Laila Yuile2013-05-22T23:21:25-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.ca/author/index.php?author=laila-yuleCopyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc.HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Laila YuileGood old fashioned elbow grease.Adrian Dix's Election Grit Came Too Little Too Latetag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.32847042013-05-16T12:32:24-04:002013-05-16T12:32:36-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/"The man of thought who will not act is ineffective; the man of action who will not think is dangerous." ~ Richard Nixon.
When asked by Philip Till what the leaders needed to do in the last bit of the campaign on his show recently, I said Dix needed to get on his game and get aggressive if he wanted to win. In fact, I even remarked that I would have run the NDP campaign aggressively from day one and that doesn't have to mean nasty. Look at the word's definition:
Characterized by or tending toward unprovoked offensives, attacks, invasions, or the like; militantly forward or menacing
Making an all-out effort to win or succeed; competitive.
Vigorously energetic, especially in the use of initiative and forcefulness
Boldly assertive and forward; pushy
Oddly enough, I had heard several pundits say what a great campaign the NDP have been running prior to last night, when suddenly the truthful commentary started coming out that the campaign was poorly constructed, with which I have agreed and commented on several times, including in a column for 24Hrs Vancouver.
The B.C. liberals have always had well-oiled, strategic campaigns, regardless of leadership. While no one could check Clark's mouth or actions as well as they might have liked to, in the end it didn't matter that she campaigned on outright fallacies, because the Dix camp was slowly killing themselves over in the corner being cautious and trying out a new way to do politics that clearly doesn't work. They were not able to deliver a consistant, simple message to the voters over and over again on why they should vote for them and not the Liberals.
Am I angry? Yes.
I'm a complete newbie when it comes to running a campaign. I worked with independent Ross Buchanan in the Surrey election and he was trounced, but I managed to get an unknown candidate with absolutely no name recognition some very good coverage in the major papers and radio time with very little money. And guess what? When you say the name Ross Buchanan in Surrey now, people know who he is. They know he took on the mayor on a fact-based campaign that was as aggressive as we could make it. Yes we lost, but one man who was completely unknown now has name recognition. People know what he stands for, no question about it. I would rather lose having fought a damn good fight and be proud of it than lose by sitting back and opening the door for the enemy to come in and kill off your soldiers one by one. Which is kind of what happened in this election.
Here's what I saw going wrong, for what it is worth.
There were two media interviews where Dix completely lost his composure when dealing with reporters. It was bad. If you can't deal with aggressive reporters asking questions it conveys a bad message to those watching. Doesn't matter if he doesn't have much experience with that, he should have been coached and he should have practiced because he did not know how to deal with it well.
The Kinder Morgan announcement was a killer for many - I would equate it to handing over a loaded weapon to your enemy. Didn't matter when or if he actually made the decision earlier, fact is he didn't share that with many people or the public so it came across as completely an election ploy to everyone who is not a die-hard NDP voter.
It is also an unfortunate reality that Dix did come with a lot of baggage via the memo, Moe Sihota and "the horrible 90′s". I cringed when he said "I was 35." Seriously. Thirty-five is not 19. Many people are married at 35, have kids, a mortgage etc, 35 is responsibility time, not excuse time. He should have simply stated he made a mistake and took responsibility. I would have added, "... which is a lot more than the Liberals have done for all their mistakes."
Christy Clark refused to acknowledge her inaccurate statements during her campaign, even when the media proved they were wrong! Why give them ammunition? I just don't get it.
Another thing that struck me was that in the effort to run a positive campaign, many NDP supporters were actually told to quiet down on social media. Big mistake. Huge mistake. They left themselves floundering and flailing as Bill Tieleman pointed out in his column today.
Dix backed himself into a corner with this entire positive, nice-nice, err on the side of caution theme. The Liberals provided so many moments for the NDP to gain real ground factually but again, the complacency for most of the campaign was stunning. And when Dix did begin fighting back it was just too late and it was then looking extremely hypocritical. Much like doing the ad buy of the 24hrs cover looked after mocking the Liberals for doing the same thing.
In hindsight, I suspect the NDP are kicking themselves for trying a "new way of doing politics" in such an important election. It didn't work. In fact, as one of the fathers at my son's school commented this morning, "Dix didn' seem to want to fight for us, why would I vote for that? They couldn't get it together! I want someone whose going to get tough when things get rough. Horgan would have done it. I'll take my chances."
Risky Dix? More like No-risk Dix to me. There is a good reason the heart of a campaign office "the war room," a campaign at this level is indeed a battle to be won or lost -- or in this case -- given away.
The people in B.C. who actually turned up to vote took their chances, made their choice and it's going to be an interesting four years. Christy Clark talked her way into the premier's office with an aggressive campaign that worked. Doesn't matter if our new premier didn't even win her own riding, nor that she didn't know how to fill out a ballot. It didn't even matter that very little that came out of her mouth was even true, the Liberals were able to get people to drink the Kool-aid and got their vote out. The NDP have a serious image issue to deal with and a serious strategy issue.
For me, the desire to fight for what I believe in, is instinctual, but then again The Art of War is one of my favourite books. It's been on my bedside table for over 15 years and I've read it many more times than that.
Perhaps I should lend it to the NDP.]]>Christy Clark's Impotence Joke About Ex Falls Flattag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.28542902013-03-11T14:11:50-04:002013-05-11T05:12:01-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/B.C. Premier Christy Clark's comments on her ex-husband Mark Marissen:
A seasoned orator, as well as a veteran of a talk radio business where controversy and titillation are king, Clark delivered what was surely the highlight of the presentation only a few minutes in.
While struggling against a microphone that wouldn't stay upright, she commented, "I'm not going to say it reminds me of my ex-husband."
The comment was met with laughs by all and the most raucous ovation of the afternoon.
I did two things. First, I nearly choked on my coffee. This woman has no filter between her mind and her mouth.
Second, I tweeted it to Clark, Marissen and Diamond Isinger, the creator of the Madame Premier blog, to see what they had to say about it.
But alas, this latest limp joke really fell flat in my opinion -- no pun intended.
Not just because people like Isinger run to the premier's defence with cries of sexism and political double standards for women in politics -- and yes, both are real issues facing some women in politics -- but because Christy's ex is still very much in her life, co-parents their son with her, and very much defends her and her government on Twitter.
It makes me wonder, how the hell Clark can reconcile being offended at Richard Branson's naked kitesurfing invitation ("I didn't think it was very respectful"), with her comments about her ex-husband while dealing with a microphone that wouldn't stand up?
And if you want to talk about double standards, what would happen if a male premier made a joke about his ex-wife's sexual function ... or lack thereof ?
Do you think that he might be called -- gasp -- sexist?? More likely women everywhere would have more than a few nastier words than that, including Isinger, who would personally man the guillotine -- but because it's Clark, she gets a pass?
Come on. Frankly, the hypocrisy between what Clark says and what she does is stunning, dwarfed only by her inability to understand why she is so low in the polls.
It comes down to character and integrity -- unfortunately for Clark, voters seem to think she has little of either, and with limp jokes like this, it's no wonder.
]]>Christy Clark Stunning Example Of Blind Ambition, Bad Politicstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.28073022013-03-04T18:22:30-05:002013-05-04T05:12:01-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/strategies of ethnic voter manipulation by the B.C. Liberals, I've been waiting for a truly sincere and remorseful apology from the premier.
Her second attempt finally arrived on Sunday, following an emergency cabinet meeting. After hours of discussion behind closed doors, Liberal ministers filed out one by one to meet the press, most still professing strong support for their tainted leader Christy Clark.
The premier herself finally emerged, and with quite a defiant demeanor, apologized again. But as in her written statement of last week, she did not apologize for the document itself, for the blatant manipulation of ethnic communities, nor did she address the misuse of public resources.
She simply said she was sorry for the language used in the emails ... and went right on to talk about how shes going to lead the Liberals to a win in the next election.
She did not apologize to the public for the document, but did so Monday in the legislature when pressed by the Opposition.
Clearly, it was business as usual for Clark, digging herself out of yet another hole with no shame whatsoever. The only problem is, there is no way for her to legitimately distance herself from this one. If she says she didn't know what her closest staff (who also happens to be personal friends) were up to, it's akin to admitting incompetence. If she says she did, she admits her involvement. Either way, the premier is in it up to her hips in this one.
There is something very disturbing about the story that has now become known as "ethnicgate." Disturbing because it reveals something so disrespectful not only about the way Clark's government uses ethnic voters, but also the way they flagrantly disregard rules, regulations and democracy.
Really, do you think the use of personal emails to avoid Freedom of Information requests on government business is actually something new to Clark's government ? One would hardly think so. We know they delete emails as soon as they can. Remember the secrecy behind the dismissal of her former chief of staff, Ken Boessenkool? No paper trail to be found, the entire investigation into allegations of inappropriate behavior with a staffer seemingly conducted verbally.
In any corporation, the way Clark handled that investigation would have been grounds for her dismissal. But no big deal, that's just the way things are done with this group.
Former Surrey B.C. Liberal riding executive James Plett summed it up best when he revealed his reasons for quitting his position in a blog post last week:
"What makes it so repugnant is that the government misused taxpayer dollars to put together a document explaining how the government could misuse taxpayer dollars further and to offer apologies for absolutely horrible things all for a bump in the polls."
"Ethnicgate" does not bode well for Christy's future. Her rosy glow has long since faded as more candid shots of her show the narrowed lips and eyes of a politician who will do and say anything to get to where she wants to be
Using public resources for partisan purposes? Secretive emails? What's next? It's quite clear that this isn't about creating good government, it's about position and power.
The question is, with a premier so completely blinded by ambition and so equally devoid of self-reflection, how far will she go to keep both in her grasp?
]]>Surrey Casino Rejection Shows An Inconvenient Thing Called Democracytag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.25168902013-01-21T15:22:09-05:002013-03-23T05:12:01-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/Gateway Casinos' south Surrey gaming proposal. It was an epic evening with passionate presentations, and excellent debate and commentaries andon Twitter.
Although I was nearly propping eyelids open with toothpicks by the nearly 2 a.m. vote, I stayed up to follow and hear the council and mayor's closing comments prior to their votes. Pros and cons considered objectively, I believe the right decision was made.
Clearly, B.C. cabinet minister Rich Coleman doesn't agree.
While reading his petulant comments in The Province story by Sam Cooper yesterday — more befitting in tone to a toddler temper tantrum than a government minister — I couldn't help but shake my head at the arrogant sense of entitlement he demonstrated:
"B.C. Lottery Corp. has lost confidence in Surrey politicians and will not "waste time and money" coming to the city with new gaming proposals, says Rich Coleman, the provincial cabinet minister in charge of gaming.
....
It was Surrey that originally approved casino zoning on the site, Coleman said, and the city asked B.C. Lottery Corp. to include amenities such as the hotel and gaming centre.
Surrey would have received about 10 per cent of annual profits, or $6 million per year, and would also benefit from an increased tax base, Coleman said.
"We met the conditions they asked us to, and the councillors still decided they didn't want it," he said.
Coleman said the government will not propose the gambling complex for another site in Surrey, and there are other municipalities that will likely be approached.
"We won't have any confidence [in council's decision-making], so we won't waste time and money," Coleman said."
I'm sorry, but what kind of pompous government minister makes this kind of comment ? Oh wait... what was I thinking... it is Rich Coleman after all. So, what is the big problem here Rich?
Why the outrage? Do you work for BC Lottery Corporation, Gateway Casinos... or the B.C. Government?
Why is the anger directed towards Surrey politicians? Over 5,000 voters spoke out against this project in Surrey, or doesn't that matter to you Rich? It's not like you personally invested so much time and effort into making this project happen... or did you?
Poor Rich. Did the city of Surrey rain on your parade? Get an umbrella.
It's a sad day when a government minister insults municipal politicians in the media because they listened to the people who voted them into office in the first place.
They call it democracy, Rich. D E M O C R A C Y.
Something your government has demonstrated, time and time again, to know little about.]]>How Christy Clark Set The Standard For Vulgar Questions, Innuendotag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.23986552013-01-02T16:10:29-05:002013-03-04T05:12:01-05:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/MILF or a cougar.
Here is an excerpt but please do read the entire column:
"Clark's answer is being cited as yet more proof that she degrades women, that she is an embarrassment to women, and so on. That two-sentence exchange has, it seems, given the Clark-haters enough fuel to carry them well into the new year.
Personally, I think she did the best she could with an unexpected, inappropriate, insulting, stupid question. She answered it quickly and moved on.
That's not good enough for the critics, who have had time — something Clark did not have — to think of all sorts of things that Clark could have said or done....
It all gets back to the cold reality facing women in politics: The double standard is still alive."
Ahhh... where to begin?
How about with the fact that I do agree with David's opening statement: "It would be nice to think that by now, politicians, male or female, could be judged on their abilities, their vision, their values and so on. Gender should not be a factor."
Yes, for most people, gender has nothing to do with the intrinsic qualities we seek in politicians or any other positions of public trust. For me, the candidate with integrity, values, passion and a solid background will come first, regardless of gender, which is why I still have such an issue with the NDP's "gender quota" policy.
However, Clark has not been relying on her values, integrity or her abilities — most of which are questionable at best, considering her policy moves and actions in the premier's office. Unfortunately for Clark, she has set the standard for herself like no other female politician I can recall, now or in history.
POTTY TALK
Let's go back to her radio talk show days, when she would hang out with the jocks from The Fox and Rock 101 and talk innuendo and potty talk. The days when she gave interviews to the guys in the sports section of "The Vancouver Sun" about her private passions, one of which happened to be one of the most degrading, vulgar shows on TV, "Manswers."
You can click the archived article if you need proof, but from her own mouth, she thought it was tantalizing to find out how large breasts actually have to be to crush a beer can.
On a side note, it wouldn't be honest to claim we don't all have a guilty pleasure or two, but more than likely we aren't going to share that with the readers of "The Vancouver Sun," especially if we were even remotely thinking about a career as premier. But to say this wasn't a candid look at the now, still unelected premier's inner workings is to ignore what most men and women think about this show.
I'm not a prude, and we're all adults here, but this show is nothing but trash TV. Trash TV that degrades women, portrays them as nothing but sexual objects, with a large load of potty talk features involving piss, poo, farts and everything else attractive to the beer bong demographic.
And people are attacking the radio host for an insulting, vulgar and inappropriate question? On a radio station much like ones she has shown her sense of humour on in the past, and documented in sound bites and photos for the world to see?
Give me a break.
WHAT WERE THEY EXPECTING?
First of all, the premier didn't "find herself" without a clue on this radio show, it was arranged by Maclean Kay, one of the premier's communications people, who had been shopping her around for good press as David points out, tends to be done at this time of the year.
One look at the station's site is going to tell anyone, even my four-year-old, that it's rock radio with personalities like Drex and the RockDawg ... so what the heck was Clark, or her people, expecting?
Seriously, let's be real here, she used to hang with Rock 101 and The Fox (one appearance being just two months ago), so why wouldn't the morning jock think he could pass off a stupid question to her? He even said he knew from her days in radio, she had a sense of humour.
And yes, she sure did answer the host's MILF/cougar question quickly... with the worst answer a politician could have come up with, male or female. I have been one of her harshest critics, focusing most often on her lack of ability displayed in interviews across the country, her reactionary policy/decision-making and the chameleon-like, insincere remodelling of her persona dependent on the media attention at the time.
Let me tell you something, I doubt someone would even dare to ask me what it is like being a MILF... but if they did, it would be the last time they dared asking an intelligent woman something so silly. But I am not the premier, and she said she thought it was a compliment.
APPROPRIATE RESPONSES
David, I am appalled that you think she handled this appropriately, and take offence to your statement that her critics had more time to think of responses.
How about "That's not appropriate for families listening Drex" or "I find that insulting, let's move on" or even the short and sweet: "Next!" — all of which came to my mind immediately and are responses suitable for airplay.
It escapes none of her critics nor myself that while Clark handled Richard Branson's invite to kite surf naked on his back with a sharp jab, she laughed at the MILF/cougar question and said considered it a compliment.
It is indeed hard to be a woman in politics. And yes there is a different standard out there for women, in a culture where women are still hyper-sexualized beings in ads, print, and TV, movies and magazines... which makes it even more alarming any woman leader would set the standard with the answer given.
Clark has been now the subject of very overt sexual comments not once, but twice. Why is that? Maybe because Clark has done nothing to show voters her abilities, her vision, or her intellect, but has done everything to show them that she will say, do or even become anything she thinks will get her a vote.
While David Obee is certainly entitled to his own opinion, it isn't Clark's appearance, or her breasts that have degraded women, it is what comes out of her mouth. For women aspiring to politics, it is not only degrading and frustrating, but embarrassing to boot.
]]>B.C. Government Denies Cancelling Christmas Gifts For Kids In Caretag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.23257412012-12-18T18:25:59-05:002013-02-17T05:12:01-05:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/Santa's naughty list of B.C. Liberals, which was well received by Santa and the public alike. Indeed, it has been said you can tell a lot about a government by the way they treat societies most vulnerable, especially children.
Sadly, our government has failed our province's at-risk children on many occasions and that's why when our good friend RossK emailed with a story that came his way from a very solid source, I knew the Grinch must be lurking around the halls of government ministries somewhere:
He blogged about the children under the care of B.C.'s Ministry of Children and Family Development (MCFC):
Specifically, those kids in the province's care who don't even have foster homes yet. Imagine being one of those kids at this time of the year.
Once you've imagined all those kids (and there are a lot of them), wouldn't you want to do a little something for them if you were a front-line MCFD worker right about now?
Like, say, buy them a small present for Christmas — even if it was nothing more than a Taylor Swift album?
And, as you might expect, buying such small gifts (total cost under $50) has been a longstanding practice at the MCFD. Until, we have been told, this year."
Gasp, say it isn't so! The Grinch making an appearance in the Ministry of Children and Families? Well, the government categorically denied the allegations on Twitter:
Aha! Well that would be reassuring — if it wasn't for the existence of an email that was left via the contact page on my website shortly after posting a link to RossK's blog.
I have removed the name of the sender of the email — a ministry employee — but the recipient's name was removed prior to my receipt of this email, to protect the identity of those involved.
"From: XXXXXX,XXXXX X MCF:EX [mailto:XXXXX.XX.X@gov.bc.ca]
Sent: December-03-12 3:03 PM
To: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX Subject: Christmas Gifts for XXXXXX
Please be advised that due to cutbacks, MCFD will not be supplying Christmas gifts for children in care.
As parents and extended family, you are still expected to provide a gift for your child if you wish to do so.
Thank you.
XXXXXXX XXXXXXX Child Protection Social Worker
Ministry of Children and Family Development "
So now we have a conundrum.
We have two sources making the same allegations, an email transcript backing up those allegations and a government denying and refuting all of it.
After posting this, a reader of mine who lives in Children and Families' Minister Stephanie Cadieux's riding phoned her office because he was so appalled. Her office in turn phoned Victoria and reported back to him that the ministry was allowing the purchase of gifts — making it sound like a sudden policy change.
I sent a copy of the email to ministry staff asking for a comment, and this was the official response of the Ministry of Children and Family Development:
"Any claim that the ministry will not be supplying Christmas gifts for children in care is absolutely inaccurate and it is very concerning that this erroneous message was sent to a client. In fact, social workers are encouraged to ensure every child and youth in care receives gifts during the holiday season.
Funding to cover gifts for children and youth in care is built-in to monthly payments the ministry sends to foster parents. For children and youth living independently or on Youth Agreements, ministry staff are authorized and encouraged to ensure those young people are remembered over the holidays and gifts are provided."
Isn't that great? It's all just big miscommunication! I think it is just fabulous to find out that not one kid in care in this province will go without a gift this year, however small, because of cutbacks — in particular because this is a Families First government after all.
And if you have also been in receipt of one of those emails, please send it along to me so we can make sure there are no more misunderstandings or "erroneous" information out there.
Because you know, I think a lot of people would find it hard to stomach a government that just promised a tough budget was coming, only to find out it was at the cost of a little bit of Christmas for kids who need it most.]]>Santa's Top 5 Naughty B.C. Liberalstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.22528772012-12-10T15:40:40-05:002013-02-09T05:12:01-05:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/
In fact he said — and I quote: "Why can't they seem to get it right when it comes to all the most vulnerable children?"
Shameful truth be told, my source indicates that Santa has received more letters from children living in poverty in B.C. over the last nine years than anywhere else in Canada — and he's not too happy about that.
My source indicated Santa's been taking a good hard look at who's been particularly naughty this year and has already ordered a rail car full of B.C. coal. He still needed some help to decide who are the worst offenders when it comes to politics in B.C. and I was more than happy to assist.
Despite being a lawyer for many years and knowing full well the penalty for perjury in the court, he now admits he "mis-stated" his original affidavit, claiming a faulty memory when it came to declaring if our government actually had detailed billing when it came to Basi and Virks lawyers... all very crucial information about the plea deal given to the two men which many believe was in exchange for their silence.
4) Bill Bennett
To be brutally honest,I seriously thought Wild Bill must have fallen off of his quad and was suffering a head injury after I heard him accusing NDP MLA Jagrup Brar of being infatuated with Communist Cuba! Seriously, one of the craziest statements ever made by any politician, but even more so for a "top lieutenant" in Christy Clark's election readiness team. Bill later had a sock stuffed in his mouth and was sent back out to the mountains, where his mouth couldn't do any more harm.
3) Colin Hansen
The man instrumental in the mess behind the HST debacle — for that alone he'll be getting a truckload of coal — has jumped from the frying pan, into the fire.
After announcing he wouldn't be running for MLA again, he announced he would however, take on the role of deputy campaign manager for the BC Liberals in the 2013 election. Seriously? Seriously? You want to actually help this bunch of bungling, unethical politicians get re-elected? Oh, Colin, Santa isn't going to like that, but maybe he'll bring you a pair of hip-waders for all the crap you'll be wading through next year.
2) Rich Coleman
It's really getting predictable that when the shit hits the fan, you can usually find Rich Coleman getting his raincoat on. Where do I begin? How about with one of his biggest backers, Patrick Kinsella, whose name seems to go hand in hand with backroom deals for the B.C. Liberals?
Coleman been very naughty this year, recently in the news for some downright unethical deals and donations between a B.C. brewer and his office, that resulted in some tax policy changes that.. surprise surprise.. would benefit the brewer to the tune of millions.
1) Christy Clark
Without a doubt, Clark takes the number one spot on my naughty list, and it sure doesn't have anything to do with her dubious appearance on the National Post's Vixens in Vancouver list. Thanks to Ian Reid for that one. Stay tuned for a new pilot on Fox next year: "Premier on the Prowl." Grrrowwl!
I think the people of B.C. would agree: Santa, instead of that good old B.C. coal, how about sending her one nicely wrapped reality check?
Happy Holidays, and I'd love to see your political choices for Santa's naughty list!
]]>Bait And Switch Toll Reduction Won't Help B.C. Liberalstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18789212012-09-12T17:30:32-04:002012-11-12T05:12:01-05:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/
Wednesday's announcement by newbie B.C. Transportation Minister Mary Polak that the tolls on the Port Mann will be reduced for a period of time with incentives -- call now and the next five people get a free Shamwow -- is no less controversial than the project itself for one very good reason.
Mary Polak is of course a Liberal MLA in Langley facing an election in 2013, along with MLA Rich Coleman and likely Surrey MLA Stephanie Cadieux. Each has confirmed they intend to run again to the press and it's very apparent to everyone (except Mike Klassen apparently) that the Liberal brand has been all but blown up by the disingenuous Christy Clark. Quite frankly, these MLAs are going to need every bit of help they can get.
The question is, will a reduction in tolls make any difference at all to hardened voters weary of the endless stream of politicking from Clark, the second most unpopular premier in Canada? I don't think so, and this is why. The Liberals are using the old bait and switch trick, one they've perfected over the last 10 years. Sure we get a discount at first, but eventually we're all going to be paying -- for the rest of our lives quite frankly.
To those of us who travel the bridge, it had been clear for years something needed to be done to address the gridlock on both ends. Public transportation south of the Fraser is horrific during the week and nearly non-existent in some areas on the weekend, making vehicles mandatory for most.
So back in 2008, with the process to twin the existing Port Mann Bridge well underway, a preferred bidder was selected and negotiations began between the province and the winning consortium.
Shortly thereafter, then premier Gordon Campbell and Transportation Minister Kevin Falcon announced the private partners didn't want to pour money into maintaining the current Port Mann Bridge and lo and behold, a grand new plan appeared to build an entirely new bridge and highway upgrade at the new inflated cost of $3.3 billion. Most interesting was the development that the province was going to take on financing one-third of the bridge themselves, another definitive sign something big was amiss.
Once again, it wasn't long before Falcon called yet another press conference, this time announcing that even Macquarie, the Liberals' best offshore advisors, could not secure finance terms that suited Partnerships BC, and the P3 partnership was called off.
In a reversal remembered by many, Falcon, who had earlier announced with great conviction that the P3 model was best deal for this project and taxpayers, suddenly announced that the government would be financing the entire project themselves, via a traditional fixed price contract.
Ironically, he also pointed out that this was a better deal for taxpayers because government could borrow money at a far better rate than any private partner could and while Kiewit/Flatiron would remain as builders, Macquarie was also being kept on in an "advisory role."
Try to ignore the fact that this project actually started out with a $1.5 billion price-tag for the very feasible solution of the twinned version.
Now try really hard to forget that when the grace period is over, when that year-long discount is over, you are going to be paying to cross that bridge for the next 40 years of your life.
Oh, you can't ignore that? Neither can I. I'll be in my 80s when the tolls come off -- if I live that long!
That's why this old bait and switch, "discounts now, pay later" fallacious politicking won't make a damn difference to the voters in 2013. Indeed, the entire project has been included as part of Falcon's legacy to this province during his tenure in the transportation ministry.
Unfortunately it's a legacy that if anything, only highlights the need for a cohesive regional strategy -- and government -- that is transparent and equitable, not punitive and narrow sighted.
The underwhelming "success" of the Golden Ears Bridge is proof in the pudding.]]>A B.C. Government For The People, Not At The Expense Of The Peopletag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18405132012-08-29T14:41:52-04:002012-10-29T05:12:04-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/
It was a mere two weeks ago when the story broke of excessive and frivolous spending in government, not only by the premier, but by all ministries.
The premier justified her spending, saying it was a once in a career instance as host of several events, but failed to comment on the excessive and very questionable spending in other ministries, which included everything from Lululemon clothing to liquor and wine. Oyster dinners in the thousands? Cases of wine from vineyards? Yes! Simply the cost of doing business!
Despite substantial evidence to the contrary, the premier just released her second quarter infomercial this week in which she claims that her government has done a great job of " keeping government spending down to keep taxes low for you." I could barely keep the bile from rising in my throat! Seriously Ms. Clark? Are you on the Mars Rover mission, and suffering from oxygen deprivation? We all read the lists of items charged to government cards! What's wrong with you?
Another example of hypocrisy in action came last week. Finance Minister Kevin Falcon was crowing foul over the excessive spending on managers and perks over at ICBC, claiming the rest of the B.C. government has cut back, and so must ICBC.
As the result of a Freedom of Information Act request by the non-partisan organization Integrity BC, it was revealed that former chief electoral officer Craig James, spent more than $40,000 in four months. Those expenses included a trip to Nairobi, which included his wife.
When confronted by reporters, James defended the expenses, including his wife's ticket, stating that all spending was in line with the policy of the day.
What stinks even more than his excessive travel expenses, was that James himself approved this policy when he took over the position. His successor reverted it back to the previous, more appropriate protocal. Yes that's right, James himself made it possible to take spouses on government business when it was not required to do so -- a policy change completely at odds with the rest of government.
What could possibly lead these politicians to make such claims of fiscal austerity when the evidence is all over the news to indicate otherwise? They must either think we are all completely daff, dumb and blind, or simply not give a damn.
I've written much about the air of entitlement this government has come to display, an attitude which sets an example from the top of government for all the levels below. How can one expect any government executive or bureacrat to display restraint when those in charge demonstrate a proclivity for excess?
The truth is the average person is British Columbia just doesn't even listen to any of this bizarre hypocrisy anymore. The average person in this province is still struggling to make ends meet, evidenced by the amount of debt we carry. Whether or not it's the most basic of needs such as food and shelter, or meeting mortgage and car payments, most people in this province are far removed from the reality of luxurious "vacations" oops I mean, conferences in Nairobi.
Falcon announced Wednesday he won't be running in the next election, not a surprising move for many like myself who have followed his actions in government for years. While he claimed loyalty to former premier Gordon Campbell and our currently, still un-elected Premier Christy Clark, we all know he could see the writing on the wall.
The Liberal ship is sinking and not running again is his only life raft capable of keeping a future political career afloat provincially or federally. With that decision, he effectively buttered his bread on both sides, in one stroke.
I think I speak for many when we say that we want a government of the people, for the people. Not a government for themselves, at the expense of the people. To accept anything less is to condone the bizarre hypocrisy of the B.C. government and make a mockery of what little democracy we have left.]]>The Crux Of The Matter: MLA Failures All Aroundtag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18258432012-08-24T15:51:41-04:002012-12-07T16:48:45-05:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/
Since first elected, the B.C. Liberals have systematically stripped, degraded and otherwise mismanaged every core ministry in this province and that is inarguable. I have spent considerable time documenting all of it in the 100 reasons the B.C. Liberals must go.
Court services closed, legal services cut, degradation of mental health services, education under-funded, health-care expansions widely hailed and lauded but without staff to complement new facilities. For example, when the Jimmy Pattison Outpatient Care and Surgery Centre opened in Surrey it was like a ghost town. Why? Not enough staff to operate in a fully functional manner. Why? There was a shortage of qualified staff.
So what did they do? Stole staff from Surrey Memorial and moved them to Jimmy Pattison up the street, leaving suddenly much longer wait times at SMH because of a staff shortage. Wow, what a solution.
The forestry industry in this province is dying. Dying. Why? Because the Liberals mismanaged it so badly auditor John Doyle said in a scathing, shocking audit, there is only a small window of opportunity to turn it around. Why? Because the Liberals don't have a clue what they are doing.
So what happens? We have a bi-partisan committee that makes a report that both Liberal and NDPs praised themselves on, while the truth is all MLAs blew a big change to make things right. (This is a must-read: I hold Bill Bourgeios in very high regard with his vast experience and knowledge. The comments section also offers some interesting connections in some communities that make you go hmmmm. The province would be well served if he were in charge of our forests.)
The Legislative Assembly Management Committee Act (LAMC) committee, which is bi-partisan, was in the direct line of fire recently with the auditor's again scathing review of the legislature finances. Seems our own government can't do basic accounting and the LAMC has been sitting around doing... ummm... doing... well to be honest, it seems like they haven't been doing anything.
Yes, NDP and Liberal members are on that committee and while we absolutely expect, yes expect, secrecy from our soon-to-be dearly departing Liberals, we do not expect the NDP members to go along with it, which they did. The NDP can claim innocence all they want, but the truth is the two members on that committee said nothing about how stupid and secret the actions of this committee were until the report came out, then they feigned shock and embarrassment. Both parties were accountable to the public.
So where am I going with all this?
We are, for so many reasons, at a very crucial juncture in the history and future of this province. Environmentally, financially, socially... so much of where we go and what we leave for our children and our grandchildren hinges on the next election. This is crux of the matter.
This is why, examining every party, every candidate, every leader is crucial. This is why, more now than ever, we must ask the questions especially when we hear promises because we know what happens when we don't. I don't care if it's NDP Leader Adrian Dix making promises, or Conservative Leader John Cummins, or B.C. Liberal Leader Christy Clark. I wouldn't feel like I was doing right by each of you if I didn't examine, poke, prod and question.
SPLITTING THE VOTE?
I know there are concerns out there about splitting the vote. The Liberals are hoping for it. However I don't see that happening. There isn't a Liberal in the house that doesn't hold culpability for the mess we are in, not one. Each stood by and let it happen with silence and acquiescence.
But does that mean we should give a hall pass to the NDP? No, of course not, because there have been numerous times they have failed in Opposition. I've come under criticism recently for questioning Dix's announcement to hold his own review of Enbridge. Friends and readers suggested I should do other stories. However, one reader on my site recently mentioned a few items in her very pointed comment that highlighted why I am justified in doing so, and why I must continue to hold all politicians feet to the fire.
The NDP, champions of the Agricultural Land Reserve , suspended one of their own for standing against the removal of massive tracts of some of the best farmland in B.C. for the Tsawwassen treaty. All of it to be paved for container ship storage, industrial expansion by the port and now a mega-mall shopping tourist destination.
The NDP are full steam ahead for fracking expansion, conditional upon a review of course, but even with this being said, for the life of me, I can't get John Horgan's statements out of my head for the lack of knowledge it exhibited with how much the province is actually monitoring and tracking water usage and licenses. And funny enough, a few days later this bit of backtrack appeared in the Sun.
This week's story in the Sun makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up. Combined with posts I have done in the past on the ongoing failures of the government to do any monitoring, followup or checking on many contentious projects is why I think moving ahead quickly and blindly is absolutely the wrong thing to do.
It takes us back to the mess we are in already. We can't afford to screw it up again.
Now, before someone jumps on me and tells me I don't get that we need jobs, I do get that. I was born and raised outside of Prince George and 'get that' more than many people down here on the coast.
I know a lot of families where dad has gone to Alberta to work in the oilfields, or up north on a rig, coming home every few weeks. I know people who've lost their homes, because of the dying forestry industry. My dad works in a pulp mill, my brother and uncles in sawmills. I get how damn hard it is risking your life every day so you can pay your bills and feed your kids. I grew up with this, and I grew up in one of the most beautiful areas of B.C. where now vast tracts of forest are gone, naked, not replanted. Where people hate the carbon tax because there is no decent transit and you have to drive, most likely a truck to get around in and haul your stuff. Where people feel that internal fight all the time between jobs and saving what is around them.
Not talking about realities isn't going to help any of them, or any of us.
I don't have all the solutions, nor do I have all the answers. But I do know that we need to balance our economic path with our environmental future, without a doubt.
It's not going to be an easy job for whoever takes the reins in the next election. We can't give a free pass to the NDP, or the Conservatives, or even the Greens. We can't hold any of them any less accountable than we have the Liberals. Doing so will perpetuate the problems we face, not solve them, and that's why we do need to ask questions, we do need to talk and we need to inform ourselves -- and those around us -- like our lives depend on it.
Because in fact, they all do.]]>Little-Known Pipeline Paves Way For Enbridge Under Radar Of British Columbianstag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.18117972012-08-21T12:41:04-04:002012-10-21T05:12:12-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/
Take for example, the Pacific Trails Pipeline project ( also referred to as the KSL line). With minimal media coverage during the approval process, it has by and large flown completely under the radar of most British Columbians. That's a damn shame in my opinion, and I'm going to tell you why.
First of all, this pipeline is owned by Apache Corporation, Encana and EOG Resources (formerly Enron). It is going to be transporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Kitimat in an expanded 42-inch diameter pipe and will assist in driving expansion of fracking in northeastern B.C., something the Liberals are all over like flies on manure. Unfortunately for the people in that area of B.C., the NDP are right on board with fracking as well, with energy critic John Horgan extolling the virtues as he perceives them.
It's all the same old crap, in different piles: the pipeline, the LNG plant in Kitimat, expansion of fracking in B.C. and the proposed Site C dam -- something Christy Clark already admitted is needed to power LNG plants and expansion in B.C. We are rushing around trying to get resources to a Chinese market that has already bought up so many LNG supply contracts around the world, and is now showing signs of the same economic decline and crunch the rest of the world has been experiencing for far longer.
But wait, if that isn't contentious enough for you already, here's the real point you might not have known about yet. The Pacific Trails Pipeline runs from just north of Summit Lake (about 55 kms north of Prince George) to Kitimat... and a large portion of this pipeline right of way follows the same route Enbridge plans for the Northern Gateway pipeline.
In fact, Pacific Trails has already begun to clear the pipeline route this summer, logging and cutting brush and many fear this is going to pave the way for Enbridge and mitigate much of the environmental impact in this area -- and Enbridge has it all that much easier for a portion of their total route. In May 2011, Damien Gillis reported on an interview Enbridge CEO Pat Daniels did with Fox News in which he said:
"We think we're in a very strong position with regard to exporting Canadian natural gas in particular. We're currently putting forward our credentials to the proponents - EOG, Apache, Shell and others - that are working on moving Western Canadian natural gas out to the West Coast; and we would hope to be able to see some synergies with the right-of-way that we're working on with our Gateway pipeline out to the West Coast. So, yes, we're very interested in doing that and we would hope to be the pipeline provider for one or both of those alternatives. (emphasis added)"
They continue to protest this pipeline and others that cross their territories and inevitably threaten the two main salmon spawning and food supply streams they rely on as the staple in their diet. These people don't go to Choices to buy eco-friendly organics, they live off the land -- the very land both these pipelines cross and I believe you can toss Kinder Morgan in there too. This is their land, and the land is as essential to their way of life as the air we all breathe.
In fact, in the last couple of weeks, an action camp was hosted by the clans of the Wet'suwet'en Nation, a peaceful gathering of protest which was attended by Chris Johnson, a writer who was left profoundly impacted by the experience. In this exceptional blog post, he writes:
"If what we have been hearing from the Unis'tot'en and Lhe Lin Liyin is to be believed, and I believe them, they will be putting their bodies in the path of this pipeline, as I witnessed them doing when a CANFOR logging contractor attempted to pass through the territory on the way to cut trees for the right-of-way for the pipeline...
"This is your wake-up call."
With active clearing already begun for the Pacific Trails/KSL line, the time has come for all British Columbians to inform themselves about what's going on and what they can do about it. This pipeline has already been approved, without a lot of fuss or fight, and this portion of the line is crucial to Enbridge who must already have an agreement in place with the partners behind Pacific Trails to use the same right of way in this area.
It might even be that if Enbridge's bitumen line is tanked, they will be in place to offer the option of LNG transport... another synergy between partners? This pipeline is a key part of all the fracking expansion in B.C. and yet so many British Columbians don't even know it was approved.
I don't hold all the answers.
I support sustainable and environmentally sound resource extraction and believe this can be achieved -- if the dedication and values are there in government to set the standard for such. Unfortunately, our governments have not been in line with this goal, seemingly willing to sell B.C. to the highest bidders and for that reason I do believe the people must set the standard and ensure their lands are protected, at any cost.
"Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money." ~Cree Proverb
(This was originally posted at www.lailayuile.com.)]]>B.C. Politics in a Word: Fallacioustag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.17786762012-08-16T08:05:15-04:002012-10-16T05:12:28-04:00Laila Yuilehttp://www.huffingtonpost.com/laila-yule/
adj
1. (Philosophy / Logic) containing or involving a fallacy; illogical; erroneous
2. tending to mislead
3. delusive or disappointing a fallacious hope
I love the word fallacious.
I love how it sounds, (slightly naughty, as it rolls off my tongue ) but more so, I love that I've finally found one word that so accurately sums of the state of politics in B.C. They are completely fallacious and voters in B.C. are left hanging in the middle of war words and media strategies where the goal is power -- rather than good government.
We have on the right the capitalistic, free enterprise B.C. Liberals. Free enterprise, as defined by the Liberals, means favouring corporate friends and taking everything they can get, but neglecting the very important social needs of the people of B.C. while doing so. People in British Columbia have effectively been held hostage by the still un-elected Christy Clark, who under the B.C. Liberal banner, has been poorly leading with no direction. Democratic process fails each of us when a talk show host can move directly from the studio to the premier's office without an election and a mandate by the people.
Despite campaigning to bring an open and accountable government to British Columbia, Clark has continued to foster an environment within the legislature that not only rewards unethical behaviour, but seems to encourage it. For the last 10 years, the B.C. Liberals have repetitively and with great air of entitlement, shown they are above the same laws we are all beholden to. This isn't rhetoric on my part, it's documented with stacks of research, stories, and evidence. They have, without doubt, written the play book on fallacious politics.
On the left, we have the no-Enbridge-but-reserving-all-comment-on-other-pipelines-B.C. NDP -- the party whose energy critic has gone from being rightly cautious on fracking to full steam ahead, "Let's get fracking!"; the party with a nice, calm leader who wants to be fair and thoughtful instead of condemning lavish spending and calling for heads to roll; the party with the same old, same old Moe Sihota in charge. A political bedbug who you just can't get rid of. So we know the insiders are all the same, leaving much of B.C. in a moral and environmental dilemma that few care to approach for fear of splitting votes and letting the Libs win again.
With the NDP ramping up for 2013, leader Adrian Dix is riding around the province on a white horse, leading the charge to also -- this sounds familiar -- bring a transparent and accountable government to the people. The NDP smell victory already, and have begun campaigning in earnest in many parts of the province, completely ignoring the stench that trails both parties after the revelations of messy finances in the legislature.
However, there is a stark reality facing voters looking at the NDP, where the true financial situation of the province is going to greatly limit their impact in the legislature.
Expect the NDP to fix years of slice and dice Liberal-style closures and cuts to court services, family services, legal aid, education, healthcare, taxes? Not happening in three years in this province. They don't even know the full scope of all the contracts the Liberals signed, the many years of contractual obligations left owing on the provinces many P3s, nor will they have any idea until they get in power - and this is something they have already used as an excuse in the past. There is more than a little fallacious politicking going on in this camp as well.
With the Liberals a non-starter and the NDP likely taking a majority in the legislature, the dark horse in the race is the B.C. Conservative Party. Say what you will about grumpy old men, religious views kinda-sorta mixing with politic, with Enbridge looking more and more like a non-starter (the Cons fully support the project ) don't count them out of the race just yet.
In many areas of the province, voters really are more centre or centre right on some issues and centre left on others than a lot of readers might realize. In my hometown of Prince George, where Liberals have largely won for the last 10 years, many people are very hesitant to vote NDP, but won't vote Liberal again. That leaves just enough room for the Conservatives to ride up the middle if they play the right candidate and the right cards. And oddly enough, many people don't connect the federal party to the provincial one, which works in their favour.
B.C. Conservative leader John Cummins has remained largely silent, happy to sit back and let the Liberals and NDP jab each other, but strategically making smart moves when the NDP fail to jump on an opportunity to attack the Libs, and more importantly, when the NDP have found themselves on the defensive, as with the recent revelations regarding the messy and unprofessional accounting in the legislature. Cummins was immediately calling for resignations, and rightly so, while the NDP leader remained largely silent.
The question is will voters fall for any of it again, or will they look beyond all the fallacious politicking?
I hope they do. I think the people of B.C. are becoming more involved, and more informed than ever before. I think every political party has better think hard about what they claim, promise or otherwise present to the voters, who've been slapped around so much in the last 10 years voter malaise still might be a concern for parties.
With so much on the line economically and environmentally, the time has come for the people of British Columbia to stand up and demand they not be taken for granted any longer, demand stronger oaths of office, demand accountability and accept nothing less. It wasn't a political party who made this province what it is, it was the people. It has always been the people, and it always will be the people.
Politicians of every party across this great province would do well to remember that, because British Columbians are a powerful political force in their own right. Just look back at Fight HST to see how fierce we really are.]]>
