The last election was James'

The last election was James' to lose and she should have resigned when she did lose it. The NDP needs a viable leader and she ain't it.

Campbell is increasingly dangerous to the province. He's Harper without the religious fanaticism.

Scary!

This is a scary budget, brought in by our Fascist Premier to massively download taxes on the middle class and families. It is a budget designed for the provincial elites, while families will get slaughtered. The tax deferral scheme for those with children under 18 is a massive bombshell that will explode in coming years, destroying families.

And where is Carole James? The bloody broken record just keeps mumbling child poverty, etc.

This women is like a vague relative who came to visit for a few days and stayed for years! God - Go - Go!

Campbell has just declared a full frontal assault on the middle class.

Privatization

Sounds like health care, transportation, etc. will be contracted out to corporate friends of Campbell and Co. We will receive less and be taxed more. RECALL!!

they have to hurry

even with a third term the damage has to be irreparable or the people might rise again.

tax reform = taxed more?

How is it that tax reform equals a download of taxes to the middle class, or private-public partnerships (which can sometimes be a valuable means to enhance services while limiting public costs) equals corporate contracting? I'm not trying to aggravate, just curious for the reasoning of these claims...

Adam

What exactly is Carole supposed to say?

That poverty and job losses don't matter anymore?

The big mystery is why Campbell has been able to get away with increasing poverty.

Is Point a stooge?

I would be sick to have to read that speech!

Blah, blah, blah olympics are wonderful legacy !

then,

the cupboard is bare, we are giving future generations a legacy of debt!

How do you talk out of both sides of your mouth?

Oh, and lets reduce your deficit, by deferring your property taxes while you have kids under 18, until you sell your house!

So in other words go into debt more! Imagine when the kids turns 18 and you have to sell the house to pay your back property taxes that you 'deferred'!

It is interesting that all

It is interesting that all governments are hell bent to "reduce taxes", but at the same time give free hand to some of the biggest crooks in history to steal more and more from the public in obscene profits and executive salaries, while people are awed over how clever they are by "increasing their earnings".

Stolen from our pockets through the soviet style collectivization and control of the markets with constantly rising prices.

And this is what the PPPs and "privatization" are about: Transferring costs and balancing budgets by not providing services while legalizing the grand theft from the public.

Ed Deak.

jimgde

If Campbell was just starting out now it would be fair to ask what's the evidence. But he's been in power for 9 years, we know what the effect was in his first years in office when we slashed income taxes by 25% and raised other taxes, fees, licenses, permits, tolls and so on.

The people at the bottom ended up with a higher overall tax bill while at the same time their services deteriorated.

As for PPP's the evidence is in, we didn't save any money. Our debt has increased by over $50 billion in so-called "contractural obligations". What Campbell relies on is people who think that a sale at the Brick offering "no money down, no payments till 2012" means they're not paying for what was built.

Here's a Vancouver Sun article on the contractural obligations
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=be4c05c2-444b-4624-afbb-fb98ac8b799e

"Who the hell expected

"Who the hell expected Campbell to address "job losses, high child poverty rate, cuts in services"?

Let's see a non-recovery with high unemployment, a devastated forest industry, increasing poverty and fewer services for those who need them? Why address that when you can put out the thinnest Throne Speech in 20 years and pack it with Olympic chest thumping that doesn't mean anything.

And some drone from PAB says James is wrong for pointing out the fact that the Throne Speech is bereft of ideas to deal with some of the biggest issues affecting people here and now? Give me a break.

The Liberals are supposed to own the economy. Instead they look like a government badly out of touch and out of ideas.

Let's take an example. Their big dereg announcement was a proposal to lobby the federal government to combine the fed and prov environmental assessment acts. This is so old you have to brush the cobwebs off it. More importantly it's not going to happen in a minority parliament with a razor edge plurality in the polls. This is a non-starter and they know it.

And its not even the biggest problem out there right now, unlike say access to capital.

Jame's critique was exactly right and I note is being echoed by most commentators today.

Throne Speech

Uuugh, enough of Gordo and his gang, there was not anything in this speech that inspires British Columbians, but I think a lot of people were expecting some fairness and compassion from this government. Also I agree that the oppostion needs some changes to be more effective. Carole James must step down if the NDP wants a real chance at being elected. The NDP could use this speech as a tool to bring down the Libs. Regretfully they will probably go for the "stay the course" approach which in my view is the wrong way. So far when it comes to politics I've decided that come next election day I am voting Green.

jim1966

With the deregulated banks

With the deregulated banks we have unlimited capital to exploit and destroy limited resources.

Europe had tons of worthless capital after WW2, but no resources, so people were starving and running around in rags.

When you have resources, you have capital.

When you have capital but no resources you have sweet bugger all.

Canada has resources and could kick all the foreign investors, who now own and rule the country, out.

What's the point in paying through the nose for "defence", and then put signs all around the borders with "Canada for sale", on them?

Ed Deak.

Castlegar

The owners of the pulp mill in Castlegar are a prime example of the extent corporations will go to download their municipal taxes onto the citizens.

It's not so much that they object to paying their current assessment, but the fact they refused to pay their taxes at all and left the city and citizens with a $3 million dollar hole in the budget.

They have also coordinated their efforts with a couple other pulp mills in BC, using the same tatics. This is a prime example of corporations using heavy handed tactics to reach their goals and damn the public if they are affected by their actions. Corporate leadership at its best in BC.

The government didn't step in and force them to pay the legitimate taxes, didn't even fine them. Imagine what would happen to us if we tried that.

WTF does that mean?

"Legislation will be introduced enabling our universities to remove themselves from the government reporting entity," the speech said. "We cannot let accounting policy stand in the way of our students' interests or hold our universities back from pursuing their unique areas of excellence in partnership with others";

Please let me know.

and on the point of jobs, look, down south, perhaps the same here:
A SHOCKING Study: America's Affluent Near Full Employment, For Low-Wage Workers 'A Truly Great Depression'...
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/02/10/no-labor-market-recession_n_456797.html?fbwall

@ Frank

Thank you for the civil response. I admit, I'm new to BC (6mos and counting), so I don't have the history with the current govt others might. And I appreciate your points. Cutting income taxes and raising consumption taxes is a strategy to put more cash in the consumer's pocket and limit consumption of perhaps unneccesary goods, but it does have the tendency to disproportionately affect the least well off. To the extent that this happens, I would argue its the responsbility of the govt to address the regressive nature of this scheme. However, judging only from the bullets included in this article, it appears the tax reforms are aimed at easing the burdens of householding for those on tight budgets. I'm sure theres more to it, but I can only weigh this on itself, not on the past.

Also, on PPPs - again, the possibility that too much services get offloaded onto the market, which will, as it is wont to do, redirect resources to areas most efficient (ie., to those that can pay for it). Of course, the whole idea is the the first P compensates for this. If this is not happening, then it needs to be addressed. But if there is infrastructure to be built and services delivered to consumers (such as energy, in article you cited), it will of course cost someone some money. Purchasing electricity from private suppliers can be an effective means to bring greener electricity sources onto the grid, ie) feed-in tariffs for renewable producers. The producers need not be large corporations, of course. Whether or not this is the direction of this government, I do not know. I only argue that the costs of the services we receive are ultimately borne by us either way, and if we can find ways to deliver those services in a cost-effective and equitable manner, I am willing to pay for it.

What it means is that the

What it means is that the universities will be up for sale to make certain that whatever they teach will be in accordance with the neocon theory of class superiority.

Under fascism this was called "respect for prestige" now it is called "economic efficiency", meaning the biggest profits for the least monetary inputs.

Ed Deak.

Campbell's farewell?

It appears to me that Campbell has decided this will be his last term and is setting the stage for some actions that will be very unpopular. Once the Olympics are out of the way, he will be less sensitive to public backlash. I predict another round of what happened in 2001.

About 40% of the public service is due to retire before 2015 so he will be able to slash the size of government without huge layoffs.

No, I will not reduce my

No, I will not reduce my expectations of government, dammit! I want more and better performance from government, not less. If you can't provide it step aside and make room for someone who will at least try.

Frank

Any idiot can see that these things matter. Talking about it and complaining publicly isn't enough when you're the official opposition. Did you hear Carole commit to a course of action on behalf of her party?

Doesn't it annoy you that Carole has been in a state of endless expectation in regards to this government? Thanks for the play-by-play, Carole, but could you please pick up the ball and play already?

Everyone knows that this government doesn't give two shits about this province, yet Carole and her party, at least on the face of it, are content parroting back voter's concerns and taking some token actions. It's that old trick where you listen to what someone is saying, and then you repeat it back to them using different words and an agreeable attitude, without making any commitments, and maybe it'll get you somewhere - works well for slimeballs looking to get in the pants of naive young women, works for some politicians who don't want to DO anything but want to get elected.

With the NDP, it comes across as the old, "Just let Campbell shit things up so bad that we're a shoe in next election, and we don't have to commit to any firm policies or do anything!" Did that work last election, Frank?

All that said, though, the biggest problem is that people love to stick it to the NDP but are thoroughly unwilling to volunteer themselves and make things happen in their riding. I hear, time and time again the refrain, "Somebody should do something about this! Uhhh, but I'm busy..." God forbid the NDP sees some new blood, though there's something sad about a tired old party with the word "New" in their name.

Still, it pisses me off that on so many occasions the NDP has thoroughly failed to take action. It's nauseating to see a party so frightened of action that they're willing to see the province fall apart, content to pick up the pieces.

MichaelT

"Legislation will be introduced enabling our universities to remove themselves from the government reporting entity," the speech said. "We cannot let accounting policy stand in the way of our students' interests or hold our universities back from pursuing their unique areas of excellence in partnership with others";

"Please let me know."

I had the same question when I read that. Could it be a nicer way of saying less transparency and accountability with our tax dollars? That seems to be how the BC Liberals roll.

Maybe The Tyee can provide more info in the coming days...

Adam M

"Talking about it and complaining publicly isn't enough when you're the official opposition."

That's all they're legally able to do. The leader of the opposition has absolutely no input into any government legislation.

That's what the 52% that didn't vote wanted and so that's how it is.

I don't like it either but I've never seen any other opposition in any province or federally do anything else.

verso

David Schreck has a piece and part of it mentions just this point. That's on: strategicthoughts.com

to Frank

For starters the NDP needs to screen their (easy to plant) candidates better.. I seem to recall 3 that besmirched the reputation of the party before the last election.

Secondly, Carole needs to get with the program.
The opposition found ways to smear the opposition via net comments on such news sites as CTV and CBC. In this case debate ignoring the legalities of a coalition but smearing the other parties:
"PC party faithful using those buzz words from the memo you got from campaign headquarters, read the Coalition Faq as provided for your convenience by CTV.. it's only one click away.. , and start thinking for yourselves.
3 stooges, banana republic, coup d'etat, traitors, greedy, power hungry .. these are all catch phrases, among others, that make you look more stupid and complicit than the people that you are trying to con."
Then the conservatives started doing comments with the first sentence being things like "Harper is my hero." This made it easy for people voting on comments to easily pick out which ones they would lay an aye on.
Exactly the same tactics used by Campbell and the neocons during the May election, and all within the new BC election rules.

Thirdly, maybe it's time to approach previous liberal candidates that have, even briefly, considered crossing party lines.

Fourthly,I don't necessarily think that Carole has to quit, but if she doesn't then she had better show some fight. Personally, I don't have to see every hair on head in place, or her standing in one spot, or her somewhat monotone voice.

And when the NDP show that they can win, then the voters will come.