HST, B.C. not as easy to say no to Ottawa

[Topaz]

British Columbia may find that the contract with the Feds over the HST is for 5 years and if they break that contract they still would owe the Feds over 1 Billion. Now I see were the Feds were going to get the money to help pay off their Tory making debt. HST, increase EI premiums, maybe have a yard sale. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100829/national/hst_walking_away

[msj]

British Columbia may find that the contract with the Feds over the HST is for 5 years and if they break that contract they still would owe the Feds over 1 Billion. Now I see were the Feds were going to get the money to help pay off their Tory making debt. HST, increase EI premiums, maybe have a yard sale. http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/100829/national/hst_walking_away

You'll have to explain how the HST will help the federal CPC raise taxes and reduce the deficit.

The 5% federal portion is still being applied to the same items before July 1 as it is now after July 1.

The 7% provincial portion is the one that has changed: before July 1 the PST was charged on most items that were already charged the 5% GST and now, after July 1, the 7% portion of the HST is applied to almost all the items that the GST was applied for (with notable exceptions being motor fuel, child size clothing, books, and residential energy).

So, the feds aren't really getting any more tax revenue from the change over.

BC, yes, they are seeing an increase in tax revenue, albeit, not as great as some people think since most businesses now get the HST they pay back whereas before they paid PST and this was a cost of doing business.

I guess what I'm saying is that, once again, Topaz doesn't comprehend tax policy and anyone reading her nonsense should read it with a huge grain of salt.

[Topaz]

Ok, look at this way. If the Tories don't really gain anything financially by doing this than they will gain politically. How? By peeving off the Canadians in those two provinces, that when the elections comes up Harper is hoping those two will turn BLUE for the Conservatives, part of painting Canada blue. Just like having a majority in the Senate, Harper wants a majority in the provinces, hoping it leads to a majority in Ottawa and then Canadians will see the Tories secret agenda. I hope that voters in those two provinces will wake up and realize that THIS Conservative party is NOT the conservative party in the old days, its Alliance Reform undercover.

[ToadBrother]

Ok, look at this way. If the Tories don't really gain anything financially by doing this than they will gain politically. How? By peeving off the Canadians in those two provinces, that when the elections comes up Harper is hoping those two will turn BLUE for the Conservatives, part of painting Canada blue. Just like having a majority in the Senate, Harper wants a majority in the provinces, hoping it leads to a majority in Ottawa and then Canadians will see the Tories secret agenda. I hope that voters in those two provinces will wake up and realize that THIS Conservative party is NOT the conservative party in the old days, its Alliance Reform undercover.

In BC I don't think the Tories have taken a hit at all. Pretty much all the anger has been focused on the BC Liberals. Besides, this isn't a Tory policy. This has been a general policy of the Federal Government to try to get the provinces on board with the HST since Chretien's first term. So I'm not sure how you can legitimately blame the Tories for this one, other than that they have maintained a long standing Federal policy.

[Wilber]

In BC I don't think the Tories have taken a hit at all. Pretty much all the anger has been focused on the BC Liberals. Besides, this isn't a Tory policy. This has been a general policy of the Federal Government to try to get the provinces on board with the HST since Chretien's first term. So I'm not sure how you can legitimately blame the Tories for this one, other than that they have maintained a long standing Federal policy.

It may be long standing Federal policy but a lot of BC Tory MP's voted for something most of their constituents oppose. Time will tell if it hurts them at the poles.

Edited September 4, 2010 by Wilber

[Hazeleyes]

You'll have to explain how the HST will help the federal CPC raise taxes and reduce the deficit.

The 5% federal portion is still being applied to the same items before July 1 as it is now after July 1.

The 7% provincial portion is the one that has changed: before July 1 the PST was charged on most items that were already charged the 5% GST and now, after July 1, the 7% portion of the HST is applied to almost all the items that the GST was applied for (with notable exceptions being motor fuel, child size clothing, books, and residential energy).

So, the feds aren't really getting any more tax revenue from the change over.

BC, yes, they are seeing an increase in tax revenue, albeit, not as great as some people think since most businesses now get the HST they pay back whereas before they paid PST and this was a cost of doing business.

I guess what I'm saying is that, once again, Topaz doesn't comprehend tax policy and anyone reading her nonsense should read it with a huge grain of salt.

Harmonizing the sales tax will of course result in businesses saving an estimated 2 billion dollars I would imagine the grateful companies that benefit will show their gratitude to the party that engineered this transfer of wealth from the consumer to the corporations. Ironically this will include international corps who will move their profits out of Canada as quickly as possible. Mr Harper has given a whole new meaning to "standing up for canadians"

As far as BC goes documents have been released that show that the BC Finance Minister and the Priemier were aware before the election that discussions were underway on the HST before the election - a claim vehemantly denied by the BC Liberals up until now. You are right for BC to get out of the HST will cost us a whack of money but I think it will sink the BC LIberals and cost the conservatives seats in BC.

Edited September 6, 2010 by Hazeleyes

[ToadBrother]

Harmonizing the sales tax will of course result in businesses saving an estimated 2 billion dollars I would imagine the grateful companies that benefit will show their gratitude to the party that engineered this transfer of wealth from the consumer to the corporations.

Let's set something straight here. The businesses that benefit are those that have a lot of input credits. Some businesses, like restaurants, whose major costs are wages and non-taxable supplies ultimately do not benefit.

Ironically this will include international corps who will move their profits out of Canada as quickly as possible. Mr Harper has given a whole new meaning to "standing up for canadians"

Why do people keep blaming Harper when the Feds have been trying to push the HST since Chretien's first term? It isn't Harper, it's the Federal government's general policy for over fifteen years to harmonize provincial and federal sales taxes.

Beyond that, there are good arguments for consumption taxes. But for me, at least, the best argument is that the provincial PST is a monster of a tax, horrific to manage, expensive for both businesses and the government, with arcane and complex rules. The HST, on the other hand, is pretty damned simple. You take the HST you pay out in purchasing supplies, subtract that from the HST you collect from customers, and the difference is either sent off to the government (if you owe), or refunded to you (if you don't).

As far as BC goes documents have been released that show that the BC Finance Minister and the Priemier were aware before the election that discussions were underway on the HST before the election - a claim vehemantly denied by the BC Liberals up until now. You are right for BC to get out of the HST will cost us a whack of money but I think it will sink the BC LIberals and cost the conservatives seats in BC.

I haven't seen any hint of the Conservatives taking a hit over this. Harper has wisely not talked about it at all. They may be at risk if the Province seeks to get out of the agreement early, but the NDP are already signaling that they may wait the full five years so as to not have to pay back the Feds a whack of cash.

I suspect we'll see a version of what played out in Ottawa between 1991-93. The governing party will be horribly scarred by this, the Opposition will continue demanding the repeal. The governing party will keep hoping for the next two or three years that voters forget, but they won't and the government will be toppled, possibly in devastating fashion. It's even possible that a new party on the Right will rise (the BC Conservatives) and take enough seats to split the vote to really wallop the BC Liberals, reducing them to a pitiful rump of a handful of seats (just as happened to the PCs in 1993).

It's the next chapter where we get the rub. When the NDP do form a government (I think that's pretty much a given now, there's just no way I can see the BC Liberals recovering), the new Minister of Finance will meet with his senior staff and they'll let it out on the line just like Federal Finance staff most assuredly did for Paul Martin and explain that while the HST was politically dangerous, it is sound economics, far preferable in every possible way to the PST, and what's more it will cost an enormous amount of money to recreate the PST. The NDP, to protect itself from Vander Zalm's Armies of Righteous Indignation, will at the earliest opportunity drop the tax down to 5% to make our total HST 10%. People will be pissed off, but after a few years of HST and after having furiously punished the BC Liberals, they'll accept it.

In fact, I'm fairly certain the only reason the NDP are supporting Vander Zalm and Delaney is because they're going to encourage by any means possible the rise of the BC Conservative Party, hoping to emulate on the provincial level what amounted to a decade of Liberal rule at the Federal level.

I think once the full realization of just how much damage Campbell and Hansen have done to the BC Liberals fortunes, and just how much hard work since Gordon Wilson first resurrected the BC Liberal Party in the early 1990s, and Campbell's work to bring in the former Socreds to make the BC Liberals a viable candidate for forming a government in the mid and late 1990s, has been undone by this, they'll toss out Campbell on his ear.

I'll be surprised if Hansen makes it to the leadership review, and now that senior Liberal supporters like Scott Nelson, former mayor of Williams Lake, who was a major supporter of Gordon Campbell in the 1990s when the future Premier was solidifying his hold on power, are calling for Campbell to resign, that fix seems in. The rumors coming out of the party is that the leadership review will at best deliver Campbell support of somewhere like 50%, which will make his leadership untenable. He'll likely resign this November at the next party convention this November, stepping down in early 2011, and then there will be a leadership convention.

The problem for the BC Liberals, just as it was a huge problem for the BC NDP a decade ago when Glen Clark stepped down, is that most of the Cabinet, which is where you usually find the leadership hopefuls, has completely sullied itself. Colin Hansen, who was seen as a front-runner a couple of years ago, will probably be lucky to win his own riding, and I doubt very much he'll be running again in 2013. That leaves outsiders like former Finance Minister Carole Taylor, who has been making rude noises in Campbell's direction ever since she stepped down, or Dianne Watts, who I know a lot of BC Liberals would like to see in the top spot because she is completely unsullied at any level by the unpopular decisions of Campbell.

What amazes me is just how much like semi-intelligent sheep the BC LIberal caucus has behaved. They saw how not stomping on an arrogant leader wiped out the NDP, how blindly following him, at least publicly, so damaged the party in the eyes of the public that it lead to near extinction. Why would any MLA in the BC Liberal caucus wait this long to demand changes? Politicians really are among the most cowardly people around, and a lot of BC LIberal MLAs are going to pay the price for their cowardice. All it would have taken was for a majority of them to stand up in caucus and say "If you do this, we'll pounce you out of office." There's nothing more powerful than a caucus revolt.

Edited September 7, 2010 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

It may be long standing Federal policy but a lot of BC Tory MP's voted for something most of their constituents oppose. Time will tell if it hurts them at the poles.

Thus far all the anger has been directed at the BC Liberals. Where the trap could come for the Tories is if this or the next government requested to get out of the HST deal and the Feds made them pay back the money. In a way, the whole thing puts the Tories in a bit of a bind, but since the distance between a Federal Conservative and a BC Liberal is about as wide as a human hair, I wonder to some extent if a lot of BC Liberals who are also Federal Tories don't want to wipe out the Federal Party as what amounts to an ideologically-allied provincial party goes down the tubes. I suspect if BC asks to get out and there's still a Tory government in Ottawa will see easy terms.

If not, then yes, the Tories will suffer in BC.

[msj]

Ironically this will include international corps who will move their profits out of Canada as quickly as possible. Mr Harper has given a whole new meaning to "standing up for canadians"

Huh?

HST will reduce taxes for international corps doing business in BC.

Prior to the HST these corps would pay PST on many items at 7%.

After HST they now pay the 7% and get this back when they file their HST returns (either as a refund or it reduces the amount of HST they collected for the government); that is, most corps aren't really paying the HST.

Throw in the corporate tax rate reductions over the past 10 years (large corp. in 2000 in BC - 16.5% and Federal 29.1% to 2010 - BC 10.5% and Federal 18.2%) and they aren't leaving for tax reasons.

As far as BC goes documents have been released that show that the BC Finance Minister and the Priemier were aware before the election that discussions were underway on the HST before the election - a claim vehemantly denied by the BC Liberals up until now. You are right for BC to get out of the HST will cost us a whack of money but I think it will sink the BC LIberals and cost the conservatives seats in BC.

I doubt it's going to cost the federal CPC's seats. They are getting a pass on it.

Many in BC understand the reality of the tax but don't like how the BC Liberals brought it in.

They have 3 more years to climb out from under this and if Campbell retires in the next 12 to 18 months I think they will not be harmed at all.

As for the NDP - well, what are they going to do? Bring back the PST? Raise income taxes? Find other ways to kill businesses with taxes in BC?

I think it will take one more election cycle before the sour taste of the 1990's NDP is forgotten by enough people to allow them back in. I hope so, anyway.

[ToadBrother]

They have 3 more years to climb out from under this and if Campbell retires in the next 12 to 18 months I think they will not be harmed at all.

They have less than three, and I cannot imagine any situation under which they recover. The general consensus among political experts here in BC is that it is a political impossibility for the BC Liberals to form another government. The real question will be whether this collapse of the leadership and the bloodfest that we're already getting glimpses of will be so bad that they end up repeating what happened to the BC NDP in 2001.

Other potential problems come in the form of the BC Conservatives. If they can stay sane (not guaranteed yet, it seems) it is possible that they will split the vote on the right. The problem for the BC Liberals isn't all the angry NDPers, they'd be angry about something anyways, the problem for the BC Liberals are key Greater Vancouver, Fraser Valley and Interior ridings, the ridings that either moved to the BC Liberals after the Socred meltdown or moved to the now defunct BC Reform Party (which was where a lot of old Socreds ended up. The latter, in particular, are ripe for moving over the BC Liberals, and all it takes is ten or fifteen of those old Socred strongholds to switch over to the BC Conservatives and, from pure electoral arithmetic, it would be absolutely impossible for the BC Liberals to stay afloat.

What the next leader of the BC Liberals needs to do is not try to win the next election, which is what Dosanjh did during his brief tenure as Premier, but rather bolster the Socred base which has been key to the BC Liberals victories since 2001, to assure that they do not walk away in May 2013. If the next leader can be sane, and not delude themselves as Dosanjh did in 2001 and Kim Campbell did in Federal Parliament in 1993 into thinking there was any hope in hell that they weren't going to be punished badly for the misdeeds real and perceived of their predecessors, then the Liberals should be in shape to stage a comeback for 2017. But I think it's pure fantasy to imagine a scenario in which the BC Liberals can keep power in 2013.

As for the NDP - well, what are they going to do? Bring back the PST? Raise income taxes? Find other ways to kill businesses with taxes in BC?

If the BC Liberals don't do it first, they'll drop the provincial portion to 5%. They will likely try to find some other way to keep everybody happy, and they won't have to try that hard. I think the public appetite for destroying governments will likely be satiated by a BC Liberal defeat. The BC NDP will do what Chretien did once he got into power, break the promise, or try to find some way around it. Chretien survived not killing the GST quite handily, and not only that, his "solution", the HST, is what's haunting the BC LIberals today (talk about irony).

I think it will take one more election cycle before the sour taste of the 1990's NDP is forgotten by enough people to allow them back in. I hope so, anyway.

The sour taste is gone. The polls pretty much show the public doesn't really give a damn about the Glen Clark years. They're ancient history. Carole James is a completely different kind of leader than Clark was, a more moderate individual like Mike Harcourt, and less of a crazy big-mouthed ideologue. All she has to do is not say anything particularly stupid in between now and 2013, and she's got it in the bag.

The BC LIberals have, through the inept way they introduced the HST, essentially made everyone so mad that no one except for a few party stalwarts who seem to think that 1998 was just yesterday are really talking about it.

Edited September 7, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Pliny]

Since we already have a conservative party in BC masquerading as a liberal party - Toadbrother points to their difference as being as wide as a human hair, and I agree, what does the Conservative party under Delaney, have to offer?

I, as a businessman in BC, was surprised and quite disappointed in the BC Conservative party's support for keeping the PST. The HST will tend to attract business and investment in BC not move money out so, in my view, hazeleyes' anti-corporate statement makes no sense.

As for the Liberals future hopes I think, under current circumstances, Campbell and Hansen have to resign and if they do the Liberals, with any display of leadership, will prevail in the next election. The BC Conservative party aligned with the BC NDP????? - a good indication the BC Conservative party ain't going no where.

[Wilber]

No doubt the HST will make exporting companies more competitive but it is the BC consumer who will be taking up the slack by giving foreign consumers the benifit when it comes to BC products.

The second week in July my hound required life saving surgery. Prior to July one, PST was not charged on vet bills. The added provincial portion of the bill came to $160.00.

[ToadBrother]

Since we already have a conservative party in BC masquerading as a liberal party - Toadbrother points to their difference as being as wide as a human hair, and I agree, what does the Conservative party under Delaney, have to offer?

Well, let's look at it tactically. At the very least, they have a fair chance of grabbing the Socred wing of the BC LIberals. Remember, when Mike Harcourt's NDP won in 1991, they did in large part because the old Socred free enterprise coalition split, with the free enterprisers wandering over to the BC LIberals under Gordon Wilson and a lot of Socreds lining up behind Jack Weisgerber's (remember him) BC Reform Party. I even had a brother-in-law who was a Born Again Christian who thought Vander Zalm was the second coming of Christ who walked away from the Socreds and joined the BC Family Party.

The BC Liberals are in every bit as bad a shape as the Socreds were in their dying days. We're just not seeing the extent of it yet, but you wait until Campbell is pushed out, and you'll see just how big the divide between the two groups is. Like I've said, the next leader needs to get the coalition healthy again. If they try to win an election with blood still dripping from the infighting, the BC LIberals could follow the Socreds into oblivion. They could, at the very least, end up like the BC NDP did, boiled down to a pitiful and ineffective rump. It may even be necessary. No party should ever be in power too long. The way the HST was introduced is as good an example of how power breeds arrogance, and an arrogant government is a bad government.

I, as a businessman in BC, was surprised and quite disappointed in the BC Conservative party's support for keeping the PST. The HST will tend to attract business and investment in BC not move money out so, in my view, hazeleyes' anti-corporate statement makes no sense.

The BC Conservatives, like the BC NDP, for purely political reasons have to oppose the HST. Ironically, since at least the 2005 election, the BC Conservative platform included harmonization of the PST to the GST. But there's some amnesia about that one.

Let's put it bluntly, both the BC Conservatives and BC NDP are bullsh***ing everyone. But to say you're in favor of the HST right now is the electoral equivalent of putting a shotgun to your head and pulling the trigger.

As for the Liberals future hopes I think, under current circumstances, Campbell and Hansen have to resign and if they do the Liberals, with any display of leadership, will prevail in the next election. The BC Conservative party aligned with the BC NDP????? - a good indication the BC Conservative party ain't going no where.

I don't see how it's possible. There's no one out there who sees a BC Liberal victory in 2013. It's wishful thinking. The BC Liberals may have their hands full just staying together. Let's remember here that the post Gordon Wilson BC Liberals are a merger of Lower Mainland free enterprise types and Socreds. There is a real risk here, particularly with someone like Scott Nelson turning his back on Campbell, that the Socred wing may just walk. The next leader shouldn't even think about elections, he or she should think about how to keep this Free Enterprise-Socred Coalition for exploding. Campbell was a master at it, but he's gone, and with him will go that most critical aspect of his leadership. Frankly, I don't think we're looking at a renewed BC LIberal party going into 2013, I think we're looking at a tortured, divided and shrunken BC Liberal party crawling through the next election.

I'm not even sure why anyone thinks the BC Liberals should win. As I said above, no political party should ever hold power too long. It's unhealthy. The thought of having the same government for sixteen years just doesn't fit with my notion of renewal. The BC NDP will get their chance, and maybe James will prove a wiser leader than Clark (frankly, I think she is).

Edited September 7, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Pliny]

Well, let's look at it tactically. At the very least, they have a fair chance of grabbing the Socred wing of the BC LIberals. Remember, when Mike Harcourt's NDP won in 1991, they did in large part because the old Socred free enterprise coalition split, with the free enterprisers wandering over to the BC LIberals under Gordon Wilson and a lot of Socreds lining up behind Jack Weisgerber's (remember him) BC Reform Party. I even had a brother-in-law who was a Born Again Christian who thought Vander Zalm was the second coming of Christ who walked away from the Socreds and joined the BC Family Party.

The BC Liberals are in every bit as bad a shape as the Socreds were in their dying days. We're just not seeing the extent of it yet, but you wait until Campbell is pushed out, and you'll see just how big the divide between the two groups is. Like I've said, the next leader needs to get the coalition healthy again. If they try to win an election with blood still dripping from the infighting, the BC LIberals could follow the Socreds into oblivion. They could, at the very least, end up like the BC NDP did, boiled down to a pitiful and ineffective rump. It may even be necessary. No party should ever be in power too long. The way the HST was introduced is as good an example of how power breeds arrogance, and an arrogant government is a bad government.

The Liberals may very well follow the way of the Vander Zalm Socreds. I just moved to BC in '91 so didn't know too much about what was happening in BC politics. I thought the "Zam" was ok but was riding a few political blunders. I would never vote NDP. I don't care how long a government is in power and how arrogant they are, if NDP were the only option I would spoil my ballot first. Usually there are options.

The Liberals need new leadership I agree. If they can get behind a new leader without too much power wrangling and in house dissent they will have a few years to buy some votes and have people forget about Campbell - hopefully it won't cost a lot. But as you say they may not be able to overcome the bleeding from the infighting. If that happens then the NDP have a chance. The conservative party may make some headway on the name if they can come up with a conservative looking platform - but how will that be different form the Liberal platform when, as you point out, the difference between BC Liberals and conservatism is mainly just in the name?

The BC Conservatives, like the BC NDP, for purely political reasons have to oppose the HST. Ironically, since at least the 2005 election, the BC Conservative platform included harmonization of the PST to the GST. But there's some amnesia about that one.

The BC conservatives were idiots for wanting to purely seek political points. If leadership is needed anywhere it is with the Conservative party.

Let's put it bluntly, both the BC Conservatives and BC NDP are bullsh***ing everyone. But to say you're in favor of the HST right now is the electoral equivalent of putting a shotgun to your head and pulling the trigger.

I don't agree. People were hepped up about the blatant dishonesty of the Liberals in introducing it.

I understand why they would not want to bring it up as an election issue. It was a hot potato they wanted to keep in the oven, and serving it up early would have put some butter on the NDP plate.

Although it is beyond me why anyone would want to vote NDP under any circumstance.

I don't see how it's possible. There's no one out there who sees a BC Liberal victory in 2013. It's wishful thinking. The BC Liberals may have their hands full just staying together. Let's remember here that the post Gordon Wilson BC Liberals are a merger of Lower Mainland free enterprise types and Socreds. There is a real risk here, particularly with someone like Scott Nelson turning his back on Campbell, that the Socred wing may just walk. The next leader shouldn't even think about elections, he or she should think about how to keep this Free Enterprise-Socred Coalition for exploding. Campbell was a master at it, but he's gone, and with him will go that most critical aspect of his leadership. Frankly, I don't think we're looking at a renewed BC LIberal party going into 2013, I think we're looking at a tortured, divided and shrunken BC Liberal party crawling through the next election.

Possibly. I can see that happening in the absence of strong leadership.

I'm not even sure why anyone thinks the BC Liberals should win. As I said above, no political party should ever hold power too long. It's unhealthy. The thought of having the same government for sixteen years just doesn't fit with my notion of renewal. The BC NDP will get their chance, and maybe James will prove a wiser leader than Clark (frankly, I think she is).

Clark isn't much to compare against.

I remember the first day after the elections when the Liberals ousted the NDP. It was like BC opened for business. The difference in the atmosphere was dramatic.

[ToadBrother]

The Liberals may very well follow the way of the Vander Zalm Socreds. I just moved to BC in '91 so didn't know too much about what was happening in BC politics. I thought the "Zam" was ok but was riding a few political blunders. I would never vote NDP. I don't care how long a government is in power and how arrogant they are, if NDP were the only option I would spoil my ballot first. Usually there are options.

The "Zalm" was not okay. He was arrogant, run roughshod over anyone who disagreed with him, refused most advice and ran his party into the dirt. When poor old Rita Johnson took over, there wasn't much left save. That's one of the other delicious ironies of this, that a man who was so unpopular, responsible for the destruction of his own party, run out of office, is now suddenly a hero. Only in BC they say.

Now I don't think Campbell is a Vander Zalm, but he has become outrageously arrogant. Beyond that, for me, is the real problem here, which is that the 2009 pre-election budget was a Fudge-it Budget every bit as conniving and false as the NDP's Fudge-it Budgets were. In both cases, governments that had run substantial expenditures on big ticket items (the NDP with the Fast Cats and the new Island Highway, to name a couple) and the BC Liberals with the Olympics and all the massive transit expansions surrounding it, were suddenly faced with a severe recession (the NDP with the Asian Flu and the BC Liberals with the 2008 credit crash). Both feared, probably rightfully, that if the true extent of the government's revenue woes were revealed, there was a real chance they might lose the election over it. So both succumbed to temptation, inserting outrageously optimistic revenue projections.

I've been asking BC Liberal supporters for the last four years, ever since the Vancouver Convention Centre spending spiraled out of control and far exceeded the Fast Cats as a money pit, how it is exactly that they can justify the constant digs at the NDP over the Glen Clark years when the BC Liberals have been doing exactly the same thing. Now, with the 2009 Fudge-it Budget (conveniently tabled after all that balanced budget legislation that the BC Liberals had introduced eight years before with great fanfare had been suspended the previous fall), they've come full circle, inventing favorable revenue projections and hiding unpopular policies from the electorate.

Campbell has become no better than Clark. I argue that he never was. What filled the government coffers between 2003 and 2007 wasn't the sound financial management of the BC Liberals. Particularly after 2005 they were spending a lot of money. It was the same thing that fed the NDP's appetite for spending, a rebounded economy filling the coffers. And in both cases, the end of an economic cycle and the inevitable crash left them every bit as exposed, both fiscally and politically.

The Liberals need new leadership I agree. If they can get behind a new leader without too much power wrangling and in house dissent they will have a few years to buy some votes and have people forget about Campbell - hopefully it won't cost a lot.

But it's really too late for that, just as it was too late for Dosanjh, and it was too late for Kim Campbell. In the other two cases, the governments' policies were too unpopular, the perception of arrogance and incompetence too ingrained. And Dosanjh didn't even have to worry about the Delaney-Vander Zalm collective. These guys aren't playing the game to get Carol James into the Premier's office. They're playing the game to replace the BC Liberals. I doubt they expect to win in 2013, they're eyes are set on 2017. Vander Zalm, in my opinion, wants nothing less than to resuscitate the Social Credit Party, in spirit if not in name via the BC Conservative Party. And if he and Delaney can convince enough of the old Socred guard to come onboard, the BC Liberals are hosed.

But as you say they may not be able to overcome the bleeding from the infighting. If that happens then the NDP have a chance. The conservative party may make some headway on the name if they can come up with a conservative looking platform - but how will that be different form the Liberal platform when, as you point out, the difference between BC Liberals and conservatism is mainly just in the name?

Politics is about perception. It's irrelevant at this point what their platform looks like. What matters is that they won't be the BC Liberals. The issue here isn't restoring the BC Liberals, the issue is that the party name itself may have become so toxic that a lot of candidates, particularly the more right-wing ones, may just float over to Delaney and Vander Zalm's camp. How exactly you prevent is hard to say, but it won't be strong leadership as much as basically blaming everything on Campbell and doing lots of mea culpas.

The BC conservatives were idiots for wanting to purely seek political points. If leadership is needed anywhere it is with the Conservative party.

Idiots? Maybe. But the biggest idiots I see right now are the BC Liberal caucus, who haven't already gave Campbell an ultimatum to get out.

I have no idea whether the BC Conservatives will pull it off. They're a pretty divided lot themselves. The BC Liberals only hope to not end up like the BC NDP were in 2001 is that the BC Conservatives never jell.

I don't agree. People were hepped up about the blatant dishonesty of the Liberals in introducing it.

I understand why they would not want to bring it up as an election issue. It was a hot potato they wanted to keep in the oven, and serving it up early would have put some butter on the NDP plate.

Although it is beyond me why anyone would want to vote NDP under any circumstance.

The people who signed that petition were not just ticked about the introduction of the tax, they want it gone. You're misreading, maybe because you want to believe that the electorate is, as a group, smarter than they are. For the record, I think the HST is a good thing. I also think the electorate is going to beat the BC Liberals into the ground no matter what happens. I'm saying if the BC Liberals want to even exist as an electoral force in 2017, they need to realize that 2013 is a lost cause, and not do stupid things like Dosanjh did, make-believing that somehow they can make the electorate forget about the previous leader.

Possibly. I can see that happening in the absence of strong leadership.

The BC Liberals have strong leadership now. Strong leadership that has overawed the caucus's sensibilities. What's going to be needed is a lot of diplomacy, and a lot of handwringing.

Clark isn't much to compare against.

I remember the first day after the elections when the Liberals ousted the NDP. It was like BC opened for business. The difference in the atmosphere was dramatic.

That day is gone, and it wasn't that great either. It took a recovery the markets to put as back on an even keel, and once that happened, the floodgates of public spending were opened up just in time for the 2005 election.

The BC Liberals really are no better than the BC NDP. Well, right now, they're a lot worse.

[Wilber]

As for the Liberals future hopes I think, under current circumstances, Campbell and Hansen have to resign and if they do the Liberals, with any display of leadership, will prevail in the next election. The BC Conservative party aligned with the BC NDP????? - a good indication the BC Conservative party ain't going no where.

Who is going to volunteer to be Kim Campbell? Unless James does something really dumb, I think the Liberals will be toast in the next election no matter who is leading. It's not just Campbell and Hansen, a lot of people are pissed at their MLA's who have have done nothing but parrot the party line on this issue.

[Pliny]

The "Zalm" was not okay. He was arrogant, run roughshod over anyone who disagreed with him, refused most advice and ran his party into the dirt. When poor old Rita Johnson took over, there wasn't much left save. That's one of the other delicious ironies of this, that a man who was so unpopular, responsible for the destruction of his own party, run out of office, is now suddenly a hero. Only in BC they say.

Yep. Only in BC. One thing is right. Vander Zalm ran the party into the ground.

Now I don't think Campbell is a Vander Zalm, but he has become outrageously arrogant. Beyond that, for me, is the real problem here, which is that the 2009 pre-election budget was a Fudge-it Budget every bit as conniving and false as the NDP's Fudge-it Budgets were. In both cases, governments that had run substantial expenditures on big ticket items (the NDP with the Fast Cats and the new Island Highway, to name a couple) and the BC Liberals with the Olympics and all the massive transit expansions surrounding it, were suddenly faced with a severe recession (the NDP with the Asian Flu and the BC Liberals with the 2008 credit crash). Both feared, probably rightfully, that if the true extent of the government's revenue woes were revealed, there was a real chance they might lose the election over it. So both succumbed to temptation, inserting outrageously optimistic revenue projections.

Maybe....perception is everything as you say. I perceived there was little economic growth under the NDP and their priorities were skewed. Under the Liberals the economy grew and the global economic collapse was hardly felt here in BC. The Liberals sidestepped some of the fallout from that.

They were however overspending in my view and I agree inserted optimistic revenue projections.

Campbell was humbled somewhat by his personal problems in Hawaii with a DUI but managed to ride that one out. His management changed somewhat, for the worse in my view, after that and he never fully recovered.

The media has never painted him in a positive light and he seems to just be the party choice that isn't the NDP. Clark really dumped the NDP in the toilet and people weren't doing well - a very sluggish economy AND no apparent reason for it. With China opening up we should have been positioned to be booming. We weren't.

I've been asking BC Liberal supporters for the last four years, ever since the Vancouver Convention Centre spending spiraled out of control and far exceeded the Fast Cats as a money pit, how it is exactly that they can justify the constant digs at the NDP over the Glen Clark years when the BC Liberals have been doing exactly the same thing. Now, with the 2009 Fudge-it Budget (conveniently tabled after all that balanced budget legislation that the BC Liberals had introduced eight years before with great fanfare had been suspended the previous fall), they've come full circle, inventing favorable revenue projections and hiding unpopular policies from the electorate.

The overall state of the economy is the difference and the priorities. The Vancouver Convention Centre left us with something the fast cats left us with nothing, nada, zip and sat as a monument just south of the Vander Zalm Fantasy Gardens.

Campbell has become no better than Clark. I argue that he never was. What filled the government coffers between 2003 and 2007 wasn't the sound financial management of the BC Liberals. Particularly after 2005 they were spending a lot of money. It was the same thing that fed the NDP's appetite for spending, a rebounded economy filling the coffers. And in both cases, the end of an economic cycle and the inevitable crash left them every bit as exposed, both fiscally and politically.

If the NDP had continued the economy would not have rebounded. The population of BC under them dropped by 10,000 with people moving out of the province and earned have-not status for the first time in history. That was an inexcusable state of affairs.

But it's really too late for that, just as it was too late for Dosanjh, and it was too late for Kim Campbell. In the other two cases, the governments' policies were too unpopular, the perception of arrogance and incompetence too ingrained. And Dosanjh didn't even have to worry about the Delaney-Vander Zalm collective. These guys aren't playing the game to get Carol James into the Premier's office. They're playing the game to replace the BC Liberals. I doubt they expect to win in 2013, they're eyes are set on 2017. Vander Zalm, in my opinion, wants nothing less than to resuscitate the Social Credit Party, in spirit if not in name via the BC Conservative Party. And if he and Delaney can convince enough of the old Socred guard to come onboard, the BC Liberals are hosed.

This is internal political wrangling and with power draining from the Liberals it is spilling into the public domain.

Politics is about perception. It's irrelevant at this point what their platform looks like. What matters is that they won't be the BC Liberals. The issue here isn't restoring the BC Liberals, the issue is that the party name itself may have become so toxic that a lot of candidates, particularly the more right-wing ones, may just float over to Delaney and Vander Zalm's camp. How exactly you prevent is hard to say, but it won't be strong leadership as much as basically blaming everything on Campbell and doing lots of mea culpas.

It IS about perception and as long as people are doing ok they don't give a crap about politics.

The media hypes up what it can for controversy and certain special interests such as Unions, the Teachers Federation, and other traditional NDP support may whip it up when they smell blood but I don't think they have much support when the private sector is pinched and they are making demands and are unwilling to make any concessions. The global economy is perceived to be the primary reason for any downward trend, not the Liberals. Most are just happy we aren't totally in the tank.

Idiots? Maybe. But the biggest idiots I see right now are the BC Liberal caucus, who haven't already gave Campbell an ultimatum to get out.

I have no idea whether the BC Conservatives will pull it off. They're a pretty divided lot themselves. The BC Liberals only hope to not end up like the BC NDP were in 2001 is that the BC Conservatives never jell.

I hear Scott Nelson is calling for Campbell's head. He'll be on the radio this morning doing that.

The people who signed that petition were not just ticked about the introduction of the tax, they want it gone. You're misreading, maybe because you want to believe that the electorate is, as a group, smarter than they are. For the record, I think the HST is a good thing. I also think the electorate is going to beat the BC Liberals into the ground no matter what happens. I'm saying if the BC Liberals want to even exist as an electoral force in 2017, they need to realize that 2013 is a lost cause, and not do stupid things like Dosanjh did, make-believing that somehow they can make the electorate forget about the previous leader.

I don't think people are that interested in politics. They are doing alright. Certain interest groups like the Restaurateurs Association, and the NDP railed about the dishonesty of the Liberals and not without reason - since they were caught in a blatant lie.

When people become interested in politics is when they aren't doing well. They know politicians are politicians and don't particularly pay attention to the spin when the economy is doing ok.

It's a different scenario than the Glen Clark and Kim Campbell fiasco's. If we were doing well economically the NDP wouldn't have been driven to two seats and the Conservatives under Kim Campbell wouldn't have been driven to two seats federally.

The anger of the public was real in those two instances and not media driven. The mistakes of the Campbell Liberals are directed at Campbell personally not the liberal party and there isn't the devastating economy that both Clark and Kim Campbell seemed incapable of seeing were the result of the policies of their respective parties.

The BC Liberals have strong leadership now. Strong leadership that has overawed the caucus's sensibilities. What's going to be needed is a lot of diplomacy, and a lot of handwringing.

Gordon Campbell made some poor political decisions that affect the perception of him as a leader. He didn't make decisions that ruined the economy and try to make it seem that all was well and continuing to bumble along was the best option.

That day is gone, and it wasn't that great either. It took a recovery the markets to put as back on an even keel, and once that happened, the floodgates of public spending were opened up just in time for the 2005 election.

You see, a recovery of the markets would not have occurred under Clark. We would have continued to be a have-not province and people would have continued leaving the province.

The BC Liberals really are no better than the BC NDP. Well, right now, they're a lot worse.

Well, BC has special interests that are very politically influential so for me these make politics in BC unpredictable. If I left it to just the mood of the electorate I would say people are fairly content with the state of the province. Those interest groups can sway public opinion and foster a mood for change. If there were an election tomorrow it would be fairly easy to predict an NDP surge just to teach the Liberals a lesson but in a few years there will be other issues - Campbell will have to be gone though if they want a majority.

You being a close follower of the political scene in BC, I don't know how involved you are but you closely watch the political machinery. The electorate doesn't and they are quite fickle. They will remember a lot longer when they had a hard time and not remember when Gordon Campbell had a hard time.

[Pliny]

Who is going to volunteer to be Kim Campbell? Unless James does something really dumb, I think the Liberals will be toast in the next election no matter who is leading. It's not just Campbell and Hansen, a lot of people are pissed at their MLA's who have have done nothing but parrot the party line on this issue.

You could be correct but as I said to Toadbrother, you are looking at people being pissed at their MLA's for parroting the party line which is a political problem. It isn't a social or economic problem for the majority. The HST is a problem for some negatively affected by it and those special interests have driven the public outrage and tried to make it look like the end of the world for the province. In reality, the Restaurateurs of BC have had a tax break that other provincial economies have been paying for years - that's one special interest group. The NDP of course are just rubbing salt in the wounds along with the backing of the BCTF and Unions.

I may be surprised at how the next election turns out but we'll see. It'll depend not so much on the affairs and faux pas' of the Liberal party, unless they are totally corrupt as happened to Chretien and the Federal Liberals, but on the state of the economy.

[ToadBrother]

Maybe....perception is everything as you say. I perceived there was little economic growth under the NDP and their priorities were skewed. Under the Liberals the economy grew and the global economic collapse was hardly felt here in BC. The Liberals sidestepped some of the fallout from that.

Then you're memory is faulty. During the first years of the NDP government, particularly under Harcourt, BC witnessed considerable economic growth, not to mention net population growth too, with both an increase in immigration from outside Canada and from abroad (remember the famous Hong Kong exodus to Vancouver?)

They were however overspending in my view and I agree inserted optimistic revenue projections.

It was a fudge-it budget, precisely the same tactic used by Glen Clark's government.

Campbell was humbled somewhat by his personal problems in Hawaii with a DUI but managed to ride that one out. His management changed somewhat, for the worse in my view, after that and he never fully recovered.

I didn't notice much of a difference. I always thought the DUI, apart from stupidity on Campbell's part, was a non-issue.

The media has never painted him in a positive light and he seems to just be the party choice that isn't the NDP. Clark really dumped the NDP in the toilet and people weren't doing well - a very sluggish economy AND no apparent reason for it. With China opening up we should have been positioned to be booming. We weren't.

Blaming the media now? That's what the NDP did in their turn, and that's what the Socreds did in their turn. The media didn't do any of it, other than the fact that the three successive governments have provided journalists with a delicious array of scandals and missteps. Come on, you're better than that. The media didn't screw the BC Liberals up, the BC Liberals did.

The overall state of the economy is the difference and the priorities. The Vancouver Convention Centre left us with something the fast cats left us with nothing, nada, zip and sat as a monument just south of the Vander Zalm Fantasy Gardens.

The Vancouver Convention Centre was vastly overpriced, will likely take decades to make its money back, and is much more of a white elephant than the Fast Cats were. In both cases, the problem was a government far to eager to use public money for pet projects. Campbell's a Vancouver man and just loves to dump money into the Lower Mainland.

If the NDP had continued the economy would not have rebounded.

That's an absurd statement. The economy of British Columbia is almost totally dependent on foreign markets. No provincial government has control over global markets.

The population of BC under them dropped by 10,000 with people moving out of the province and earned have-not status for the first time in history. That was an inexcusable state of affairs.

We had an on-fire economy in the early and mid-1990s because the Asian Tigers were spending like drunken sailors, that is until the bottom fell out. Our economy, for better and for worse, is pretty much dominated by commodity prices, which we have nothing to do with.

The media hypes up what it can for controversy and certain special interests such as Unions, the Teachers Federation, and other traditional NDP support may whip it up when they smell blood but I don't think they have much support when the private sector is pinched and they are making demands and are unwilling to make any concessions. The global economy is perceived to be the primary reason for any downward trend, not the Liberals. Most are just happy we aren't totally in the tank.

This reads like some sort of apologetic for the Liberal party, and it's kind of sad, because it's exactly the same excuses used by the BC NDP in its dying days. I guess there really is only one script for political failure of a government.

I hear Scott Nelson is calling for Campbell's head. He'll be on the radio this morning doing that.

It's pretty damaging, Nelson being Campbell's major cheerleader in rural BC.

I don't think people are that interested in politics. They are doing alright. Certain interest groups like the Restaurateurs Association, and the NDP railed about the dishonesty of the Liberals and not without reason - since they were caught in a blatant lie.

Why is it when someone is opposed to the HST they are a special interest?

It's a different scenario than the Glen Clark and Kim Campbell fiasco's. If we were doing well economically the NDP wouldn't have been driven to two seats and the Conservatives under Kim Campbell wouldn't have been driven to two seats federally.

The economy isn't doing well. Let's face it, the BC Liberals are in serious trouble, and all the wishful thinking won't change that. The public have turned away from them.

The anger of the public was real in those two instances and not media driven. The mistakes of the Campbell Liberals are directed at Campbell personally not the liberal party and there isn't the devastating economy that both Clark and Kim Campbell seemed incapable of seeing were the result of the policies of their respective parties.

More blaming the media. Pretty pathetic.

Gordon Campbell made some poor political decisions that affect the perception of him as a leader. He didn't make decisions that ruined the economy and try to make it seem that all was well and continuing to bumble along was the best option.

He lied about revenue projections. If it was wrong for the NDP to do it, why is it okay for the Liberals? And again, the reason in both 1997-98 and 2008-2009 for the economic woes was international markets. While the BC Liberals did tame government to some degree, by and large after 2005 they reversed course and spent and spent and spent and spent.

You see, a recovery of the markets would not have occurred under Clark. We would have continued to be a have-not province and people would have continued leaving the province.

Glen Clark controlled the international markets? What is he, Superman?

Come on, Pliny. I won't defend the NDP's management style, particularly under Glen Clark, and government did need to be reigned in, but the markets not recovering under another NDP government? We must be talking about two different markets, because the only market that matters to BC is the one beyond our borders that we ship out our commodities to.

Well, BC has special interests that are very politically influential so for me these make politics in BC unpredictable. If I left it to just the mood of the electorate I would say people are fairly content with the state of the province. Those interest groups can sway public opinion and foster a mood for change. If there were an election tomorrow it would be fairly easy to predict an NDP surge just to teach the Liberals a lesson but in a few years there will be other issues - Campbell will have to be gone though if they want a majority.

Ah, I see. So the electorate are sheep who just follow the loudest voice?

You being a close follower of the political scene in BC, I don't know how involved you are but you closely watch the political machinery. The electorate doesn't and they are quite fickle. They will remember a lot longer when they had a hard time and not remember when Gordon Campbell had a hard time.

They will remember Gordon Campbell long after Campbell is gone. The BC Liberals will not win the next election, not even if they had Jesus Christ as leader.

[Bonam]

They will remember Gordon Campbell long after Campbell is gone. The BC Liberals will not win the next election, not even if they had Jesus Christ as leader.

What? This is nonsense, the liberals in BC have a very good chance of winning the next election. The HST thing will be mostly forgotten, especially as the economy continues to recover over the following couple of years. BC was hit very mildly if at all by the recession. Much of your post, that BC's economy is controlled by commodity prices, is less and less true. Tourism, service, and technology are larger and larger industries and forestry is becoming less and less significant in BC. Also, you underestimate how much fear and resentment BC voters still have at the NDP, over issues like the fast ferries, the Glen Clark budget controversy, and how much blame is still assigned to the NDP for economic problems in that time period.

Oh and by the way, I'd much rather vote for Campbell again than Jesus Christ.

Edited September 7, 2010 by Bonam

[Wilber]

What? This is nonsense, the liberals in BC have a very good chance of winning the next election. The HST thing will be mostly forgotten, especially as the economy continues to recover over the following couple of years. BC was hit very mildly if at all by the recession. Much of your post, that BC's economy is controlled by commodity prices, is less and less true. Tourism, service, and technology are larger and larger industries and forestry is becoming less and less significant in BC. Also, you underestimate how much fear and resentment BC voters still have at the NDP, over issues like the fast ferries, the Glen Clark budget controversy, and how much blame is still assigned to the NDP for economic problems in that time period.

Oh and by the way, I'd much rather vote for Campbell again than Jesus Christ.

I disagree, I think the HST issue will not go away for the Liberals and they have their own fudged budget, BC Rail and huge convention center cost over runs, etc to come back on them as well. The HST is their Fast Cat fiasco. The Liberals have become guilty of the same hubris as was formerly attached to the Clark NDP. As far as the economy being more diversified is concerned, tourism and service are the industries most adversely effected by the HST. HST takes the portion of the consumption tax (PST) that used to be paid by manufacturing and other business and transfers it to services that were not taxed before.

By the way, unlike some others I will not reward those who blatantly lie to me with my vote. Particularly those who are arrogant enough to assume I am too apathetic to do anything about it. I would spoil my ballot first.

[Bonam]

I disagree, I think the HST issue will not go away for the Liberals and they have their own fudged budget, BC Rail and huge convention center cost over runs, etc to come back on them as well. The HST is their Fast Cat fiasco.

Nah it'll be just like the carbon tax. Was supposed to be a big issue but now more or less totally forgotten. Anyway, it's not like the NDP would repeal either tax.

The Liberals have become guilty of the same hubris as was formerly attached to the Clark NDP. As far as the economy being more diversified is concerned, tourism and service are the industries most adversely effected by the HST. HST takes the portion of the consumption tax (PST) that used to be paid by manufacturing and other business and transfers it to services that were not taxed before.

Right, so we're gonna be taxing the industries that are growing and prospering anyway rather than continuing to deal the death blow to industries that are receding as is.

By the way, unlike some others I will not reward those who blatantly lie to me with my vote. Particularly those who are arrogant enough to assume I am too apathetic to do anything about it. I would spoil my ballot first.

Fair enough. In my case, I'd rather take the opportunity to pick the lesser of the available evils rather than throw away the vote completely. The NDP to my mind are still the greater evil in BC. Would be interesting if the BC Conservative party actually existed in any meaningful sense...

Oh and actually there are a few instances where I was really surprised by the extent to which the government stood by promises made, even by much earlier governments. For example the removal of the toll from the Coquihalla highway. As a frequent outdoor traveler, that was a very welcome change and certainly bought the liberals points in my book. It also set a precedent that maybe we can actually believe the government when they say that the tolls on the bridges now being replaced/constructed will not be permanent.

Edited September 7, 2010 by Bonam

[ToadBrother]

What? This is nonsense, the liberals in BC have a very good chance of winning the next election. The HST thing will be mostly forgotten, especially as the economy continues to recover over the following couple of years.

I doubt that very much. This is no longer about the economy, or really even about the tax.

BC was hit very mildly if at all by the recession. Much of your post, that BC's economy is controlled by commodity prices, is less and less true. Tourism, service, and technology are larger and larger industries and forestry is becoming less and less significant in BC. Also, you underestimate how much fear and resentment BC voters still have at the NDP, over issues like the fast ferries, the Glen Clark budget controversy, and how much blame is still assigned to the NDP for economic problems in that time period.

Then explain polling figures that show the NDP beating the BC Liberals hands down. And if we can use history, both of the NDP and the Socreds, and I think we can, the BC Liberals have already poisoned the well.

This is an narrative invented by BC Liberal supporters, more to the point to help them sleep at night. But on the ground, the anger that a lot of Liberal MLAs are feeling suggests that this isn't just a blow-over thing. That was the theory during much of 2009 and into early 2010, that the voters would forget it, that the NDP was still the scary monster on the bed. If it was going to just blow over, it would have done so already, but it hasn't, and it's not even the only thing playing into the NDP's hands. There's the real risk of a split in the ranks, which is what wiped out the Socreds in 1993 much (and, on the other side of the spectrum, the rise of the Green Party split the NDP vote and delivered all but two seats to the BC Liberals in 2001).

Look, I'm not saying these things because I'm particularly fond of an NDP government. I'm saying because, well, it's a simple reality. People were saying precisely the same thing as you on the NDP side after Glen Clark's fall, that everyone would remember how awful and chaotic the later Socred years were, that they'd remember that despite the stumbles the NDP was sweet and cuddly and wonderful. They even thought a new leader would buy them the good will. It didn't work, because while it's true to a point that voters have short memories, there is a threshold that you can reach that, once you're there, the voters just stop listening.

That happened the minute the petition drive began.

I don't think you really have much of a notion of just how profoundly unpopular the BC Liberals are, even in ridings in the Lower Mainland and Fraser Valley which wouldn't vote NDP if they had guns to their heads. These are the ridings, and a number of key Interior ridings, where a third party has a real chance of succeeding, and where, if BC Liberal MLAs don't start giving their constituents answers they're willing and ready to accept, that's exactly what will happen.

All the NDP has to do at this point is do a bit of flame fanning, and it's not even that hard, the BC Liberals seem to be doing most of that themselves. Carol James just has to sit back and watch as infighting creates internal chaos as Campbell's leadership crumbles, and while Delaney and Vander Zalm, possibly using this new Unity Party (the BC Conservatives being to schizophrenic to be much of a vehicle, I think) as a new right-of-center alternative.

This is like an early Christmas present for the NDP. It's exactly the same situation that delivered them power in 1993. The right-of-center party in tatters, it's leadership discredited, the obvious heirs to the throne too sullied to throw their hats in the ring. The potential of a third party to appear out of almost nowhere to bulldoze whatever hopes the right-of-center party had of staying in the race, let alone winning. Heck, who the hell even knew who the BC Liberals were in 1992 while Gordon Wilson was quietly building a party machine that in fact has served the party very well ever since? This Unity Party, with Delaney and Vander Zalm at the helm, already has much more exposure than Wilson and the BC Liberals did when they burst on to the scene during the 1993 election and pretty much destroyed the Socreds.

BC voters are an incredibly fickle lot, as you will soon realize. They've trashed parties a number of times over the provinces's history, and they'll do it again. Like I said, if I was the next BC Liberal leader I wouldn't be fighting the game as if I could keep the party in power, I'd be fighting the game not to repeat the history of electoral destruction that has typified BC politics over the last twenty years.

Edited September 7, 2010 by ToadBrother

[ToadBrother]

Nah it'll be just like the carbon tax. Was supposed to be a big issue but now more or less totally forgotten. Anyway, it's not like the NDP would repeal either tax.

The situations really are not comparable. The carbon tax was an issue for about fifteen minutes, and quickly faded. More to the point, it was in fact a policy not all that unpopular with elements of the NDP and the Greens, meaning it didn't have the legs. The NDP's ability to protest it was as hampered by the environmental wing of the party and by fears of alieanting the NDP vote that was still turning to the Greens. The HST poses no such problem for the NDP. Opposing it does not alienate anybody in the party, nor does alienate any fence-sitters who might vote Green. Apples and oranges.

The HST has been a boil on the BC Liberal's arse since June 2009, and not only has it not faded, it's got even worse. Just how many times do you BC Liberal supporters keep thinking you can say "It will fade" before you realize that hoping for voter amnesia no longer is a strategy that is going to work?

Edited September 7, 2010 by ToadBrother

[Wilber]

Nah it'll be just like the carbon tax. Was supposed to be a big issue but now more or less totally forgotten. Anyway, it's not like the NDP would repeal either tax.

Not so, the HST issue continues to grow and government ratings continue to plummet. What the Liberals can't seem to grasp is the more they persist with the lie that they weren't considering the HST before the election and didn't know how far they were off with their budget claims, the more insulted and pissed people are getting. Exactly the same process as did in Clark's government.

ToadBrother is right, this is not so much about a tax as a governments credibility. This one has none, people are just tuning them out.

Right, so we're gonna be taxing the industries that are growing and prospering anyway rather than continuing to deal the death blow to industries that are receding as is.

Yet one of the quickest ways to stop an industry growing and prospering is to over tax it in the first place.

Fair enough. In my case, I'd rather take the opportunity to pick the lesser of the available evils rather than throw away the vote completely. The NDP to my mind are still the greater evil in BC. Would be interesting if the BC Conservative party actually existed in any meaningful sense...

A vote lost to a party is a vote thrown away. Voters do not need to vote NDP for the Liberals to lose, they just need to not vote Liberal.

Oh and actually there are a few instances where I was really surprised by the extent to which the government stood by promises made, even by much earlier governments. For example the removal of the toll from the Coquihalla highway. As a frequent outdoor traveler, that was a very welcome change and certainly bought the liberals points in my book. It also set a precedent that maybe we can actually believe the government when they say that the tolls on the bridges now being replaced/constructed will not be permanent.

Yes, right before an election if I remember correctly and only if you use the Coquihalla a lot. They also substantially increased provincial park fees and added HST to campsite reservation fees which were already three times as much as Washington State for a stay of three days or more and which uses exactly the same reservation system as BC. Not so good if you are a frequent outdoor traveler.