Two Leadership Runs! Place Your Bets!

I am indeed like the guy at the horse races waving a fist full of tickets shouting "Come on anyone!" because he needs a winner so badly. Since "Pinocchio" Campbell finally did the decent thing and resigned and Carole James was forced out, I've made so many prognostications I can't keep track. I therefore declare this to be my absolutely last effort to give you a winner in their respective leadership campaigns -- unless, of course, I change my mind.

The parties proceed from two entirely different guidelines when it comes to selecting the top banana. The Liberals know that their core support will be loyal so they have to reach out for the "centre." The NDP, however, much as they might like to reach out, look for a leader who best can handle the virtually impossible task of keeping their warring factions from killing one another even though, make that when, an election is on.

The Liberals compromise to find a winner and have a long history of conferring the Liberal party status on anyone who looks as if they can win, while the NDP campaign process seeks a leader who is the least offensive to the most factions -- if he/she can win, so much the better, though that is far from the deciding factor.

The Liberals, then, face the Herculean task of finding someone -- anyone -- who can best recant all the policies of their late leader, the best way of doing that being not have been there at the time.

The best "recanter" so far is Mike De Jong, who would get rid of the HST recognizing that, as a woman can't be just a "little bit pregnant," no aspirant can hope to get away with keeping it by dropping it a point or two. The declared candidate who can deny direct involvement is Christy Clark since she wasn't there. Not having listened to radio ever since I discovered the iPod, I wouldn't know what Clark said about the HST but I'm told that she didn't give her old cronies much of a hard time on the subject. However, Clark was around for the sale (Oops! 990 year lease) of BC Rail and that is a lingering un-lanced carbuncle that will not go away -- nor should it.

Good odds: Clark and De Jong

The well known non-contender, Carole Taylor, because she quit her portfolio (Finance) before the 2009 election, is clear of the HST mess and wasn't in the legislature when BC Rail was dumped. The only question that could be asked of her (and it is indeed a weak one) is, "Why did you run for the Liberals in 2005 after that terrible BC Rail decision?"

Because Taylor has proven to be a capable person in any walk of life she's tried, including B.C. finance minister, she remains the shoo-in for leader but for one niggling detail -- she says and says and says that she doesn't want it. The moment she changes her mind, all the other challenges fail.

Without Carole Taylor, it should be Christy Clark or Mike De Jong, with Clark having no HST poop to clean directly off her shoes and being better connected in the Liberal party, should get the nod.

It's my daft (not deft) handling of the NDP race that has me like the guy at the race track. My only (pitiful) excuse is that to pick a winner here one must know the NDP inside and out and even NDPers of great age and wisdom have trouble with that. When, as with the Liberals, the only choice is who has the best chance of winning, a political junkie at least has something to work with. When dealing with a party that would rather suffer than be healthy, one looks in vain for a formula.

Three strong NDP candidates

The first difficulty is deciding if the old rule that Brutus doesn't get the crown applies to the NDP. (The great exception to the "Brutus Rule" was the finally disgraced Brian Mulroney who had others work the sharp knives for him.) This question is an apt one for if the Brutus Rule doesn't apply, the obvious favourite would be Jenny Kwan who has the experience and has much grown in stature in part because of the sterling performance that she and Joy MacPhail put on after the 2001 debacle. She has said she doesn't want the job -- politicians are noticeably unreliable on questions like that -- and two of her co-conspirators, who would normally be considered, Katrine Conroy and Norm Macdonald, had their fingerprints on that dagger which is likely fatal to their chances.

I've finally (beware of political commentators who say that) boiled it down to three.

In no special order, they are Mike Farnworth, Adrian Dix and John Horgan.

Farnworth is way ahead in experience having been an MLA for much longer and was a cabinet minister. He's likely the person with the fewest enemies in the party, which is the NDP's way of keeping score.

John Horgan, with difficulty, stayed with Carole James. He's the energy critic and has been frustrated in getting his views, especially on private versus public power spelled out as clearly as he would like. He has had health issues.

Adrian Dix is the pit bull. Back in Glen Clark's dark days, over a gaming license, Dix manufactured an exculpatory memo to help his boss out and, worst of all, got caught. He did own up and apologize and considering the serial lying of the current government, Dix's sin pales considerably.

Dix does, however, carry one very big plus. He's just what Carole James was not, a take-no-prisoners alley fighter. Looking ahead to an election campaign, this is just what is needed to deal with whoever the Liberal leader is.

I wouldn't dare try to divine what a sane political party would do, much less try it with the NDP.

Is it right or wrong?

You must know my bias. I am co-founder of an environmental group called the Common Sense Canadian. Unlike politicians, we're not seeking public office and have no one to whom we are beholden. Whereas political parties reflect whether they are "right, "left" or "centre," our guideline is simply, "Is it right or wrong?"

I believe that the biggest issue by far is the destruction by Campbell of our environment, be it agricultural land, fish farms, giving power away and bankrupting BC Hydro in the process and by favouring piping tar sands muck across our province and down our coast.

To me, a fiscally inept government legacy can be fixed by a successor but once you've lost your farmland, salmon, energy and sea coast they are gone forever.

The argument that these environmental rapists are needed for the economy to prosper is nonsense.

Where's the fiscal sense of taking farmland for a highway if that means you have to import food?

Where's the fiscal sense in destroying our fishery so Norwegians can put in lice-laden fish farms, kill our wild salmon, then take all the money home with them?

Where's the fiscal sense in giving our power away and destroying rivers while financing the private undertakings with ratepayers' money so that all their profit goes out of the province -- while destroying BC Hydro in the bargain?

And surely no one can sensibly argue that it's good business to give a virtual free ride to oil companies (whose record in the environment is appalling) for pipelines and tankers on our coast

I'm all for business and money being invested in our province, as long as we have good rules of behaviour and enforce them.

Placing my NDP money on...

This means that my choice would be John Horgan, but that is given that I don't yet know the environmental views of Farnworth and Dix. If they accord with the position Horgan has taken, that's a big plus in my book.

I have not mentioned Corky Evans. He's run for the leadership twice and failed. He's been very outspoken these days and one always suspects retired politicians who appear on the scene when things get noisy. He would make a very attractive candidate but as stated above, the NDP's leadership races have little to do with winning elections.

Given my record, I apologize to the two Liberals and three New Democrats for jinxing them but console them with the thought that while I've never been right, all losing streaks come to an end sooner or later -- don't they?