There are forums and blogs, Ed

One just has to make sure that the info presented in them is accurate, avoid rants and see that a wider number of people read them.

...

"This government has decided that it knows better than anyone else to what extent someone should be able to participate in a democratic process.

"Anything the government does that restricts expression ... undercuts the very purpose of a modern, open Election"

Gordon Campbell July 4, 1995

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

I love this guy!

The concept that.......

........... the public can only have free speech is that they speak through a political party smacks of both Fascism and Communism; it is a dangerous path to follow.

What must be remembered is that BC & Canada are an oligarch benign dictatorships, where freedom of speech is not guaranteed.

It seems our political masters, always uneasy with free speech, only want to have the perception democracy 30 or so days before an election.

Slowly, but now with increasing speed, BC is swirling down, in a downward spiral, to a totalitarian style government where the public have no say and are jailed as political prisoners when they defy government edicts (Eagle-ridge Bluff and Tsawwassen power-lines come to mind).

Unless we speak up or [EDITED. -MODERATOR.], we will end up like the dreaded Eastern Bloc countries of old.

What shall I call my party?

If I can get my friends to donate, they get tax write off's for donations!
Do I get a couple of dollars per vote garnered too?
I was thinking of calling it the real ndp RNDP or Renewed NDP RNDP. or Provisional NDP. PNDP
Provisional until to old corrupt Provincial NDP is destroyed.
Renewed because the ndp has lost touch with fairness, and they do not even talk to ndp voters anymore, democratic values, (one person one vote) the ndp supports 43% beating 57% and real because the real ndp would say yes to carbon tax. (Not yes and no at the same time). And yes to pro rep. Not yes and no at the same time.
Anyone want to join?

The Uneducated Party

We promise not to run union ads. Instead we'll take your tax dollars and run whatever we like.

Send us a cheque and please let it be in inverse proportion to your IQ.

I guess

I guess it is called the "gag law", because I begin to gag everytime I think of it, Campbell or any of his Cabinet Ministers. This government makes me sick!

I guess the gagging

gets tried out on several here at the Tyee. Skookem 1 of all people has been gagged. He's the epitome of what I hold dear about the Tyee. It seems we can have government media monitors posting no end of propaganda - with our own tax dollars! but a free spirit like Skookem 1 has to watch his Ps & Qs.

Come on Beers et al, lighten up, will ya?

Self-serving Liberals

Uncivilized engineer said, "And union ads are the most annoying of all - totally self-serving (a la 2005 BCTF)." All ads are self-serving. But just look at how ballistic the BC Liberals went when an unbiased Auditor General justifiably criticizes them for acting without consulting the public who they are supposed to be serving. Their comments were totally self-serving as is their campaign to justify the "gas" tax. If Campbell really wanted to go green, he would ride an ass down to California to visit Arnold.

Just to explain...

People are blocked for spamming, for racism, for sexism, for homophobia, for being trolls, and so on. More to the point in this case, people are also blocked for being personally abusive, especially after being warned to stop being so.

We blocked Skookum1 because he continued being personally offensive to another commenter after being warned both in the thread and by e-mail to stop. It's true, SharingIsGood, Skookum1 brought a wealth of fascinating historical information and was a great debater. We didn't want to block him. However, when someone ignores our requests and doesn't respond to our e-mail, we're left with few options.

Some might say that moderating or blocking someone for being personally offensive curtails what we want to be a feisty debate. We disagree. We think people can debate fiercely by doing things like deconstructing logic, questioning facts, challenging conclusions, and so on. Being personally offensive does nothing to improve the debate. Rather, it repels people and reduces the diversity of voices in the forum, which in some ways hollows out the debate.

Of course, moderating is a subjective task and we're not robots. There will be times we make mistakes or will be inconsistent. We try to mitigate this subjectivity by consulting and deliberatng with each other (here at The Tyee) when we moderate, especially when we're considering blocking someone. And we did so in this case.

Geoff.

No more wild salmon

I guess that just about all the salmon are domesticated now. I remember latching on to a real Tyee in a rowboat 25 years ago, just outside of Campbell River. It took me for a ride for over an hour and left me with a story - even though I didn't get it in the boat. I'm glad I didn't kill that fish. That was just about the time I met my first Skookum - through his son, Frank.

It seems Skookum Tom rowed a boat all the way to Quadra Island from Vancouver, set himself up with work and a place to live. He then got in his rowboat and rowed out to sea - to the Queen Charlotte's, took a Haida bride for himself and rowed her home to Quadra. They had some children, the youngest being Frank. Frank's mother died in childbirth, and Skookum Tom did a fine job of raising those kids while supporting the family by catching ling cod, smileys and silvers, and logging a bit too. Then, one day, not too long before Frank's voice began to change, Skookum Tom did not return home. It seems Skookum Tom over-turned his rowboat and drowned 50 ft. from shore. He'd never learnt to swim. Frank was sent to residential school where they made him drink cod oil.

Now Frank has been gone for about as long as Quadra Island has been tamed. If you ever happen to catch a wild tyee, think of how great and exciting they are, then let it go, let it live. The tyees are like all the people I have known named Skookum/Skookem - better left wild.

Well thank you, Geoff...

... for your explanation, but it really only confirms for me that Tyee is losing its way a bit. Editing for abuse isn't always bad thing, and I've no idea what Skookum1 said - or ignored - to have the popes of wrath pronounce excommunication upon him, but there is singular difficulty in pronouncing a corrective sentence on an educator such as skookum1 who puts too much energy and vituperation into his task, and no correction at all on the ignorant comment that spawned the conflict.

There are commenters who post here the most ridiculous drivel, copied straight from press releases that have nothing to do with reality, and this behaviour is completely antithetical to the reason Tyee was set up in the first place - to provide an alternative voice to that of the mainstream media, which, apart from a few subversive editorialists, regurgitates word-for-word the marketing bumph put out by every corporate or political spin department, without correction, amendment or independent thought.

When a commenter such as Luke Skywalker can open the thread with a quote from a marketing organization that freely admitted it can't get representative samples any more, making all their "research" suspect, http://thetyee.ca/News/2004/05/07/The_Dirty_Secrets_of_Pollsters/ then it's time to consider who the agent provocateur/euse is.

That's a hard job, but it's only an Admin's job. It can be done by us out here, and we're happy to do it in our ad-hoc and unique ways, but if you don't like the ways in which it's done, then give us BOTH some guidelines. No bumpf without a logical and supported argument. And no rebuttal (which, by definition is logical and supported by facts) without clean language.

Ya gotta treat both sides with equal contempt, or this experiment is doomed to mediocrity.

Geoff

Well, Geoff, in my honest opinion, and not just because like you I respected Skookum1's viewpoints, I did not find his comments re the other poster unfair or out-of-place.

It gets tiresome when a commenter refuses to answer a legitimate critique and simply builds more BS upon the original falsehoods.

This is not the sought-for "dialogue" the TYEE comments sections are supposed to be about, rather, it is simply wasting the time of the responder and the rest of us looking on. If flaming him had PO'd the BSer enough to dissuade him from posting more such garbage, I'm sure we would all have breathed a sigh of relief, and the site would have been better off for it, since decorum was NOT at issue there.

OTOH, I pretty much agree with your admonishments to those posters who resort to ad hominum comment out of childishness, although I think it is enough that they destroy their own credibility in doing so.

May I suggest you invite Skookum1 back into the fold - we need him.

That's Why I Like the Tyee

Yuppers, Ipsos, a reputable international polling organization respected by all political stripes has now... according to Zalm:

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

In the real world, that would be considered libellous to Ipsos... but I digress.

Polling - Ipsos and Mustel

FWIW, both Ipsos and Mustel are considered the creme de la creme of BC polling organizations.

Mustel's accuracy is as good as it gets.

http://www.mustelgroup.com/accuracy.asp

The numbers therein speak for themselves.

Gag Laws

And, in my opinion, they were 'fair' comment: harsh, critical and to the point - they were neither offensive (except to those whose words and behavior was being addressed) nor were they racist. Furthermore, the subsequent action of entirely deleting Skookum 1's explanation (under another label) has the effect of placing a chill on further debate that is entirely in the traditions of Stalinist revisionism.

You claim a debate has gone on behind the scenes; I suppose it has, but the removal of one side of that debate – as if it had never existed – is not only NOT exemplary journalistic practice, it is dishonest.

With Skookum 1, you know exactly what you’re getting – with behind the scenes editorial ‘direction’ you only see what the Commissars deem you’re allowed to see.

I happened to read what Skookum 1 wrote in response to the Tyee's editorial action(s) - unfortunately, I suspect few others had the chance.

I believe these are issues that require further debate and discussion and I think the credibility of this exercise (the Tyee) is at stake if that debate is as one-sided and truncated as it has been above here.

But then, Luke Skywalker is permitted to make statements such as the one above (about zalm) -

That's why I enjoy this site... many posters are out of this world! :)

serially and with equanimity.

It is the smiley faced emoticon that makes the difference to the editors?

Or are we dealing with something far more sinister?

Luke

zalm linked to a relevant article. Let's look and see what Angus Reid himself said on the subject, shall we?

Reid says that a combination of factors - including reduced media budgets for polling and the increasing reluctance of Canadians to talk to pollsters - could be harming the reliability of election polls.

He's particularly worried about the growing tendency of many Canadians to screen their phone calls and refuse to talk to pollsters - which can mean that a pollster has to make 10,000 phone calls to complete 1,000 interviews.

Such high refusal rates not only increase the cost of polling, but they may mean that pollsters end up interviewing people who are not representative of the general public.

"It's the big dirty secret of the industry," Reid said.

Now admittedly zalm was forced to link to a quote by the guy the polling firm "Angus Reid" was named after rather than yet another BC Liberal press release that you're so fond of so I can see why you'd say

I assume this means that in your world if the BC Libs don't say it it means its not true?

Geoff

You had a problem with what skookum1 said but no problem at all with Luke repeatedly demanding that another commentor bet him $10,000 or shut up. A comment obviously meant to both demean and to quiet a voice that dissented from BC Liberal orthodoxy.

The problem on this site isn't skookum1, its the fact that the Tyee has come to prefer the posting of BC Liberal press releases rather than people's opinions.

As said above, the BC Liberals already have enough outlets for their press releases.

The Liberal Party is One Big Dirty Secret

And it sure will be nice to see a little light on things like holding meeting so the public can sit in or have a listen. Its not like they are talking war maneuvers unless Liberals are talking about the Blitz they are doing on the poor. Thats what they call it. So what BC is now adopting China's shut up policies? At least it isn't shut or die yet. Maybe torture though have you seen where they send the poor when they want them to shut up, St James Community the neighborhood crack shack? Frightening, torture almost. I can just see the courts now with the cases of freedom of speech and the back logs. Communist BC it has a ring to a Chinese ring.

The Medium is the Message?

Well I got a new one "The Message is Controlled". Its a sad day for Canadians living in communist BC.

Looks Like It Has To Be Spelled Out...

Mustel:

2006 FEDERAL ELECTION - POPULAR VOTE IN BC

Conservative (Prediction) 38.2%
(Actual) 37.3%
NDP (Prediction) 28.5% (Actual) 28.6%
Liberal (Prediction) 26.7% (Actual) 27.6%
Green (Prediction) 5.9% (Actual) 5.3%

BANG ON!

2005 BC PROVINCIAL ELECTION

Liberal (Prediction) 45.2% (Actual) 45.8%
NDP (Prediction) 40.5% (Actual) 41.5%
Green (Prediction) 11.7% (Actual) 9.2%
Other (Prediction) 2.0% (Actual) 3.5%

BANG ON!

http://www.mustelgroup.com/accuracy.asp

SES (Nanos) Research

2006 FEDERAL ELECTION - POPULAR VOTE IN CANADA

Conservative (Prediction) 36.4%
(Actual) 36.3%
NDP (Prediction)17.4% (Actual) 17.5%
Liberal (Prediction) 30.1% (Actual) 30.2%
BQ (Prediction) 10.6%(Actual) 10.5%

Extremely BANG ON

http://www.nanosresearch.com/main.asp

Angus Reid (Angus Reid Strategies) is not Ipsos and said statement can be construed as libellous.

Again, that's also misconstruing the facts.

The thrust of this thread is directed toward uninformed individuals who spout gibberish without any effort to engage the topic.

Now, is it any wonder that the BC public is in support of Bill 42???

Angus Reid

...isnt Ipsos Reid? That's news to me. I wonder who bought who, then?

Hey Luke

[OFFENSIVE COMMENT REMOVED. -MODERATOR.]

Especially when Steve Mossop is quoted as saying they're trying to develop new strategies to counter high refusal rates.

Which is precisely why I don't answer pollsters. I'll be damned if I 'll have my politics or my issues addressed by an oversimplification on a multiple choice test.

When I want my politicians to know something, I'll tell them.

Over Zealous Editors at the Tyee...

"The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers."
— William Shakespeare
King Henry VI_, part II, act IV, scene ii

So I paraphrase the bard by inserting in the Subject Line of my post...
"First thing we do is kill all the..."

... and some (insert adjective here) Tyee editor decides it needs omitting.
Good job.

I'm on the line to Shakespeare's ghost right now and he says he'll get back to me after a few more turns in his grave.

hey Admin.

To be honest I was never impressed with long-winded posts, and Skookum 1 was a master at that skill.
However, banning people does not make sense if you want a full debate.
As it happens you already have 2 choices, here and those who only want "approved" posts can stick with the "best comments"
and then let the " all comments" be allowed to be a "free for all place"!
Fair enough? or do you have a need to control?

Luke

So sue the Tyee and Angus Reid. Are you ready and willing to do so?

Angus Reid

Qualifications to pontificate on value of polls..

Angus Reid, ran his own polling firm and was the official poller boy of the Liberal Party.

Luke Skywalker, reads about polls in the newspaper and thinks they're way cool.

For some silly reason I'm thinking I'm going to take the word of your fellow Liberal.

Note to Tyee admin : I'm not going to bother googling to see if the word I just made up, "poller" is in fact a racist statement in some language like Esperanto or in the official bizarro world internet geek glossary. If it in fact is a derogatory term in Klingon or something I plead ignorance.

Interesting little story - not exactly apropos

But worth the time nonetheless.

Take the time to read Buzz Bissinger in today's New York Times....Anyone who reads all the way to the end will understand why a story about college baseball in the US is worthy of a moment's time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/19/opinion/buzz1.html?_r=2&hp=&oref=slogin&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

timely, well written story, GW

I really enjoyed that Buzz Bissinger story, GW. [EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

Apparently you can't shut me up?

One last thing Geoff who are you in the scheme of things? You guit remember. Where is the guy responsible for this travesty to Canadians Fundamental Rights? I want to hear from him, the Honorable Mr. Oppal or is that the unhonorables? We do get our voice though despite Liberal tampering we finally get our say at the poles on who we feel best represents our interests at heart. But how would you know? Or better yet do you even care? I think we already know the answer.

And Geoff I got my Geo's all mixed up with..

with my Georges. It was directed at the former attorney general,George Plant or Platt I believe who quit just before the previous election and doing the civil city thing. It always kinda made me wonder why but yet be so eager to get back into the scheme of things once the Liberals got themselves relected despite Basi-Virk controversy. And of course what is a must for a democracy a Free Press something of the past. Or is it?

It's just nonsense , IMO

God, am i ever getting tired of seeing EDITED- MODERATOR.

I thought i left that behind in grade school.

edited statements

Name-calling isn't nice, but it does show the poster's true feelings and capability for discourse, be they homophobic, racist or what have you. Censoring the comments of a blog is revisionism of the "Ministry of Truth" kind IMO. What ends up happening is that the most erudite and language-savvy posters get their say, but somebody who is a bit rough around the edges in terms of their texts, often gets the bum's rush for not having the skill to couch criticism in filigreed prose.

All censorship is de facto bad IMO. Organs that champion free speech, be they the Tyee or our supposedly democratic leaders practicing this custom is kind of frightening. It's a slippery slope that's getting greasier every day.

Democracy/BC Liberal Style = Gagged and Threatened

This Gag Law, like the latest craziness/penchant for slapping citizens and groups with lawsuits for merely speaking out is at base a detestable and slyly "legislated" (lol) means of "uttering threats". A crude and disgusting attempt to control by legitimizing the uttering of threats against its own citizenry....and against the Charter Rights of that citizenry. (Not to mention that last time I looked "uttering threats" is clearly labelled a crime.)

Behavior is revealing and once again this government reveals itself through its shameless attempt to shut the citizenry of this province up via threats inherent in this Gag Law.

Why would anyone vote for such a so-called "government" that behaves so undemocratically by threatening its own citizens and their right to free speech?

What a mockery of democracy.

Throw the perverse bastards out!

Through their totally undemocratic despicable behavior the BC Liberals are making very clear what they are afraid of.

And what could that be?......

I forget who said it, I think it was writer, Dominick Dunne....the quote goes something like this:

"The threats, both physical and legal, never spring out of fear of lies that may be told.... but always spring from the fear of the truths that may be revealed."

Is that what this Gag Law is really about?

I have a suggestion

You have comments.
You have best comments.
Why not also have moderated comments.
Unless of course it could poise a problem.
When I see a lengthy comment usually I'll give a read to the first line or two and a couple in the middle to see how valuable the content is. Shorter is better.
As not to lose your audiences interest. Often if there is more material on a subject it is best to direct some one there. As reason they are here is to catch you views and not your life story.

? How significant a role do you think the internet will play on the next election? Goggle says the internet can make or brake a politcian in this new age of communication.

Um...

I believe I have an overdeveloped sense of irony, so I can never be sure if my perceptions are 100% accurate.

Is this really a piece about somebody's inappropriate need to gag opinions in an opinion magazine whose Admin guy is using it to defend his inappropriate gagging of somebody's opinions?

No flying penises please!

I'm thinking that is more it. I have opened my email and have had them fly out at me unsuspectedly, so its like comments its a form of flashing and does get to me. Some people it dosen't bother others it does. So its kinda like comments, stupid comments, best comments. You pick.

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

That was Gordon Campbell March 26, 1997 -- in Opposition.

Yup, I definitely have to agree with that position based upon the BC NDP's proposed $5,000 third party spending limits.

Heck, that would buy ya a blowhorn and a permit for an afternoon in front of the Vancouver Art Gallery! :)

At least the so-called Gag Law is 30 times that figure at $150,000.

Ya do know that that figure $150,000 (for BC's ~4.3 million population) is the same as the federal third party spending limits?

Canada's population is ~34 million!

And the federal NDP in regards to same??? Not a squawk!

Is it any wonder that political commentator Alex Tsakumis (who looks favourably upon New Democrat Robertson's Vancouver mayoral bid) recently made this comment:

Now, where are the New Democrats, with principle, who are gonna march with pitchfork and flaming torches upon the Alberta and Manitoba NDP?????

Beam me down Scottie

Luke Skywalker what are you talking about? I'll give you one thing Mr. Campbell has it going on when it comes to business before he got into politics and as opposition he was great as he would say anything to make the other party look bad even at the expense something good may happen for those less fortunate. I believe Campbell got into politics believing politics got in the way and needed to be minimized what it could do for its communities. Its Helter Skelter for many in my neighborhood thanks to this government and it has been trying to control everything from the get go. I believe my government is out of control when it comes to spending. I believe my government is out of control when it comes violating civil liberties.
I believe my government is out of control when its comes to violating my constitutional rights.
So Luke I wonder what you will be talking about when the NDP gets in?

Luike Skywalker

I've just complained to the editors about you again. This must be the tenth time you've implied that Lynn and G West are the same poster.

They aren’t, they never have been and you’ve been told several times that they aren’t.

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

Other people around here are banned for nothing, you make insulting and libelous personal remarks with impunity and get away with it.

Special rules for Campbell supporters I guess.

No... It's "Beam Me Up Scottie"! :)

I believe my government is out of control when it comes to spending.

BC NDP government total provincial debt as at fiscal year ending, March 31, 1993 (over one year after NDP came to power):

$23.36 billion

http://oag.bc.ca/PUBS/1993-94/93-94%20report3%20on%2092-93%20PAccts.pdf

[page 56]

BC NDP government total provincial debt as at fiscal year ending, March 31, 2001 (when the NDP left power):

$33.88 billion

Total Increase in provincial debt under NDP: at least $10 billion

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/OCG/cfa/PA/01-02/PA%202002%20Debt.pdf

[page 106]

BC Liberal government total debt as at fiscal year ending March 31, 2008:

34.627 billion

http://www.fin.gov.bc.ca/ocg/pa/07_08/PA_2008_ProvDebt.pdf

[page 127]

Total increase in provincial debt under Liberals: under $2 billion

Most importantly, third party credit agencies look at other many important financial indicators/ratios/future liabilities to currently come to this conclusion:

Dominion Bond Rating Service confirmed the province’s rating of AA (high) while Standard & Poor’s and Moody’s Investors Services Inc. gave the province a rating of AAA and Aaa respectively, their highest possible ratings.

If you are talking about third party spending limits, a Charter of Rights challenge was made a couple of years ago to the Supreme Court of Canada vis-a-vis the $150,000 third party spending limits imposed by federal legislation for the whole of Canada.

Ya know what?... the Supreme Court of Canada, through detailed and balanced reasons, upheld those federal third party spending limits.

http://scc.lexum.umontreal.ca/en/2004/2004scc33/2004scc33.html

Based upon BC's political history, it does happen once in a blue moon;)

G West...

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

Vaughn Palmer

...thinks the BC Fiberals have done a lousy job with our money during one of the best economic times in BC's recent history, caused by unearned windfall profits on resources in the past five years due to global demand. Or perhaps you missed it?

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=fad87384-c36f-49fc-8e1c-b7a5bbd160e2

No, I suspect you just ignored it.

I just emailed another complaint

And I'll keep doing it until you smarten up or the management deals with you.

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

Of course we ignored it Zalm

Vauhgn Palmer that is. Vancouver Sun. MSM. Canwest garbage. Theres been more venom spewed about the MSM lies than just about any other subject reported here on the Tyee. Haven't you been listening?

Or could this be a case of wanting it both ways. I notice quite a bit of that around here. Carole's quite good at it too. You know, the NDP supports a new Port Mann bridge, but not a Liberal built bridge. Or, they support a carbon tax, but not a Liberal carbon tax. Is it any wonder the Public turns a deaf ear.

Sheer entertainment value. Keeps me coming back here.

just for you happy

Something a little more to your taste in terms of right wing cred?

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=662060

By the way, the general attitude in my circle is that good old Vaughnie is Gordon Campbell's poodle.

I'd say the times they are a' changin'.

Oh, and by the way, apparently the Campbell Tax is now not loved by some 70% of BC folks.

Wild versus Farmed

So I assume given the rules of moderation, if they are to be applied evenly, that Luke Skywalker will be blocked for continually on these threads implying that I am someone I am not. It is a blatant lie and as such could in the delicate world of Thread Moderation be considered personally offensive.

Personally I can take it...I'm a big girl now and not that easily offended. Mostly I think it's a silly lark that reveals major weaknesses in the commentor's silly argument.

I wasn't going to comment on this, as I have said my piece many times in this regard but as for "wild original fish", like Skookum 1 and others who are great reads, the taste and quality are incomparable. They are a rare thing these days, don't underestimate the real power and the real treasure of conserving that rarity.

[EDITED. -MODERATOR.]

Bill 42 - Doesn't stop citizen journalists, just the poor

They have enough savvy lawyers sucking up taxpayer dollars to know that this would not fly in a court of law, it’s totally unconstitutional. However they are also counting on us being "good Canadians." Most of us don’t like to actually purposefully break laws, well, I would perhaps qualify that and say there are those amongst us, say in BC, who aren’t concerned about pesky little things like legislation or moral rightness, but most of us like to toe the line.

In any event, a group of seven of the large unions and the BC Federation of Labour are launching a court case challenging Bill 42 for trying to gag them with regard to advertising during the lead up to the election period.

What is not generally part of this discussion is the disenfranchising aspects of this draconian law. For most of us, presenting “government issued” identification and documents that contain our place of residence to the chief electoral officer at the time of voting is not a problem, nor an issue.

Mugabe and his thugs may have committed lots of intimidation and other deplorable practices in their elections, but he never actually stooped so low as to legislatively prevent citizens from voting. Way to go BC Liberals!!! You’ve sunk us lower than Zimbabwe and a whole lot of other nations that the west likes to think of as “uncivilized.” Funny, some of those nations of the South have some lessons to teach all of us about democracy.

It seems pretty clear that THE essential question for those candidates who will run again in May 2009 while they are out campaigning, especially at all candidates meetings and community events, is what was their vote was on the Election Amendment Ac (Bill 42)? And if they voted “yea” then they are automatically disqualified from running, or EVER AGAIN setting foot in the Legislature, the “People’s House.” For some of the more namby-pamby who might disagree with that harsh assessment, think about this: if an MLA voted for this bill, they have failed the first test of politics. They have failed entirely at DEMOCRACY by pledging their support for an unconstitutional, disenfranchising and morally corrupt piece of legislation that has brought shame to the Province of BC at an international level. It’s really as simple as that. If after serving three years (or more for those who have served more terms) they don’t get the basics of Democracy, they have self-selected and taken themselves out of the political gene pool.

For a bit more, see our blog and please distribute it, it provides details of many of the wrongs and misdeeds of our present ruling oligarchy:

http://bcliberalssuck.blogspot.com/

bcliberals_suck...

From your blog:

So, here is a revolutionary idea for the election in May 2009. We propose that citizens vote for .... the BEST CANDIDATE in their riding, no matter what party they are in.

You may have no idea how "bang on you" really are with many BC'ers!!

More and more debt...

Luke Skywalker:

You and I have argued this at length on this topic on these threads:

http://thetyee.ca/News/2008/03/26/SlumpReady/

http://thetyee.ca/Views/2008/05/01/Boomerang/

So you know that to compare NDP and Liberal finances, as you have in your second-to-last post, without taking the following facts into account, is utterly dishonest:

1. GAAP - Liberals use GAAP, which allows them to amortise capital project costs over the expected life of the project. This gives a dramatically lower picture of provincial debt than would be the case if capital costs were not amortised. And, as you know, the NDP did not amortise capital costs.

2. Hiding debt in P3s - As you know, P3s are used to hide debt. According to Bill Tieleman, the value of P3 projects in BC is on the order of 7.8 billion $. The NDP did not build nearly as many projects as P3s. Actually, I can think of none.

http://billtieleman.blogspot.com/2008/01/californias-terminator-cant-beat-bcs.html

3. Contractual obligations - These include P3s. The total value of BCs contractual obligations has risen sharply over the last few years:

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/columnists/story.html?id=be4c05c2-444b-4624-afbb-fb98ac8b799e

21 billion $ since 2005. Not bad!

What can we conclude? BC's debt has increased by at least ~10 billion $ since the Liberals have come to power.

What sort of surplus is this?

Luke Skywalker:

A question for you... The last budget states that BC has a 2.9 billion $ surplus, and yet, lo and behold, BC's total debt has risen by 1.2 billion $.

Another question for you... What would you say if it was the NDP claiming a 2.9 billion $ surplus while the debt rose by over a billion dollars? Would you be congratulating them on a fiscal job well done? Be honest, now (if that's possible).

Actually, I think I know the answer to my last question. I imagine your response would be a visceral string of curses aimed at the NDP that would make a sailor blush. I can almost feel the flecks of spittle launched airborne by your hypothetical invective now.

brain dead teacher's union

It is true that the Liberal party proposed and passed the law. However, the law was debated and amended in the legislature. At the beginning of each session, the government lists all the bills it will introduce and then negotiates how much time will be spent debating each bill. If there is no debate it is because the NDP did not ask for debate. Seems reasonable to me - precluding only unending debate.

Had the teacher's union not spent a million dollars slagging the Liberals in the last election, this bill would probably not have been introduced. This is not about an individual's right to free speech, it is about a crazed union outspending all parties in a frenzy of weirdness. This bill should have been called - The Bill to Save the Teacher's Union from its Crazed Executive.

Sorry - not true

Anyone familiar with the way the legislature was run in the spring session would not make the claim that this bill - or an other introduced in the session had adequate debate.

Please refer to the record and note the use of closure. This government has been more undemocratic and abusive of the rules and tradions of the Legislature than any government in the past 50 years - and that's saying a lot.

The linkage of the teachers' union to this situation is bizarre.

NDP Math...

Jimmy:

You are using Tieleman as a source??? The strategist who was involved in Glen Clark's 1996 election campaign and the fudgit budget fiasco??

And the Tyee ain't terribly reliable as a source for financial information either.

Nope. They set up the BC Transporation Financing Authority, a crown corp., as a vehicle to hide taxpayer-supported debt.

As for the fiscal year ending March 31, 2008:

Surplus: $2.886 billion;

Accumulated surplus for fiscal years commencing April 1, 2001 and ending March 31, 2008: $13.165 billion;

Net Accumulated surplus for same period: $7.451 billion;

Taxpayer-supported debt increase for 2007/08 fiscal year: $619 million;

Crown Corp. debt increase for 2007/08 fiscal year: $575 million (due to BC Hydro's installation and upgrades of generating units)

Taxyaper-Supported Debt to GDP ratio: 14% (Ontario: 25.7%, Quebec: 42.3%);

Credit Rating Agencies BC Outlook: Standard & Poor's: AAA, Moody's - Aaa, DBRS: AA High;

BC Auditor General John Doyle signed off on the above.

In fact, auditor general Doyle even complained that the revenues should be increased by a further $445 million as the government is calculating net oil and gas royalty revenue, when he believes the figure should be gross.

But I digress.

Jimmy, sheesh you would be an excellent opposition critic for the Ministry of Finance. ;)

No need to shut up liberal dribble

because none of the responses make any sense. Heres a giggle for you as I'm a debater at heart but my opposition often does not get to be heard as message often blocked. Now thats funny at least to me when I busy talking away and all the responses I get back from opposition can't be heard because offensive. Whats with that. And Luke its not about numbers, numbers can be fudged its about what we are living and how we feel about it that is going to make the difference in the next election.

Perhaps we could debate the following

http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/sports/story.html?id=c03a805f-4736-4836-a3aa-2a00e72b25a0

Please pay particular attention to this excerpt:

"Plus the review turned up evidence of "poor internal cost accounting . . . internal labour costs were not included in calculating the cost of the repair."

Hmmm . . . now what's that all about?

It likely related to a significant change of policy at ICBC not long after the B.C. Liberals came to power.

The repair facility has been around for 20 years, and the main purpose was and is, as the full name suggests, research and training.

ICBC employees and industry personnel are trained in best practices for repairing vehicles. The facility also conducts research into vehicle safety, more efficient repair techniques and other matters.

But in 2002-2004, ICBC embarked on a led-from-the-top drive to increase revenues and improve the corporate bottom line.

In the case of the repair facility, this meant new performance targets specifically aimed at enhancing revenues from recovery and repair of vehicles."

And then start to wonder whether or not the CEO's reluctance to provide the openness he promised has been replaced with a frenzy to keep everything hidden in separated boxes; to attack the messenger rather than responde to the message and - most troubling of all
TO CREATE THE IMPRESSION THAT THINGS ARE A LOT BETTER AND MORE FINANCIALLY SECURE THAN THEY ACTUALLY ARE.

The Enronization of the province continues.

All the while aided and abetted by an army of OIC appointees doing their Stuart Chase 'best' to keep anyone from noticing while the furniture is being slipped out the back door.

It's not much wonder that the operative attitude in Campbell circles is to dwell on the past.

And Luke Skywalker its from the heart

As many are broken as I used to come home after seeing all those beautiful young people lost alone on the streets, all screwed up. I would come home and cry my heart and then get mad at myself because I Knew I would be crying my heart out 24/7 and that is when I decided to have my say. Yes Luke we live it and all the money in the world won't make a difference and only makes it sadder that you have much yet kids are eating Junkie candy when you brag about having so much.

Live long and prosper, Luke Skywalker!

Luke Skywalker:

I didn't think you'd answer my questions about the latest public accounts. Much too embarrassing for a loyal Liberal like you. Nor did you take issue with my characterisation of your comparison of Liberal versus NDP debt as "dishonest", because you knew that my characterisation was correct. You were being dishonest, but you didn't expect to be called on it.

Oh, this is just too easy! That you, of all people, would say this... But anyway, I hope the BC Public Accounts are a reliable enough source for you.

Accumulated surplus for fiscal years commencing April 1, 2001 and ending March 31, 2008: $13.165 billion;

That old chestnut, eh? And yet our debt is higher now than in 2001 in spite of these surpluses... How does that work? Hmmm... Oh right! Because they're not really surpluses! (At least not in any literal, intuitive, or meaningful sense.) As I point out above (in a question you conveniently ignore), BC has a (pretend) "surplus" of 2.9 billion $, and yet the debt has risen by 1.2 billion $. So it's not really a surplus, is it?

Red herring. You were talking about total debt anyway. So, yeah, red herring. But while we're on this topic, 1. this type has been going on since WAC Bennett ("contingent liabilities" in 1959... ring any bells?), and 2. this is precisely why the 'tax-payer supported' debt figure is so meaningless.

How many times have I pointed out that this figure is meaningless? And there is an excellent and obvious example as to why "tax-payer supported" debt is meaningless in your very last post. Can you think of what it is? No? Here's a hint: shifting debt to crown corporations...

Yes. It is a question of fact, not opinion.

Indeed, you do.

Awww, shucks :)

Okay Luke Skywalker take me to your leader

And I will put my mark on the Liberal ballot actually I may on the poor side of town as you make good oppostion, as NDP laxadaxy when it comes to its poor. Why? If in your term your advertising budget is lesser than or eqqual to the term of the NDP. I will take into considertation rising costs? Okay Luke go get those numbers. I just want you to be happy doing what you know how to do best.

Hey Jimmy...

How many times have I pointed out that this figure is meaningless?

And there is an excellent and obvious example as to why "tax-payer supported" debt is meaningless in your very last post. Can you think of what it is? No? Here's a hint: shifting debt to crown corporations...

1. Taxpayer-Supported debt to GDP ratios are important indicators that, among others, credit rating agencies utilize when determining the province's investment grade for debt rating purposes.

It's a simple Finance 101 concept that people with a financial background appreciate.

2. Your assertion of shifting debt to Crown Corporations doesn't jive with BC's public accounts. (although the NDP was notorious for doing same).

BC Self-supported debt 2004:

$7.753 billion (BC Hydro comprised $7.040 billion of that figure.)

Four years later just an increase of $295 million:

BC Self-supported debt 2008:

$8.048 billion (BC Hydro comprised $7.633 billion of that debt)

Again, all signed off by BC Auditor General Doyle.

You really don't have a good grasp of financial matters, do you???

But then that's why you are jimmy laroux ;)

The starship Enterprise awaits you, Luke.

Luke Skywalker:

Ha! Maybe that explains why this sort of thing is happening:

http://www.reportonbusiness.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080722.wwachovia0722/BNStory/Business/home

This doesn't even make sense. Did you understand my last post? I did not anywhere say that shifting debt to crown corporations was a practice undertaken by the Liberals, if that's what you're implying I said. That "tax-payer supported" debt has often been shifted to crown corporations in the past is a fact, and you yourself gave an example. Rather, the fact that the NDP and the Socreds before them used this strategy of shifting debt to crown corporations illustrates precisely why the division is so artificial. As you know, tax-payers are responsible for crown corporation debt just as they are for "tax-payer supported" debt anyway.

$7.753 billion (BC Hydro comprised $7.040 billion of that figure.)

Four years later just an increase of $295 million:

BC Self-supported debt 2008:

$8.048 billion (BC Hydro comprised $7.633 billion of that debt)

This has nothing to do with anything I've been talking about. You've brought it up out of the blue. Maybe you had trouble understanding my last post. Let me know if you're confused and I'll do my best to spell everything out for you. Or perhaps you're just doing your best to change the subject.

Red herring. Let's see if you can set a record!

It seems to be considerably better than your own, but then I suppose that's not saying much.

Umm... Jimmy...

Throwing in Wachovia Bank into this picture has certainly left me scratching my head. It's not even comparing apples to oranges. A whole different ball game.

True. But let's look at that crown corp. debt:

BC Hydro: $7.633 billion
BC Transmission: $86 million
Columbia River Power: $219 million
Other: $196 million

Total: $8.048 billion

That's commercial debt, ie. supported by revenues and, in turn, the government receives annual cash dividends therefrom every year. Been like that as long as I can remember.

Of course, we can wipe-out $7.852 billion of that crown debt and receive additional $billions$ as a premium by selling off BC Hydro, BCTC, and Columbia River Power.

But if it ain't broke, don't fix it ... just keep those assets in public hands. Probably the only thing that both you and I can agree on.

In any event, not only does BC have the lowest provincial taxpayer-supported debt to GDP ratio in Canada (after Alberta)...

But BC also has the lowest provincial taxpayer–supported debt service costs as a percentage of revenue in Canada (after Alberta).

As for "taxpayer-supported debt" (the credit card debt), it has decreased from $29.994 billion in fiscal 2004 to $26.579 billion in fiscal 2008, a decrease of $3.415 billion.

After Alberta, BC is in the best shape financially in all of Canada provincially. Certainly nothing to sneeze at and definitely nothin' to complain about.

Bite Me!

Its kinda magical is it not there is nothing like telling a bunch a Canadians to shut up, its in there DNA, to really get them talking. I with the author of this piece. Your right on.

Facts and Figures?

Your good with figures Luke Skywalker because your are always digging them up from somewhere. God only knows. Did you find those numbers on the advertising I bet the skys the limit on that one? Anyhow since I know it bang on about the raise thing and Illmud, what should we call these enterprising fellows, the workless party? No that is already taken. How about the Worthless party. Work for you? Dosen't work for me. And Luke I know my motives for being here what are yours? Is your life that much better since your Campbell mania? I know many have been hurt and left for dead. Is that a good thing or are they just flys in the ointment?