Rafe, you're incorrect about the teachers...

Thanks for a thoughtful article, but you need to correct the inaccuracy about the teachers: "faced with the teachers union, or at least one local, threatening a strike vote right after the election."

The Liberal website reads: "it was revealed that the [BCTF] plans to hold a strike vote immediately after next week's...election." But the Vancouver Sun article never "reveal" this at all. The only suggestion is in the poorly worded headline: "Teachers to consider strike vote two days after election." Obviously, the "considering" will happen two days after, not the strike vote. It takes a very long time to organize a strike vote.

Campbell is being sued now for defamation, because he failed to retract this and other more nasty false comments by the deadline of May 13th.

http://www.bctf.bc.ca./CounselLtrToCampbell2005-05-12.pdf

But defamation laws protect individuals, not institutions (i.e., BCTF). So here's an idea: why doesn't a reporter challenge Campbell to make the same accusations again -- except in reference to an individual, like Jinny Sims? If he truly believes his accusations, then let him say them to teachers' faces. He won't, because he knows the accusations are false and he'd be sued.

take care,

Chris

Thanks, Chris. I'm relieved to know that Campbell is being sued for the distress he or his lying, cheating minions deliberately caused for kids, families, and B.C. teachers.

Interesting point, however, that an "institution" such as a professional association isn't protected from defamation.

I've been hoping that there could be some recourse in law for example in the sale of B.C. Rail (he promised not to) and ... well, you know the list.

P.S. It kinda makes me sick, however, the way Rafe and Global News, probably others, are trying to get a foot into the stirrups of two horses running in opposite directions right now.

It's less about fairness and balance, I think, than about trying to keep in the good graces of the next government and they really don't know (hahaha) who that's going to be.

This isn't a metaphor, but in accord with the use of hackneyed phrases to succinctly capture a truth, Rafe "You've come a long way baby."

In 2002 I wrote a letter to the editor of our community paper commenting, in the following words, on your then new column.

"On another subject, Mair's column got off to a good start. Now if you can convince him that when criticizing the powers that be he doesn't have to always provide the caveat that, no matter how bad they may be they could never be worse than the NDP, his credibility will be even greater."

In your radio editorial this morning you advised that you would be voting for the Green Party candidate in your riding of West Van. You then went on to recommend that other voters vote for whatever candidate had the best chance of defeating the Liberal candidate in their riding.

By my reckoning, that is a 180 degree turnaround, and one I am glad you were able to achieve without feeling you had to reject your loyalty to free enterprise principles.

raif; i can tell you definitively that a full-scale strike was planned for the fall. does that make a difference in the way this story was reported?

I'm glad to see Rafe has mellowed and apparently transformed in his golden years, because he used to be a cabinet minister under the Socreds of Bill Bennett, whose leader and party had a cold, mean spirited aura, not unlike that of Campbell and his Liberals of today.

Okey, Rafe you may have it mostly right.

But the serious challenge for you and all the 'Greeners' is to give the NDP some serious consideration before you vote or you WILL get the Liberals BIG TIMES again!!

Well, I for one,will remember Campbell gave us a reason not to trust our system, rather than he gave us an opportunity to change it.

I will be voting no, because I do not trust the liberals to implement fair ridings and rules around STV and there are better forms of porportional representation

You know, if the Liberals push the teachers too far, they'll, with justificaton, walk out regardless of what Campbell dictates.

Unlike Regan, and the air traffic controllers, he hasn't the airforce to do their work and so he can't fire them. So far, people have been trying to get along . But, if there is nothing one can do to do so, then what's the point at all.

"raif; i can tell you definitively that a full-scale strike was planned for the fall. does that make a difference in the way this story was reported?" sirjohna pulls out of his ass.

Well, I can say definitively that BC Hydro will be sold to Enron. That the entire BC coast line will be sold to a Finnish salmon farming consortium. That the Legislative buildings in Victoria will be sold to Disney.

My assertions are just as true as sirjohna's.

C'mon RedRiverGirl, prop rep is not on the ballot and never will be. This is our one chance to change the system. The non-partisan Elections BC can handle the boundary drawing.

Rafe's change to Green Party champ is not that big of a shock to his old radio fans (of which I am one, though it grieves me to think of myself as old). Basically if things are messing up the salmon then he's against it. God only knows what he'd do if the Liberals talked shit about Churchill!

Well, if sirjohn says the BCTF was definetly going to plan a full scale strike, who could refute possibly refute that statement! Considering the comment is made by someone who won't identify himself and is an obvious liberal lover. Not much credibility there sirjohn.

"Campbell and Co. have been superbly well managed. Skillfully using the Liberal-loving Canwest newspaper and TV juggernaut..."

I'm becoming a fan of Rafe, one of few journalists putting heat to the Campbell Liberals. It's my position that if we want things to get better in this province, to restore some decency and balance, and to re-elect the NDP, we are going to have to do something about the evil empire of Canwest. They don't care about having a democratic election. Just like Campbell keeps silent and avoids potential traps, Canwest just won't print the story if it hurts their candidate. How many letters to the editor have you managed to get printed?

The dishonesty of the major media with regards to the non-teacher strike issue is really astounding. That no such thing is even planned, that the basis of the story is false, hasn't stopped the silly little pundits one bit. Rafe portrays part of that, but misses one very important element.

In every other province of Canada, including Klein's Alberta, teachers and non-teaching staff in schools have the right to strike. And there have been work stoppages in the Alberta school system.

Columnists like Mike Smyth have, these past few days, been playing political games and partisan Liberal games at that.

this is such great fun. tomorrow i'll give out my coveted 'best blather award'. this will be a tough decision, as there are so many strong contenders.
nominations include
b.c. mary
jeeves
coyote
redrivergirl
jazz
yammer
lynn
and the favorite at this stage of the contest:
banquos ghost
sorry to all others. you put up a good show too, but these guys are the creme de la creme.

I find Mike Smythe the worst of the bunch. His attempts at balance, are just that—attempts. His bias is transparent, and he gets defensive when he's called out for it. Their was absolute glee in his voice over the recent BCTF thing. I wish these guys would just come out and tell their listeners and readers their bias instead of pretending like they don't have one. Say what you want about the Moe Shihota's and Norman Spectre's, at least you know up front who they support.

My apologies for my earlier comment. It turns out I must have been incorrect. The BC Liberal website has as it's two top stories the BCTF issue. Also, as of today (Monday) Bill Teilman and Will McMartin CBC radio, most of the newspapers, CKNW commentators, and CBC TV all seem to confirm that BCFT are indeed going to have a strike vote two days after the election. So Rafe is probably right after all -- he's a pretty influential source and there's no reason to doubt him.

Even more proof is found in the fact that no one -- no media outlet or "leftie" commentator -- is reporting that the claim untrue. So like any other voter, I must assume that it's true and will bring that info with me to the ballot box.

take care,

Chris

Am I the only one who thinks Rafe Mair is overly taken with his own sense of self-importance?

For the longest time, Mr. Mair was, and many would say still is, a rather large cog in the propaganda machinery of Big Media - even had a clause in his contract, as I understand, that paid bonuses if he could stir up contraversy. He certainly took great glee in beating the crap out of the former NDP government at every opportunity, whether based in fact or not. But I digress...

1) Anyone can make up lies and shout them from the rooftops. The difference here is, the Campbell Liberals do it every day, all day long, and the emasculated editors of electronic and print media simply repeat their outrageous distortions, and complete the circle of public disinformation.

2) Campaigns based on fear and exclusion, as the BC Liberal strategy demonstrates, play on the ignorance of voters. An under-informed electorate (including those who listen to Rafe Mair) will more easily accept wild accusations if presented by a supposedly neutral (sic) source like Tony Parsons.

3) Mair's support for STV is unfortunate, considering that the proposed system would:
a) give urban residents seven votes compared to rural voters' two.
b) Give dense urban ridings of five or more seats a degree of proportionality, while rural ridings of two members would have none.
c) Make northern ridings like Bulkley Valley-Stikine, already the largest constituency in the province, completely unmanageable for local MLA's to represent.
d) Create unweildly ballot structures, as multiple member urban ridings could see a minimum of 50, and likely more candidates on a single ballot (there are currently 45 political parties registered in BC).
e) Actually increase the impact of political parties, despite claiming the opposite - as the main parties with ample resources are best able to promote a slate of candidates (e.g., COPE, NPA) and turn out the vote on election day.

Enough Rafe-isms. When are we going to see an actual PROGRESSIVE columnist on Tyee? Patiently, I remain...

Somebody, want to tell me what's wrong with having a strike vote with almost 4 months notice? Seems to that this just makes the two barginning agents have to work in the summer....poor things...

Personally, I'm more interested in seeing how GC and crew handle the prosecutors suit as well the Supreme Court of Canada challenge by the Three Health Unions, and let's not forget the rarely mentioned Basi/Virk trials....they might end up wishing they'd dissappeared after all...

sorry kids, i forgot about blonde pitbull's nomination.

Krispy says STV would "give urban residents seven votes compared to rural voters' two."

How? Everybody would still only get one vote. No one gets 2 or 3 or 7.

5 seats is more plural than 2, that's true but at least 2 is twice as good as the current 1.

Bigger ridings also means more MLA's in those ridings.

"d) Create unweildly ballot structures, as multiple member urban ridings could see a minimum of 50, and likely more candidates on a single ballot (there are currently 45 political parties registered in BC)."

I see this as a good thing. More voter choice. Currently our elections might as well be do you support the government, yes or no.

"e) Actually increase the impact of political parties, despite claiming the opposite"

Not true at all, candidates within the same party will now have to run against each other. Slates don't work because unlike a civic election you never get more than one vote. That vote may be divided into fractions but it still adds up to one.

sirjohn, I'm shocked and appalled that I would be left off your illustrious list.

Comments well taken about Rafe Mair from a few people up the thread. See that's what we call dialogue sirjohn - words attached to an idea. All you do is stir and stir and stir...and I suppose tomorrow night you'll take credit for your cleverness should the malinformed vote the thugs back in.

Chris, the teacher's can't strike, won't strike, it was a deliberate hoax, a scare tactic. How sick is that! Although it does point out how vulnerable the Libs must feel. They're being being sued for defamation, did you miss that bit...
here's the evidence:

http://bctf.bc.ca./CounselLtrTo...l2005-05-12.pdf

Did anybody note the half hour given to Paul Ramsey and Gordon Wilson on the Jennifer Mather show today? Whether it was a decision by NW to appear a little less biased or not, some good points were made, like how the Libs are well stocked with old Socreds.

Sorry, try this link...

http://www.bctf.bc.ca./CounselLtrToCampbell2005-05-12.pdf

I've already voted in an advanced poll on STV...in my view something SO damned important is not going to be accepted by me until the bugs in the formula are gotten rid of. One year's study is not good enough for me...back to the drawing board, from what I have seen there are inequities in the new plan that just don't cut it with me. Specifically the inequality of numbers of MLA ie your voices in the Legislature, according to where you live. Don't like it..too easy to create undemocratic situations. And I understand if this new system is implemented..we are stuck with it for the next 15 years, like it or not.

Jazz, something's not working with the link you posted...

testing...testing

[img src="http://www.thetyee.ca/Views/2005/05/16/deepcuts2.jpg"]

Is the new one working?

Apologies. I've been typing for many days - I guess we're all part of the new free press.

By the way, sirjohn, I'm all ablush at your kind words....

Frank,
1) In a seven member riding, you vote your preference from 1 to 7. In a two member riding, you vote your preference from 1 to 2. Ergo, 7 votes,vs. two votes no matter which way you look at it.

In urban ridings, you have up to 7 MLA's to represent you. In rural ridings, you only have 2.

2) You may find it refressing to have 50 or 100 names on a ballot, but most will find it intensely confusing (believe me, I scrutineered at the advance polls, and the number of people who don't even know the basic proceedure of voting is amazing).

With so many candidates, only those with sufficient financial resources to be more visible (ie, mass advertising) will likely be successful. The STV process will only see the continuation of slate politics, which is antithetical to the stated purpose of STV.

3) Some of the folks on Tyee may remember the time when we had dual ridings in BC. Elections BC decided to do away with that process, as it perpetuated inequality - some voters had two MLA's and two votes, and some had only one. STV is fundamentally no different, only they try to justify it by saying we only have one vote.

Yet some people's first choice will be counted, while others' won't. I'm all for proportional representation, but this doesn't even come close. There is no reason to replace a bad system with something worse.

"Is the new one working?"

Yes, thanks

Exactly what I am thinking too Krispy. I am all for..change to something better, but at least do a little more in the effort and research and refining area before trying to foist the new voting system on us. Just seems to me that ol' Gordo wants to be famous for something..in a big bad hurry.

Jazz

Sorry, I was writing with tongue in cheek, actually. (That's why it sounded so over the top).

What people don't know is that it takes a long time to get a strike vote from the "considering" to the "voting". So the earliest for just the vote would be just before school ends. And a vote is usually several weeks and often months ahead of any "job action." And "job action" (e.g., work to rule) is usually weeks ahead of an actual strike (e.g., rotating strikes), which is weeks ahead of a total strike. Campbell's accusations are false on many levels, and he knows it.

Anyway, the BCTF lawyers would have to write up the lawsuit. Of course, it will be too late for any election, but that's not really the point. The Premier shouldn't be making such comments -- election or no election. This isn't really an election issue, but it no doubt has an impact when the entire media (including the left commentators) ignore the truth.

More info:
http://web.uvic.ca/%7Ecupe4163/PAC.htm#defamation
http://www.bctf.ca/newsreleases/Archive/2005/2005-05-12.html

Cartoon:
http://www3.telus.net/public/crobinso/campbell_defamation.jpg

cheers,

Chris

Read Potvin's latest article:
Is Campbell a “made man”?
With enough rumours to end his career, how come the media leave him alone?
http://www.republic-news.org/archive/113-repub/113_potvin_media.htm

re: Krispy & STV

first post
a. You only get 1 vote. Everyone only gets 1 vote.
b. Yes there would be more proportionality with more seats, but there would still be way more proportionality with 2 seats than there is now. Also nobody would have to 'hold their nose' and 'strategically' vote for the NDP - they could put them down as 4 or 5 or 6 where they belong and if their first choice is knocked off then their vote would still count - no 'wasted' votes, where voting for X is basically voting Liberal.
c. It would be no harder to manage a riding. For every X number of people there would still be 1 MLA.
d. Yes yes, the uneducated masses need a simple black and white question, with a couple fringe parties thrown in for 'democratic' colour, or their brains will explode right? Pshaw.
e. Could you explain how the impact of political parties would increase in a little more detail? I'm not folowing you...

post 2:
1. Even in a 2 member riding, there are more than 2 candidates, so you can vote from 1 up to the number of candidates if you want to rank them all, or you can pretend we're using the same tired old FPP system and only put a 1 down and vote only for 1 candidate.
2. See d above.
3. I'm not old enough for that one :(

This isn't replacing a bad system with something worse. This is replacing The Worst system with something not quite as bad. I would be much more comfortable with MMP. But we have to do something, and this is a giant step in the right direction, IMHO.

A very interesting read crobinso. Thanks for the link. I suspect this is the woman, never far removed from His Lordship, with whom I had a brief run-in during a heckling event.

Did she have his baby, is the question, nicht wahr?

With my quite natural instincts for scandal, I know upon what eventual outcome I would place my wager. :-)

Soooo, Mrs. Campbell, it is said, is now going by her maiden name? Sehr interresant. Either she has joined the ranks of "liberated" Frauen, :-) OR ...

Yet, not a whiff, not a hint in the Kept Media. Too funny on one level, and yet a yardstick on another. (Gordon Wilson and Tyabjee must just squirm with frustration.)

sorry frank, but every once in a while you seemed like you weren't quite as big of a freak as the rest of 'em. don't give up trying though, you show a lot of promise.

Aaaahhh, shucks, sirj, I'm touched and honored, by your beliefs....

Mikev & STV:

1a. You only get one vote, but since BC-STV will use the Gregory method for transferring votes, your vote could get split up into pieces; thereby having your one vote having a hand in electing many candidates. Other people will have their vote stuck on a single candidate for the entire vote transferring process. If you were unlucky enough to choose the candidate with the most votes who didn't get elected as your first choice, your vote is as wasted as any vote could be under FPTP.

1b. There is no guarantee that BC-STV would produce a more proportional result than FPTP (although, statistically, it will on average). It is not PR, and their is no mechanism in it that guarantees proportionality. If a large percentage of voters only vote for one or two candidates, you can kiss any chance of proportionality gone.

1c. It wouldn't be harder to manage a riding that is two to seven times larger than they were before? You've got be kidding. Good luck to any independent or small party candidate to meaningfully travel and meet their perspective candidates or to even afford to put up election signs that could cover their riding.

1d. How many people do you know that can explain BC-STV in full detail? Not too many I'm betting. The system that elects our political representatives should atleast be easily understood by the majority of voters. If you wake up the next morning and don't like the result it would nice if you understood why it didn't turn out like you hoped.

1e. You know how political parties nominate their candidates? Local riding associations and grassroot politics and all that. You can kiss that goodbye. Slates of candidates will be decided by the party executive. Since the party's candidates will be running against each other, it will be much too strategic to leave it to chance.

2(1). Absolutely correct. Although I have heard many proponents remark that only an idiot would vote for only one candidate under BC-STV. Maybe they should publish that along will their other information for this new voting system.

2(2). Krispy's point is still valid. Candidates will need a lot more cash to get their name out there. As in municipal politics, which have many names on the ballot, name recognition is key. You might not like it, but that is the reality.

2(3). I doubt you're not too young to pick up a history book and learn something.

IMHO ... this is a big step into somewhere we'll regret going. Vote No on STV.

Krispy, doesn't matter if you vote 5 times or 7, you still only get one vote.

"In urban ridings, you have up to 7 MLA's to represent you. In rural ridings, you only have 2"

You guys know that right now, under first past the post, there are ridings that represent less than half the number of people in some other ridings?

"The STV process will only see the continuation of slate politics"

How? No explanation?

"Yet some people's first choice will be counted, while others' won't. I'm all for proportional representation, but this doesn't even come close"

Actually it is closer to pro rep than what we have. But it leaves the power in the hands of the voter, not the party. As for first vote, right now, most people's first choice will not be counted. Under STV this will happen much less often.

Since I am now in complete denial about tomorrow - here's something completely unrelated to politics...but interesting all the same... there is a chance to see the northern lights during the next few days because of that large solar flare the other day, the largest in history, registering 9 on a 1-9 scale. The electromagnetic storm gives us a chance to see the aurora borealis, great chance for photo shots...

Last time this happened we saw a great display. So watch the starry skies tonight and the next few nights, have a hot rum, and well...maybe if we wish hard enough on the northern lights tonight... who knows what tomorrow might bring...

Birnda: Great article - thanks.

Sirj: Did you read that? What say you to that?

Thoughtful article by Rafe.

No prediction on what will happen on STV, except to say that I am voting YES. I have been to the Citizens' Assembly web site several times; have done some reading on it (in addition to my old Poli Sci text books) and have tried an on-line simulation. I won't pretend that I understand all of the mechanics, but feel I understand the concept.

More important, voting NO on this is one of the few things that prominent Liberals, New Democrats and organized labour types all agree on. A second look at STV shows that these long standing members of the "elite" will all have their oxen seriously gored under STV. Heaven forbid! People may actually use their own minds! So anything that upsets the establishment is going to get my serious support.

STV is definitely a better idea than 1st past the toilet. But, it is confusing, I'll agree with that.

Here is my take on things after reading through it... Re the misconception around multiple votes: Yes, each person only gets one vote, but that vote can in fact be fractions of a vote for various candidates... This is determined by how similarly others in your riding vote like you... The more similarly, the more your vote gets "transferred..." Nonetheless, by the time you mark #9 candidate on your ballot, rest assured, it has virtually no value mathematically, right up there with a lottery ticket. Just stick to the first 3 or 4 --if you must. This is because it is unlikely that your vote will be "transferred" more than 3 times, without all the candidates getting elected. It could happen, but it is very unlikely. No it is not truly proportional representation, but STV remains an intriguing system that mixes the concept of ridings with that of proportional representation. It is a compromise, and any compromise is better than the hard-line system we have now. Vote STV. Or suffer more of the consequences we have already suffered…

BTW, sure, Raif is a bit of a self-important windbag, but show me a radio commentator who is not? I still admire him for speaking his mind. How many radio hosts can say that? He is an asset to free speech, even if you choose to disagree with him.

Sirjona, still an asshole I see.

A sore loser is still a loser...

thanks ed, i was hoping someone would call me that one last time before my contract expires.

Gee, sirj, does that mean tomorrow you'll do it for free? Bet they'll be lining up at your door for their freebies....you know the Libs like have the upperhand ...and the employee on their knees...you have heard wages are going DOWN, right?

The media must surely be behind Gordo. How they managed to not latch on to any of his personal scandals during ratings week is beyond me. Mein Gott, how can you not report on baby Campbell?

Come on CKNW, Crapwest , give us the dirt!!

Could STV lead to E-Voting?

ghosts; wow, you really do want that award. why don't you give us some NEWS pal? stale old stories and lefty innuendo is just way toooooooo boring. as are you. get a life.

Cambell's wife left him?? Haha... sucker.

Sirj- do you have a problem with capitals?? Or are you 12?

man, that BCTF thing was a stroke of genius! wedge issue - hell, this was JUST the ticket to keep labour front and centre in the Libs attacks. call it a curious streak of anti-intellectualism, but out here in the heartlands, people just HATE teachers, doctors, nurses, etc, and the highly paid administrators that pull down those big bucks. now, there's a TYEE story - why is there such anti-union vitriol, EVEN BY people who have been union members, themselves? could it be that people are seeing 'through' the apparent contradiction of having professionals belonging to a pecking order where seniority matters more than merit?
teachers - and i know plenty of 'em, are generally fine folks of relatively above average intelligence who - compared to most professionals, and certainly to the working non-unionized sluggos out there - have it pretty damned. good. twelve weeks paid holiday, $65K plus benefits. man, they don't make jobs like that in the private sector, these days...

You know know matter what is predicted or what turns out to be reality tomorrow, I smell fear...sniff,sniff,sniff...yup, there it is, not to the left, not in center, nope it's to the right....you know why, in my humble opinion? 'Cause we the center and left will be better off with less right....

More regurgitation re; STV:

1) First, any time I have to rely on a friggin' computer formula to calculate my vote and apportion it according to some arcane formula that only a PhD can understand, that is wrong. When I make my choice and mark my name on a ballot, I should know who and where that vote is going. Under STV, some computer program will tell me where it goes.

2) Slate politics - Ask Vancouver's new civic TEAM party (or whatever they called themselves) how easy it is to even be noticed in an election in an urban centre. Simply put, multiple ridings will, by default, foster a 'team' approach to campaigning.

It is much more financially efficient for 7 candidates of one party to pool resources and campaign as a slate - bigger bang for the buck, and together you can afford bigger and more frequest ads.

Ask an independent candidate, or a civic Green candidate how he/she is going to compete with the overwhelming financial capacity of a party-driven slate approach, to even scratch the surface of recognizablity under this system. (When was the last time an independent candidate was elected to urban civic councils or school board, for example?)

This is, as I mentioned earlier, fundamentally antithetical to the stated intent of STV. Obviously, the folks who sat in their little circle and gazed at their navels gave no real consideration to the practical aspects of how such a system would operate on the ground.

3) If I live in downtown Vancouver and have 7 MLAs to choose from to represent me, do I not have more choice, more proportionality and more representation than the northern BC citizen who has only two choices, and likely representatives of the same party?

It ain't rocket science folks. STV is fatally flawed.

sthrendyle, while you might know some teachers well, you sure don't know their reality. I don't know any teachers who get paid for twelve weeks of holidays. It also needs to be said that many don't make anywhere close to $65k per year. A starting teachers salary is $35K in some districts. As for the benefits, they are paid for in part by teachers, so stick with talking about what you know. There are many private sector jobs that are better, but not the types of jobs the Liberals have been creating these days, that's for sure!
As for the media releasing information about the teachers taking a strike vote, what a bunch of lies and misinformation Gordo and his biased media friends pulled out of the hat in a final act of desperation! Blonde Pitbull, I smell fear too!

My bottom line, when I stand up physically for my country, is the day I walk into the voting booth and find a Diebolt or another version of a none paper trail voting computer.

That is the day that I would go to Victoria ,or Ottawa, as the case may be, and pull them out out of the legislature with my bare hands. I'm sure I would have a lot of people joining me. I guess we all have our bottom line.

STV would have to be calculated by computer and how the heck would we know what is transfered. Forget it.

Krispy,

1. Most people don't understand the current system. If you had a test on Cdn politics at the booth most would be unable to answer all the questions. I bet less than half the population even knows how many MPs there are in parliament. I bet less than 10% can say who is our head of state and what the responsibilities of that office are.

As for the counting method of STV, its not that hard to understand.

2. The method under which civil elections carried out in Vancouver is completely different from provincial elections, whether it be using FPTP or STV.

Election reform in Vanc was voted down too. And notice that talk of reform died. We don't get to keep holding referendums till everyone agrees.

Why would 7 candidates from the same party pool resources? A voter can only pick one of them as their first choice. Candidates from the same party will be competing for the votes of their own party just as much as they are competing against other parties.

Unlike Pro-Rep, the voter, not the party, will decide which member(s) of a party gets elected.

I wanted to add that the way they double check election fraud is by exit polls. That's why they know something went wrong in Ohio and other places where they used Diebolt. How would you exit poll with STV? For the first time in history last election the exit polls were calling Kerry and Bush claimed victory. Exit polls are always right unlike pre-election ones for obvious reasons.

Diebold

http://www.blackboxvoting.org

Ghostsmachine, I'm becoming resigned to losing the sirj award to you, will you becoming to the presentation?

RedRiverGirl, Exit polls are not always right. If they were the results in Ohio would have been overturned.

As for voting machines, that has nothing to do with STV. An STV system will still use physical ballots so there will always be a paper trail. Diebold is not coming to BC.

sthrendyle, the book "What's the Matter With Kansas" answers for you the "why".

I think that we are missing a vital idea regarding STV. Under the current FPP system there is an apathy that most feel that reflects in voter participation. Most people I talk to (that dont vote) feel that their issues are not represented in parlament due to the current systems flaws in representation. No voice means no hope.

Now those of us who have some understanding of politics can offer the hopeless indifferents nothing tangeable but "please vote, I promise that someday it will count". All empty promises under our current conditions.

STV may not promise the world all at once, however it may provide advocates for social justice, enviromental responsibility, and positive reform, the fuel we need to encourage the 73% of no shows between the ages of 18 and 24 that they can change the world as they know it.

These are small steps but no great empire was formed in one day. This is our chance to make change people, take it, vote yes to STV...

redrivergirl said:

While I agree with you that the last US election was a mess, and that the USA cannot claim to be a democracy any longer, because with 30% of the votes disappearing into touch-screen voting machines, the result can never be audited or proven, you are completely wrong about STV.

BC-STV was designed to use paper ballots, than can easily be audited. The vote tallies can be done by hand, as has been done in Ireland since the 1920s, although that takes several days. If we want to use computers to tally the votes, as will be done later today, by Elections BC, we can do so, with confidence that any result can be re-counted.

I would like to also remind you that elections and vote counting in BC is done by a non-partisan, regulated agency, called Elections BC, as opposed to the partisan groups that do it in places like Ohio and Florida.

Your worries about election fraud under STV in BC are completely groundless.

redrivergirl, STV is not a right wing plot, it should tell you something, that notorious power-mongers from both the right and the left are afraid of STV. And they should be afraid, because under STV, the lock that their kind has on near-dictatorial power, would be severely weakened. Barrett and Bennett in the same bed, how cozy.

Vote YES!

Just remember when you vote today, vote for somebody you would trust to kiss your baby. Not sell her.

I have already convinced a lot of people not to vote for STV. I just ask them to explain it to me. If they can't, I ask them how they could vote for something that they don't understand. How embarassing! LOL.

Buy your ticket to the right of complaining. Please vote today.

Thanks for this info. Never heard it. I've got a hillside I'll be on this evening.

Beauty shot Blonde Pitbull. A dirty mind is a beautiful thing to behold. :-) And MsJ in drag as SirJ is an entirely appropriate objet de moquerie. (Did I get that right?)

Catch yas all upon the morrow, so that we can either celebrate or cry in our coffee together, and analyze whatever the results may be. (But with luck, at least, 39-39-1. :-)

NO FEAR!

Praise from the master is praise indeed....

I saw Gordo on TV yesterday bragging about how BC was producing the most "jobs per capita" of any jusrisdiction. I find it interesting that he should choose to use that particular measurement in relation to employment. Perhaps it was an unconcious recognition of the fact that the kind of jobs being created by this government are the kind that require a person to have at least 1.5 to 3 jobs each in order to support a family. Vote Liberal and let the Golden Showers continue.

Thanks for the info about the paper ballots, but what would give the public an indication that their vote transfers had been tampered with? At least in our ridings now, we can sense a tone, or a momentum as well as the exit polls. With this the alarm wouldn't even be raised about the transfer vote.

I couldn't say if it's a right wing plot, although, I sure haven't rule it out, or a flaw that can be exploited. Either way, another problem, not considered by the assembly. I can tell you Manning is out stumping for it on Rafe and CKNW last night and in each host's program today today. Some sectors sure want to see it pass. Wonder why. The Greens think they're going to get a a seat, finally. What's in it for the neo-cons? I can think of more than a few benefits for them.

Coyote or anyone else in the know.
How can I learn about gordo's other personal 23 yr old "indescretion"?
Please advise.

I think one of the first questions about a voing system to answer is how vulnerable is it to fraud?

And, because neo-con 101 is to take the non-partisan departments of gov't and replace the structure with themselves, (watch what is going on with the FBI, CIA - government communications in Victoria) can we be sure that Elections BC is non-partisan, and if it is, will it remain so?

Sorry, I meant to ask this in my above post, but did the assembly address this at all?

Thanks Rafe for calling like it is and your editorial on Mon, thanks for not bowing to the
Corporate gods and elite like most of the media ilk. God the political direction of the sun is run by no other than Michael Campbell( Minnie Gordo) . I quote Rafe"I will vote for any candidate that has a chance of beating the liberal incumbent"

Canwest and Global TV, (same thing) has been disgusting the last couple of days, they have
Been cheerleading overtime. Gordo must be shaking in his boots. This election is the vast majority vs. big money and big media.The NDP at 40% is in a strong position going in, remember that the Fiberals have major concentrated support on the North Shore and West end so the 5% lead does not mean much in the polls. When the NDP win we have to cut all 3rd party advertising and cut donations from big business and unions. And put caps on personal donations and open up this media, break it wide open. With all the media support the CBC finally admitted that the liberals are going to have a tough time keeping power.

Reasons to vote NO on STV- Sexual transmitted vote.
1) It was not the most popular choice on the citizens assembly, so why was it picked.
Very suspect. Maybe they used STV to pick it.
2) Huge voter blocks in rural BC, less rural voice than we have now.
3) If you find it hard to get accountability now try to get it with 4 MLA's
In one riding.

Good questions, redrivergirl: The first question any real reform of our electoral system should address about a voting system is: Where is this voting system vulnerable and how will we protect the integrity of this system from weaknesses? I think you're on to something about it being used as a way of bringing in computer-voting sytems...

Coyote: Northern lights didn't dance, didn't even show up for the dance... too much cloud and the chance is diminishing now. Jamaicain rum very good though...

red drivel girl is going for it big time today! watch out banquos, the race is tightening up. very disappointed in b.c. mary today.

Hey Lynn,

Even an election BC official on the radio said that at this time our population size makes bringing in electronic voting machines a non-justifiable expense, however if STV comes in they would have to purchase them. Obviously, he was not making any innuedos.

Of course not... :-)

Ghostsmachine gets some award....

I haven't laughed outloud like that in a long time.... wow.

actually, ghosts - i regularly have dinner here in the heartlands with a scot who worked for National Health in the UK. he has studied hospital systems all over western Europe and is completely appalled by the grip of unions - especially the nurses and the support workers - to get in the way of deliver MORE EFFICIENT service. this is coming from someone who was a hard-core Marxist in the UK and has NO LOVE for the libs. he has said, though, that if the average businessmen knew of the roadblocks it took to, say, get new sinks ordered, he's quit after the first day. maybe that's why they can't keep adminstrators.
i come from a family of teachers and for the longest time i have defended the Health and Education sectors and unions. but here in the heartlands, a lot of people who seem to have succeeded are damned hard working entrepreneurial (not by nature, but because you have to be to make it out here) types who are simply fed up with 'entitlement,' and professionals who have accrued 'rights' based on seniority, and not on performance. there are tremendous teachers, and burnouts playing out the string - today, my wife (who works in the school system) overheard a teacher bitching because she couldn't find parking space because the school was being used as a polling station!

ghosts - listen, lots to agree upon in your last post. i am not speaking 'personally' - ie - much of the last two posts wrt teachers and health care administrators i actually don't agree with; but beyond Hope we do see a different way of doing things, as you would on vancouver island. the lower mainland is a rootless place to a large extent - people have moved there from elsewhere and the lens through which they see things is considerably different.

the real issue, as i'm sure you'd agree, is this endless 'race to the bottom' by both business and govt's to streamline, outsource, cut back, etc - 'make things more efficient.' however - and any DECENT (i said 'decent' - not 'cost cutting) manager will tell you that you may trim fat, but you cannot cut bone. THAT is when your company is truly hooped. it is indeed terrible that cuts to, say, the Forest Service were so massive and unfair - those are damned good jobs that are being eliminated, and in places like lillooet, it can devastate a community.

right now, i'm self employed in a business that basically is more competitive and more cut-throat than it's ever been. it isn't fun bidding on contracts that don't pay what they did twenty years ago - WITHOUT inflation factored in. it's an OK deal, but hardly conducive to the economic rhythms of family life (ie - mortgage, insurance, and dental bills).

before that, i worked ONLY in union environments and frankly, the sense of entitlement drove me batty. i truly think that there is a happy medium between the two, where good workers are rewarded and given a decent, humane 'career path'. but you have to get out of that whole multinational shareholder corp mindset; that's straight out of the 19th century.

it's been a good night for BC, and for the NDP. like all of us, we underestimated carole james; she has effectively banished the ghost of Glen Clark (now there is a perfect example of a union style toady who is easy to hate - now working for pattison). she seems like an honorable person - i'll look forward to her taking on carol taylor in the next election.

as for gordo - i just think a lot of people couldn't get that smirking, suntanned mugshot image from maui out of their heads. jeezus, what did he blow on the breathalyzer again - what the f*** was he thinking!! the electorate paid him back, VERY personally, i believe, tonight.

stuart wrote:

My info says that it was selected by a 153 - 7 vote of the Assembly, so that doesn't make it "the most popular"?

My info says that there will be the same number of MLA's per capita as there is now, so ho wis that "less rural voice"?

If your current MLA isn't willing to help, who do you go to? With, as in your example, 4 MLA's, you will be able to find the one who is most simpathetic to your concerns and/or you can 'play them off against one another' since they will ALL want your support in the 'scrum' of the next election. Yes, you will need to keep track of who you approached for help and what they told you/did for you.

I voted for STV since I know that, if I don't agree with my one MLA, I basically don't have anyone to represent me. For those conspiracy theorists out there, there is no reason a paper STV ballot can't be made machine readable and then a computer figures out the results, with 'spot checks' made by Elections BC to ensure the integrity of the system. If we don't seek to improve our 'broken' system now, it will be at least 20 years before the opportunity comes by again.

Referendums, that seemingly purest example of democracy, only works if we can all agree to an open, fair and honest debate. Unfortunately, as some comments on this thread and ghostsmachine has so ably and eloquently pointed out, many of us are severly challenged in this area.

We certainly don't agree on everything. Would be strange if we did. But...

You are really good often enough, from my perspective, to even be inspired...

Great bunch of rants, Ghostsmachine, though I'm surprised that you left out the quote "Mussolini made the trains run on time" when you were discussing efficiency. Also, please don't lump all "anarchists" with the kind of bleeding hearts that tell themselves "everyone is basically good"--some of us don't feel that way--also, the employee-owned scenarios you describe are basically an anarchist idea. Anarchist as a political movement, that is, not in the literal way that some people define the word. Nor in the way that trendy posers define it. You probably are one without knowing it, G

(sorry, screen froze before I'd finished). Can anyone tell me why it does that? The only thing I've been able to do to correct it is to post the incomplete message.

Anyway, as I was saying, you are probably an anarchist without knowing it, Ghostsmachine.

I feel a need to modify my agreement with your rant, Ghostsmachine. People are stupid, but they are inculcated to have a lot more stupidity than they were born with. Same with meaness. Most human babies are loving, bright little things.

Yet, obviously, stupidity and meaness are part of human nature, as well as intelligence and kindness. If they weren't, we wouldn't have any problems.

This was a point I tried to make with a fellow, so-called anarchist (more like self-important twit) who was giving me the line that "capitalism makes people crazy". I pointed out that it was PEOPLE who created capitalism, but she didn't get it. To her, capitalism is some abstract power oppressing humanity from without. Sort of the way people talk about "the invisible hand of the market".

I was so busy congratulating Ghostsmachine on his/her postings there that I forgot the original comment I was going to make, which was: why DIDN'T the N.D.P. refute the Liberals lie about the budget? It adds to my suspicion that they deliberately threw the election because they were paid off in some way.

anne; you may want to take a course or two in political science before you continue posting here as you're making a fool of yourself with your talk of anarchy.

sirjohna, you might want to read up on ANARCHISM yourself since you don't know the difference between it and anarchy.

better take some of your own advice anne. there's absolutely no difference. perhaps someone's been feeding you a line. if you understand what it means and you're an advocate of anarchy you're a complete fool.

Sirjohna,

I'm sorry you let your cheap paperback dictionary substitute for real research. From the introduction to Essential Works of Anarchism, Bantam, 1971:

"anarchism is a positive social doctrine embodying a critique of human society as it exists and a vision of a better form of social order...As William Godwin, who stands at the very beginning of the anarchist tradition, gracefully stated 'anarchy as it is usually understood and a well-conceived form of society without government, are exceedingly different from each other.'" The problem with dictionary definitions is that anarchists have not written the dictionaries and have, therefore, not been permitted to officially define their own movement. Thank you for allowing me the opportunity to educate others on this string. You, yourself, are apparently uneducatable.

The point I was attempting to make to Ghostsmachine was that I do not think a simplistic and overly idealistic view of human nature is necessary in anarchist philosophy--indeed, I think such an attitude is self-destructive to the movement. Obviously, to prevent anarchist communities from becoming magnets for deadbeats and con-artists, it is necessary to be aware that such elements exist in society and that they are actually closer to the capitalist mentality than they are to anything to the left of that.

that isn't a definition annie old girl, it's an editorial. are you educated, by the way?

Tsk, tsk, Sirj, just because you're unable to put together more than a few semi articulate sentences don't be mean when those who can, do. Maybe a wee bit jealous?

of what blonde? rambling idiocy? at least some on this thread, like you, are worthy of fencing with. the rest are just leftist clones regurgitating what they overhear in the commercial drive teahouses.

great name by the way ellie. my daughter's.

Sirjohna,

I feel kind of sorry for you. Not many people here seem to like you and most think you are stupid. It must be hurtful. But then, why don't you just go away? The only conclusion I can come to is that someone is paying you to be here. If their intent is to influence people here, I do believe they are wasting their money.

great retort anne. i'll give you that. but i must admit that i find it difficult to take an anarchist seriously.

Sirj, you've heard the saying "a picture is worth a thousand words"? Well sometimes you need a thousand words to create a picture in some one elses' mind. Especially when that person doesn't want to understand. Lots of people have the ability to feel empathy, you, well, you aren't totally without it you are just very selective with where you use it... Walk a mile in my/their shoes.... Also Anne is not an anarchist, at least not by the definition I've learned.
As for my name,eehh, well not the worst out there for sure but... Try going through grade school being compared to Ellie May Clampett of the Beverley Hillbillies...Although in retrospect I could have had my other grandma's name and been Ellie May not Ellie Rose...I've never met anyone with it - I've met Allysons' called Allie but no Eleanors or Elizabeths called Ellie -what is your daughters name short for?

By the Sirj where's your buddy, Punisher, I'm still waiting for the half of the story I don't know.

never met the cretin blonde. i know an eleanor who is called ellie and my daughter is ellen. if i were you i don't think i'd knock ellie may clampett to a red-blooded male though.

True enough, Sirj, men would like Ellie May Clampett but as children they were saying that I was a hick/dummy.Kids are cruel wonder were they get that from.... Even now, I find that men seem to believe that blonde hair and "big" boobs could not go with brains... Those that make that mistake when dealing with me I enjoy toying with -nothing funnier that the surprised look on their faces when they realize they are soo wrong....

i'm sure you can hold your own blonde. men aren't always the most perceptive or intuitive creatures, and it takes most a very long time to mature. having an intelligent daughter is a wonderful experience for any man if he's aware enough to realize how much he can learn from her.