national | Political Insider

What if they had an election and nobody came?

Martyn Brown has a point and I will help him make it!

In the last provincial election according to both statistics and the mainstream media, 50% of the people did not vote.

I have said for a long time that is not true. I believe most people are voting when they don’t show up at the polls. I think they are voting in a way most people are not accustomed to. They are voting with their feet!

That means by not showing up at the polls and voting with a pencil they are voting in a different way saying that politics doesn’t matter because the way politicians and people in the backrooms conduct business and themselves is not relevant and is a waste of their time.

Martyn Browns new book reaffirms what I have felt for a while.

Brown’s excellent book, Towards a New Government in British Columbia, could just as easily be entitled Towards a New Government in any Province. To wit: just look at the gong show that is known as an election in Quebec.

There are no platforms revealed and it is basically 3 parties at war with each other while 1 of those parties is also taking on the country.

I am surprised the polls show anybody will vote.

In our province,BC, the Conservatives and the Liberals are at war with each other while the BC NDP hasn’t said much of anything other than they will have something to say when the election is on relative to their platform.

I am also surprised the polls show anybody will vote.

I have been involved in backroom discussion at municipal, provincial, federal and the board level. I can tell you the discussion revolves around 3 questions. They are: How do we get young people involved, how do we get women involved and how do we reach the 50% of the people who don’t vote.

I can also tell you from discussions with friends in all parties they are the same questions they all ask.

The answer, as Brown clearly says and he is right is this: If you keep going the way you are you can’t and won’t.

Why would they?

Elections and governments always go the same way. One side wins,hangs on for a few terms and gets booted out either by scandal or for not doing the few things they pledged to do during the election.

What about the favorite expression coined in the media around North America. That would be ” It’s the first year of their mandate, they are doing the hard things now so they don’t have to do them near election time” or some similar coined phrase.

What about politicians who run on this’ we are here to do politics differently’ and then they don’t.

We elect politicians and governments for 4 year terms and expect them to carry out the work for the whole four years not one and buy my vote for the other three.

I have argued for term limits on these pages and that would be a start but even with a limited term there would still be time for shenanigans.

We, the voting public, need to hold governments and wanna be governments to account.

It is no longer good enough to wait until the election to reveal a platform.

It is no longer good enough to vote for faux change.

We need term limits and tough recall laws.

What we need most, however, are politicians who are not afraid to lay it on the line. People who will talk out loud about what they will do,why they will do it and then stick to the course and not break our hearts.

We need the backrooms and the parties to stop going to war.

It’s no longer good enough to go to the polls and vote for more of the same.

Something drastic has to happen.

For until it does, this former backroom guy, will join the 50 % and vote with my feet.

I don’t see that I have much choice!

Quebec Debates Kickoff Fall Election Season-Time for Renewal !

What would BC look like if Gordon Campbell had been limited to two terms?

Elections are always a time of renewal.

The electorate whether its National, International,Provincial,Municipal or just at the riding or board level get a chance to review and evaluate the people carrying out the jobs they were elected to do.

This fall there are by-elections in Ontario ( which could lead to a provincial election depending upon the results) a provincial election in Quebec, several Annual General meetings and of course the U.S. Presidential election.

When I hear parties that get hammered at the ballot box say it’s time to take a deep look at ourselves and commit to a renewal program I just shake my head.

If there were term limits right down to the volunteer level, renewal would be a constant process.

As a rule there isn’t and as a consequence the same people tend to get elected to the positions over an over again.

Not only does this lead to what I call empire building and other assorted sleazy BS, but it stifles growth because people who would like to get involved don’t because they think their chances of getting elected are slim.

This is one of the things I like about U.S. politics who have term limits right up to the President.

From a voters point of view if you don’t get what you were promised short of recall, it provides at least a window of relief.

I have been an EDA president Federally with the Conservative Party of Canada and I left after two years because I think, although they have 3 year terms, two years was plenty.

Provincially same thing,although there are no term limits, I announced to the board in June I was not standing for a directors position and that I would serve out my term and get involved in other areas.

People going to an Annual General Meeting have the best chance to start the renewal process. instead of simply voting for the same people over and over listen to what the new folks have to say. Ask those that run year after year what exactly they have done to make the process better. This is your chance to hold those you voted for previously accountable. It is you chance to renew and revitalize your party from the ground up!

Think about Municipal elections, the same people run over and over again. How many new ideas get stifled because there aren’t enough new faces to inject something different into the discussion.How many good people don’t bother to run? How many newspapers tell you at election time that one spot opened up.( it’s an election; all spots should be open)

As far as MLA’s and MP’s go, two terms is sufficient for the reasons mentioned above plus the associated saving with the so-called gold-plated pensions. ( remember too some of these people have been MLA s a lot longer than 3 years because they started in opposition)

Imagine if you will that Gordon Campbell had been limited to two terms. How different might the last election have been under a new BC Liberal leader.Imagine again in 2009, new people in both the NDP and the BC Liberals running to be MLAs instead of the same old.

What would the political landscape in BC look-like today if that had taken place?

What do you think, would term limits be worth looking at in Canada?

Quebec Leaders Debate could go along way to deciding election!

Which one of these folks has the most to gain?

The French language leadership debate happens tonight in Quebec and for Jean Charest there really is no tomorrow. If he is to make up ground and surpass the other three parties he must come out swinging and put the boots to Marios and her separatist platform.

The Coaltion Avenir Quebec leader, Francois Legault has to prove to the electorate that his party is a viable alternative to Charest’s Liberals.

He also has to send a message to those people considering parking their votes with knucklehead Marois and the PQ that there is a reasonable more sane place to vote that will include what Quebec wants and no threat of a referendum.

For the Quebec Solidaire and spokesman Francoise David they have to prove to separatists that they actually exist and that they are abetter alternative than the PQ. I believe they are a non-entity in this election.

Marois has to show the people that her party is not made up of Xenophobic racist separatists. For her this is no small order given that’s what her platform reeks of.

Who has the most to lose?

Charest and Marois.

The Coalition Avenir stands to gain the most if Charest and Marois flounder.

They win if Charest looks like he is trying to cover something up and they win if Marois looks like the racist old hag she is.

A good performance by Legault and the election is his to lose.

What do you think?

Pauline Marois: Election Campaigns are no place for platforms!

Tommy Mulcair: I will save the day; next time.

Sounding a bit like Kim Campbell, Pauline Marois refuses to divulge anything about her party’s platform until at least the leaders debate.

She is taking her lead in the polls and the voters for granted and not saying anything that might trip her up except: She is telling anybody who will listen that she has had a transition team in place for a few weeks.

And

She and her party have gone on record today saying they don’t care what the courts say, their religion plan is a go!

Add to that:

The threat of an expensive referendum and it begs the question:

Why would anybody in their right mind vote for them?

We will let Tommy Mulcair have the last word:” We think there is a place for us on the Quebec Chessboard”

What do you think about all this?

Marois: Why Can’t Provinces have Jurisdiction over Employment Insurance?

If you get the urge to jump Pauline, don’t let me get in your way!

Pauline Marois, while she confused the heck out of her constituents with her position on the student conflict about tuition ( you remember she looked hammered in the picture playing the symbols in the recent demonstration), asked the question ; Why can’t the provinces have responsibility over Employment Insurance?

The answer to that is both easy and obvious.

Firstly one can only imagine the level of extortion that would exist between the provinces and the federal government regarding funding for this file given all the recent Christy Clark caused hullabaloo at the first ministers conference.

Secondly and more important the provinces would not have a clue what to do when a person moved from one province to the next, got laid off and wanted to collect the insurance.

I imagine the conversation would go something like this” But sir you worked to majority of your time in Saskatchewan so I don’t see how you would expect us here in ( Insert the province of your choice) to finance your unemployment. Might we suggest you write those folks back home?”

The response from the folks back home would be ” We regret to inform you that you no longer reside in the province of ( Insert once again the province of your choice) might we suggest you appeal to those bureaucrats in the province where you now live?

Of course if your new province just happens to be Quebec you might get an answer like this” While we appreciate your claim for employment insurance is important to you, you must realize that we are in the middle of a referendum on which country you actually live, so until that is cleared up no claims will be processed. You should also realize that if we lose and Quebec remains in Canada there will be a further referendum delaying the processing of your claim even longer. Might we suggest for your sake and for ours, you pack your stuff up and move to the province of your choice?”

I think it’s pretty obvious why Employment Insurance would be a federal responsibility.

What do you think?

Christy Clark’s Antic’s Spread East!

Marois: In the extortion Olympics,Clark will seem like a rank amateur compared to me!

Today it was revealed, in a page out of the Christy Clark text-book on stupidity, Opposition Leader and Chief Knucklehead for the Parti Quebecois , Pauline Marois, will challenge the recent agreement with the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador.

Under cover of the environment the Parti Quebecois will no doubt demand its Fair Share” otherwise it will threaten to block any further talk about oil.

Between the cement head in Quebec and her twin in BC ,Prime Minister Harper and is team are close to being stuck between “une roche et un endroit dur”

Speaking of rock’s and hard places, word has it The beaver had a rough day after the Quebec solidaire gave it the boot from Quebec in their recent election ad portraying what else, separation.

Maybe a local politician or two will watch the ad, draw a picture of BC and give Clark the boot for starting this latest round of extortion.

What do you think?

Clark and Marois: Two Extortionist Peas in a Pod!

With talk of a Quebec election the talk of the never-ending referendum has started up again.

This time Quebec MNA and nutcase Bernard Drainville, in anticipation of an election victory ( read: taking the Quebec electorate for granted) unveiled extortion plans to get the referendum happening when the PQ get to power.

Why shouldn’t Marois and her team get into the act?

It comes on the heels of last weeks hijacking of the Premiers meeting by dimwitted BC Premier Christy Clark who stood on her soap box in what will no doubt be a vain attempt to extort money from Alberta and buy votes from the good citizens of BC.

This is obviously a case of monkey see monkey do as Clark looks in the mirror and sees Marois and vice versa!

Stuck in the middle? Some say Prime Minister Harper.

The real answer is the taxpayer who will no doubt foot the bill for these shenanigans.

Had enough yet?

Who do you think will do the Extortion Shuffle next?

Christy Clark pulls a Rene Levesque on the National Stage!

ouoya — Redford : Out here in Alberta we have a saying: Shoot,Shovel and Shut Up! Ms. Clark if I were you I would consider shutting up!

Christy Clark has gone from alienating most of the voters in BC to pissing off the Rest of Canada.

The ROC now see how fortunate they were when Clark earlier skipped the Western Premiers Meeting.

Clark has taken this weeks affair and instead of being a good leader on a strong Canadian team , stood on the national stage trolling for votes needed to save her political life.

There is a fine line between tough and stupid and with her outrageous demands Clark once again crossed it.

You want more money? Go on record and tell us what our votes are worth. Then how about conducting a normal business deal? Call Enbridge and negotiate with them.

That, however would require Clark and her government to take a stance on this whole issue. Something they are loathe to do!

Clark won’t and in doing so, she has managed to add to the group of people who will vote to cast her out of office next May. Her attempt at extortion has shown the six nations people the person who she really is. ( That would be a sleazy unelected Premier with no leadership skills).

Christy Clark is a dangerous politician. The polls show her on the way out. The next 9 months will not be about good governance for BC. They will all be about Clark trying to find a way to increase her public support and to keep a thin hold on her party leadership.

That in itself is a shame.

Are you ready for that?

Christy Clark on the National Stage -Part 2

So while the other Premiers are hard-working on the National Stage trying to solve the nation’s health care problems, what is our erstwhile Premier up to?

Texting on her cell phone and it’s obviously not work related given the smile.

Sitting there goofing off and flaunting it in front of the National Press gallery.

Why do we waste our text dollars sending this dimwit anywhere?

Christy Clark: The Country gets a look at the Charlatan of BC!

Christy Clark AKA Cruella Deville ; I am what I am!

Every village has its idiot and British Columbia’s is on the national stage attempting to extort money from the rest of the country for a project she has yet to take an official stance on.

She refuses to take a stance on the project but uses baffle gab like ” It will be terrible for the environment but for the right price we can over look it. ( That in itself is a rendition of the old joke” I know what you are now it’s a matter of haggling over price”)

Clark’s position on the Enbridge project is telling of her character,something that those of us that live in BC have been subjected to for quite some time.

She is a devout socialist, something that comes through every-time she says no pipeline or blockade.

She is a phony and has talked about native treaty rights so much lately it won’t be long before she utters those famous words. You know” In my heart I am a six nations person”

She claims she wants her ” Fair Share” for BC but refuses to say what the “Fair Share” is. When questioned Clark’s reply is that she does not want to negotiate the project in the press.

In truth and in fact that just shows what a liar Clark is, her public rebuttal of Allison Redford is exactly that; a public attempt to get Redford to give up some of the royalties.

I have said before that Clark and the BC Liberals biggest fear is that somebody will take her up on it and want to talk.

If that happened Clark and team would have to take a position one way or another. Something they desperately want to avoid.

This whole public discourse is Clark’s futile attempt to find a so-called wedge issue to prop up her dead carcass in the polls.

It won’t work and now the whole country is getting to see the laughing-stock we refer to as Premier.

In fact even Kevin Falcon himself did his best to get her off the front page when he unveiled the deficit today.

What do you think? Is Clark a bad joke?