. What Campbell did is forbid MP's to act on behalf of their own constituents. Instead they all had to toe the party line, droning out the same boring meaningless sound bites as their leader. I hope that some of them at least had the grace to be embarrassed by being made fools of in front of people they were supposed to care about. Now Campbell is making endless empty promises of money that may or may not ever materialize.how he has the nerve to show himself in communities like Lillooet or Nelson is beyond me.

Here is my take on the situation - of "the coast" - and "rural BC", --or as some may say "centre- periphery" relations. It is 100% correct that most of the monies that end up in Provincial Treasury (aside from personal taxes) come from resource extraction, forestry, pulp & paper, oil & natural gas, hydro-electricity, minerals, fishing,...and most of those revenues have been spent at "the coast". As someone who has lived several decades in the interior of the province I have always thought the "coast" was getting most of the benefits while interior communities were getting "ripped" from what is essentially a "colonial" relationship.

To my view, provincial political parties, whose HQ are located down at the "coast", whose "brass/cadres/ employees" are mostly urbanites, and where most of the Leaders of said centralized parties are from the "coast", subject as they are by the "lobbying" by business and labor elites..and as a consequence the "interior" continues to receive little understanding or sympathy from these "parties" "cadres" etc. etc.

...If during this provincial election, where either the NDP or BC Liberals get elected, and if, following that election, the 'Interior communities" continue to get treated as second class citizens, "ripped" and "shafted" by colonial policies that predominately benefit the coast...then, perhaps, hopefully, we might see the rise of the Kootenay Party, the North Coast Party, the Vancouver Island Party...each with their respective platforms and leadership from their geographic community. ...accountable to their base---the people who reside in that region.

Then if elected to the Legislative, these regional parties and their respective elected reps...could indeed form an Alliance or Confederation, negotiating amongst themselves to more equally receive beneficial policies and monies from Provincial Treasury. What has happened to rural BC over the past 20-40 years is an unmitigated disaster....a disaster that has also caused increased urban migration and the problems attendant to that.

...Indeed, political parties originating from and more connected to their respective territorial base, essentially a ward system for BC, is in my opinion the preferred way to invigorate our low-level democracy. Of course - many will disagree...preferring more centralized political parties, and a continuation of the centralization of political power in the Premier's office & Executive Branch of government. My preference is for more decentralization, subsidiarity, and an internal provincial constitution that more fairly distributes powers between Victoria and the respective regions/cities/municipalities of BC. ..also fiscal decentralization too.

During the BC NDP Leadership Campaign I can still recall a women from the East Kootenays asking me- what my plans were for day-care, for schools, hospitals, etc for their region. I said, hey, for the past 35 years billions of dollars from coal, timber, and the now defunct Sullivan Mine went straight to the Centralized Treasury in Victoria...and very, very, little came back to your region under your control. Can you just imagine if there was a 'fiscal arrangement" such that the Kootenay region got the "first cut" from the revenues and they stayed in the region, and what was left went to Victoria....then you, and every region that had the same benefits from such a fiscal decentralization would never have to suffer from the foolish and often inconsiderate decisions of centralized decision-makers in the Premier's office and other "Victoria" bureaucrats. I said you would have the monies for day-care, schools, hospitals, to diversify your economy ...and no "idiot" Premier in Victoria could take that away. I still don't think she, or many others really "got' that idea...although Corky Evans sure does!

...anyways...there is my take on all of this!

The situation in Lilloet - and elsewhere - is just further proof that decisions about services and development ought to be left to the community itself and not to a bunch of politicians in Victoria. There is no way in hell that a passenger is discontinued, a forest service virtually shut down, or any other cut backs and closures without the appoval of the community concerned. We need a movement to decentralize political power, something no political party (well, maybe the Greens a little bit) is talking about.

I should add that genuine decentralization would come with Peter's "first cut" approach to taxes. There is a phony form of decentralization practiced by neocons (I saw this happening in France) which needs to be avoided - that is they decentralize the political responsibility to the community, but don't provide any funds. This turns decentralization into a weapon against the community and naturally leaves a sour taste in people's mouths about the whole question of decentralism.

Really good piece by Peter, giving myself at least, an opportunity for a better understanding of his "regional ward system" model.

Very interesting, and mayhaps not so far fetched, especially if future politics in this province, in its current "party" form, which is demonstrably dysfunctional in any equitable way, starts to come unglued and fragment. (IF the NDP goes down to another defeat this round, it is almost certainly toast as a viable force, and the pressures on labour and "the left" to abandon it will only increase.

(Which I actually think has the potential to open up a positive new direct for development and possibilities, that will not leave the Neocon Alliance around the Libs unscathed or effected either. What is, is inadequate to getting at the real job of resecuring sovereign control over our own prov., national and regional economies, and commencing to complete our more "rounded" industrialized economic development-, allowing us to better husband and fully utilize our own resources. Now, of primary benefit to US imperialism.)

Where we are at is an impasse, in part manifested by and partly caused by the ascendancy of neoconservative economic thinking within the capitalist ruling class, (More accurately neo-liberal economic theory, but unnecessarily complicated to explain.), and the inadequate responses to it of especially organized Labour and ideological "social democracy"/ the NDP. Which from here, puts the pressure on "people" to wrestle with and find their own solutions, and may well in the course of which, drive to seek more regionally based models and responses as Peter proposes.

Also, interesting and useful observations by Anarcho, especially on the risks and pitfalls that exist in the capitalist models of decentralization, which echoe the "states rights" hamstringing of social and economic progress in the US. (Which become useful to the ruling class in exploiting regional wage and other disparities to their own advantage and the harm of communities. So regionalism is NOT without its risks either, as Anarcho helps make clear.)

Still, an interesting discussion that I hope will reappear from time to time in other threads.

Just a few points of clarification, what I am NOT proposing is off-loading programs & costs...as Campbell is doing. What I am proposing is fiscal and political decentralization relying on the principle of 'subsidiarity' and the concept of equalization payments to regions within BC who can't meet their needs due to downturns in their regional economies. In the areas of education, health, the environment, labor, there could be "meet or exceed standards" - which implies that regions must meet provincial standards but they could exceed them too.

In my view of BC politics there is far, far too much power centralized in Victoria, in multinational corporations, and within the offices of business and labor elites that have excessive persuasive lobbying power on the political elite within provincial parties. That style provides less accountability and transparency then what ought to be achievable by regional parties who are much 'closer' to the people that would be their base of support.

The facts are, people in BC, including First Nations peoples, live in villages, towns and cities - and except for First Nations peoples, all of these are 'political and legal creatures' of the province...and they have minimal powers.There will be many that will disagree with my radical prescription to reinvigorate our low-level democracy by seeking means to readjust the poliical architecture of the province -not by STV electoral processes - but by the election via New Zealands form of proportional representation of a constitutional constituent assembly whose sole purpose will be to hear presentations, call experts, do the research, argue and debate, and eventually write up a 'proposed internal constitution' for British Columbia - a constitution to then be debated and voted on directly by the people of BC. Naturally such a made in BC constitution would clarify what jurisdictional competencies would remain in Victoria, what the regions would be responsible, what would be co-equal responsibilities, and this then would guide the degree of fiscal decentralization.

This needs to be done...because the unequal distribution of political and fiscal power due to centralization of that 'power' in the Premier's Victoria office, coupled with the power of unelected senior Victoria bureacrats - regardless of party elected - corrupts the use of that power by the Premier and Executive branch of government, it typically allows 'capture' of that power by either big business or big labor to the detriment of peoples at both the 'coast ' and the 'interior', and most essentially it is 'very disempowering' of citizen power.

In my view, we have a low-level democracy in BC/Canada because the Crown has too much power, and Premiers & Prime Minister's & their select elitist Minister's & Deputy Ministers can essentially govern dictatorially - using the Legislature/Parliament to rubber-stamp their dictates. If the ownership of all public land/resources/water/forests, etc. currently held by the Crown was transferred to the regional governments, of which First Nations would be a vital part, then revenues and taxes from those "resources' would first go to regional governments according to the 'internal constitution', and the remainder goes to the 'centralized power' which may or may not remain in Victoria.

...more later when I have time...but essentially...the singular most important institution we need in BC/Canada is a 'constitutional constituent assembly' elected by NZ's pro rep system ...to get to work on these matters....otherwise we shall continue to have Premiers & Prime Ministers, as heads of governments & centralized politial parties - who essentially have dictatorial powers to sell us out to powerful labor or business interests, and to erode our sovereignty as a nation. Citizens have rights and duties within a participatory democracy that empowers themselves...and we need a constitition that reflects that possibility.

A constitutional constituent assembly on a pro rep basis would certainly be a good idea. I wait for your further development of this concept...

House prices have more than doubled in Bralorne and Gold Bridge, partly due to reopening of the gold mine, partly due to proximity of Whistler and Pemberton.
Tumbler Ridge tanked when the coalmine closed, became a ghost town, but with reopening of coal mine it's rebounded. Homes fetch good prices once again.
Prince Rupert has struggled and property prices fell as the pop declined, but with cruise ship terminal, commitment to new container port facilities, plus Chinese interest in reviving the Skeena pulp mill, this may be opportune time to invest in a Rupert home.
Our resource economy has always been cyclical and a gamble, and those on the front lines in these communities know it well from deep and sometimes very painful experience.

I have some difficulty with the way you equate, as if it were equal in fact , the power of "Labour" to influence state economic policy , with that of the corporate business class. It takes a bit of a stretch there, Peter.

We're such true, there would certainly not be the wide disparity in the application of labour standards and wages as exist, and it would certainly be a hell of a lot easier for labour to organize than what it is, and to strike etc.

The reality is more, that while there has been a high level of effective co-opting of organized labour into some "labour management" aspects of current capitalism, that is scarcely evidence of anywhere near equal or shared a "power'.

It is around this issue, I think, that the credibility of your position gets stretched too thin.

Big Labour no doubt enjoys a "degree" of power over that of non-organized labour, but that only-, and a positive in my book. It is patently an overstatement to suggest that organized labour, in its present form and degree of organization certainly, holds anywhere near the same degree of "power" and "influence" over the affairs of society and the economy as does corporate power. The concrete evidence is just too much to the contrary.

Big Labour is much trying to play in the same game as Big Capital, no doubt, and has been much "absorbed" into its Grand Game, but much so from a "subservient" or "lesser participant's" position than anything resembling an equal. I've been around and involved in trade unionism much too long, such as to know the veracity of that claim is anything but false, or wishful thinking.

"Official" Labour has much legitimate criticism that can be levelled at it; its own internal "democratic" workings, which are also more "formal" than "real", its too c-operative relationship with Capital, in my view, bureaucratism, being reduced to a vassal of NDP political commissars, and a resulting suspect usefulness in any truly future democratic economic system. Though I am personally not yet ready to write its history of experience off. But the critique must proceed from a real foundation and understanding of its real place within capitalism, not over-blown, made into a straw man or scapegoat creation.

In short, Official Labour's influence and power is actually much less than that you ascribe to it. (Again, largely a result of excessive NDP influence, failure to mobilize its own membership power, or invest adequate resources into creating a visible and engaged "People Power" of which to be a part itself.)

There is still too much reliance on formal, acceptable and official avenues of influence-, on narrow politiking and lobbying. It worked in the Post War Prosperity Period, but is inadequate for now, in the period of ascendant Neo-conservative Capitalism.

A sentiment above, which I would echo, from Anarcho.

And an interesting piece from you, Kurt.

Being precisely why we need to get out from under the neo-colonial relationship with the US Empire, and away from this excessive resource export dependancy. We need to develop the industry and manufacturing base that will strengthen our own raw material processing capacity, and self-sufficiency.

It has been the major failing of our chickenshit ruling class, and their political and economic apologists-, of which a few of these latter fellate themselves around here.

...thanks for reeling me in on that 'stretch' --if equating the power of Capital and the Power of Labor ...these days it is certainly true that the power of Capital/Big Business/NAFTA/CAFTA/WTO overwhelms the power of Labor. ..but despite that, there are far too many Labor leaders who simply prefer to use their power to advance or try & prop up of consolidate the oligarchy of Capital...so in that regard it is not a stretch. Somewhere, perhaps on bcpolitics.ca I have an article on this, of the choice before labor - to either advance/consolidate capitalism or not?

..lots to do today ..but all in all an interesting thread and contributions by many!! Also, despite the cyclical nature of commodity markets...nada was put away for a 'rainy day', 'nada' returned to the regions in terms of surplus capital to diversity their economies, or spend on public infrastructure programs, schools, hospitals, during the economic downturn. Now, when both NDP & Liberals promise no deficits, balanced budgets, etc..wonder what they will do should a severe economic shake-down occur...like what happened during the Asian recession a few years ago.

"...there are far too many Labor leaders who simply prefer to use their power to advance or try & prop up or consolidate the oligarchy of Capital...so in that regard it is not a stretch."
writes Peter.

To here we are agreed, without a stretch indeed.

Though which has to be noted, that to assume such a role, one is acknowledging themselves that they are not proceeding from a position of strength, but a position of weakness and inequality. Were the real power otherwise or even, evenly matched, such leaders would unlikely be tempted to grovel or genuflect at the throne of Capital as they sometimes do, but would adopt a more challenging and forthright posture.

Which, while there is a rational explanation, as I attempted to offer above, does not make the role or its effects any less treacherous, on the part of some labour leaders.

And it is going to be a tough nut to crack, as in behaviour to change, because it has over the years become a conditioned reflex, ingrained in the labour body politic.

Which brings us back to the average worker or person on the street again, and what they choose to do or not do.

So what happened to my posting here yesterday. I've been away from Tyee for a while, came back and signed up and then posted on this article, but now find my thoughts have disappeared.

Was it something I said?

I never saw it appear allan and I was checking pretty regularly. Perhaps an entry mistake?

Frank, that's entirely probable. It was my first post to the new and improved Tyee.

I'm new to it, but I'm certainly not much improved.

allan, great to see you back. Thought we might have lost you to the tour de france...

Where's the other guys I'd like to know. Lewis, Shirin, Ranbir off the top

Frank, maybe if you told them about that Maui tour prize you mentioned, tracing the wavering footsteps of Gordo... that might entice them back.

What? Lewis did post now and then, I'd ruin my chances... mmmm....I can smell that Maui drunk tank now...mmmmm :)

I can't understand why they wouldn't have made the switch.

Allan! Great to see read you again. I just lost one too, Allan.

I find this new system a little quiky myself. I don't look down when I'm typing, so I haven't caught what key causes the problem yet, but there is a key on the right hand keyboard side, which if you tick it by mistake, sends all your hard work into the drunk tank.

On the other hand, maybe I got censored for saying, "She must have been a good romp, because you were gone for quite awhile." :-) (I do tend to want to push that envelope.)

Again-, good to see your moniker again.

You really only need to go to Surrey to see how governement cuts have affected healthcare, social services, education, and services such as the Tenancy office, MCFD , mental health.these are the eservices we look to government to support but instead they support the big lie whichn is they are providing better streamlined services.The cynicism inherent in this message is crazy making but the press publishes these false propaganda. Those affected however, like in Lilloet know where to look for culpability and that is Gordo and his trained seals.

Thank you Lynn and Coyote.

I was pleased to see each of you still down in the trenches when I came back in here.

I had been tempted to sign in under an assumed, but as we've seen with far too many brownshirts and flamers, few of us can hide behind other writing styles especially when the emotions get involved.

Coyote, I look down, but then I don't notice when the screen goes blank and my special wisdom is lost to all future generations. If I could just split my vision I'd have it licked, I think.

Anyway, my initial comment here was to note (i'll be brief) that Claude Richmond and Kevin Krueger, in Kamloops and Kamloops North Thompson, generated the same type of wrath when they stubbornly, supported Gordo's effort to sell of the Coquihalla Highway.
They were still defending the very unpopulr plan the day Gordo cut his losses and ran away from that project.

Krueger, I'm sure, will be reminded by many in the Barriere area that his government amended the forests act in May 2003. The change removed any requirment to process locally cut wood in the same region.

Three months later the Barriere fire raced up the North Thompson valley taking out many homes and businesses, inclding Tolko's Heffley Creek sawmill.

Tolko simply abandoned the property and started shipping the wood out of the region while more than 200 well-paid Barriere workers were left jobless in a now jobless community.

What was Krueger's reaction when confronted with his government's misdeeds?

Ever the diplomat, Krueger called the workers lazy and underserving of real jobs.

...here is a tip...so you don't lose those gems that you write up...before you click "Post Comment" ...why not copy it ...and then if the post fails ...voila...you have it again and again and again and again.....!

Enjoy!

Why didn't Gordon Campbell care about Lillooet? I'll call it collateral damage. In order to get the efficiences he needed to hand the wealthy and big business a huge tax break, he gutted the services of small interior communities. The biggest slap in the face was when he did away with the requirement of cutting the wood harvested in a region to be processed there as well. Your mill burns down? Oh well, it's not going to be rebuilt. Goodbye jobs!

I hope that Lillooet's economy becomes revitalized sometime in the near future. Maybe the 2010 Olympics will bring something to the region. If it does, they'll have to thank Glen Clark. Without his support there would never have been a Vancouver bid.

kevin kreuger and rick thorpe are the "julius streichers" of the provincial liberal party. were it not for the real damage they do they would be beneath contempt.
in Squamish they have lost bc rail and interfor, both mill and dry-sort. Both devastating losses (many hundreds of good jobs) can be directly attributed to gordon campbell abrigating his supposed responsibility to the people of this province to appease his corporate overlords and line their pockets at our expense.
i hope people from the heartlands remember these things on May 17th.

It is good to see from the Vancouver Sun that Carole James is offering interior community democratic control of 'regional investment vehicles' that will be funded from resouce rents..so they build, diversify their regional econmies....something like the Columbia Trust idea! It is also good to see that she wants to debate Campbell on his policies respecting the Fiberal trealment of interior communities --there should be a goldmine of support for the NDP in the interior!

...

A good idea from James concerning democratic control of regional economies... deserves to be applauded.

The Hurtland seems to have no boundaries. These are just a few of the recent headlines in our local newspaper in Powell River, once a thriving town. "Poverty numbers highest in BC", "Senior sent to North Van dies alone" and Logging plan at odds with water needs", ( that last headline concerns the BC government's plan to allow logging inside a community watershed). Other headlines concerned large protests over the privatization of BC Ferries and just lately coverage of a cocaine bust in our fair town, the largest ever in our history.

Meanwhile, the mainstream media snores and slumbers on, waking just long enough to prop up Campbell's well-feathered pillow of lies.

I lived in Lillooet for almost ten years, Bain was my neighbour for that time.

I hurt us last year to have to leave, there is no more amazing small town than Lillooet.

I campaigned for Dave Chutter in 2001, and he is a very nice man, but why he wanted to be an MLA I will never understand.

Lillooet began shedding jobs badly in 1996 - the sawmill closed, the reman plant last half their workers to softwood and yes the closure of the government offices hurt the town.

The problem in Lillooet is repeated over and over again in the rural resource towns of BC. These towns have lost their political clout and therefore are no longer given serious consideration federally or provincially.

Try to get a business loan if you are in a town like Lillooet - it will not happen, the corporate sector will not support rural BC.

Towns like Lillooet make Vancouver possible, it is a damn shame the people in Vancouver do not recognize that and allow rural communities the right to run their own future.

Some day I will move back to the closest thing to paradise in Canada - Lillooet BC

sorry to hear you had to leave such a beautiful place bernard. i take my kids camping on the yalokom river every summer and it truly is paradisical. we explore a different area of back country each trip and there truly is nothing like it.

Lynn...this is not a "good idea from Carole James"....

...this is an idea that perhaps first was born in the Kootenays in the early 1970's --from a research project related to the management of the Slocan Valley Community Forests...of which Corky Evans was the director. That remains one of BC's first community designed and controlled research project that showed the extent of timber revenues going to Victoria....and the pittance going back to the Slocan Valley to the residents, workers and the natural environment that produced that wealth.

It was the people of that region who first strongly articulated a strong desire for more democratic control of their regional economy...and they should get credit for such an idea....as it empowers the creativity of the 'people' and not 'the leader' .

For so long, the people of BC, especially the interior, have been dis-empowered, lied to, deceived, exploited, on the tail-end of social/environmental/ economic costs from 'economic project's -dreamed up & controlled by the Capitalistic State based in Victoria or Ottawa, and Capitalistic Multinational Corporations based in America ...and facilitated by Victoria....and they, not James, are the authors of this empowering solution of 'more democratic regional control' of economies.

In fact, I remember, while being a Kootenay resident for ten years, it was the year 1971 or 1973...myself and another chaired a large public forum the topic of which was "Local Resource Control"....30 years later the regions, the 'hurtlands' are still being 'f**ked" over...and it has nothing to do with which party is in power...and who the personaliities are that are in power...and everything to do with how inequitably 'political & fiscal power is structured and distributed throughout BC.

...nonetheless it is indeed a good initiative by Carole James to adopt this idea, articulated for decades by activists - that there ought to more regional/community control of economic development- but we'll see how it all pans out should the NDP actually form government???

Excellent analysis, Coyote & Peter. Kudos! It is so sad to see how our resource-based communities have suffered...

I'd like to see some sort of program to help them diversify their economic base and be less subject to the vagaries of commodities markets. Perhaps if they had that "first cut" of their resource output they could do their own programs.

But as long as "the crown" owns all the resources, and the populace at large can be talked, scared or cajoled into delegating control to the large multinational corporations and their cronies, I see little hope. Those in positions of economic power put considerable effort into giving us "left wingnuts" a bad rap in order to try to render us ineffectual and maintain their preferred status quo. The only thing that I think may do them in is their greed which breeds short-sightedness.

I have not much else to add except to the "disappearing post" problem. My workaround is to compose in a text editor and then copy & paste into the comment box. That way if the system here eats it, you haven't lost your work :-) It doesn't fix the root problem but it works...

shouldn't that have read "a good idea from James concerning demonic control of regional economies...

Peter, I stand corrected on that one. I wasn't familiar with the history backing the idea. It is a really important distinction you are making and a powerful one that was this was a people's initiative to gain economic control of their economy... the last thing from a leader-based idea or party politics. Instead it is an innovative way of addressing inequitable power structures. After reading so many of your comments and the significance you place on the importance of the people's right to control their economic and political destinies, I understand your depth of feeling on this one.

Very well reported, Chris. You wrote about Lillooet but this really captures what I'm hearing in the Kootenays too.

WEBMASTER: I sure wish the other commenters wouldn't carry on personal conversations.

...you know, if possible, one day, I would like to meet with some of you, Anarcho, Coyote, Lynn, and others onside with the views that we've been articulating on the Tyee for sometime now. I am not sure how it is possible, but I offer my tel # 604-684-4446 of my law office - where a message can be left for a return call.

Lisa,

I'm not sure what you meant by "personal conversations" was it the response to the joys of living in Lilloet, or was it the enthusiastic greetings re the return of Allan? In either case,
I think that these "personal conversations" are kind of nice. They show that friendships are being formed and that real people post comments here.