Tag Archives: Politics

Rafe on NDP Leadership Win for Adrian Dix

Share

What are we to make of the NDP selection of Adrian Dix as their leader?

For one thing, leaders are not selected by the media or pundits. At least not with the provincial Liberals or NDP.

My first reaction to Adrian Dix’s choice was pretty glum. For the past 10 years the NDP have been moving towards the centre into a position where it could start getting traditional Liberal votes. Mr. Dix, on form, seems to be taking the NDP back to the days of Dave Barrett. Glee in the Liberal camp was unrestrained based upon the fact that the NDP could now be seen as a fairly bright coloured red – the “socialists” would be there to kick around. I believe, on reflection, that may be an exaggeration.

From the point of view of the Common Sense Canadian all three leadership candidates were sound on the environment and private power. But if they can’t get elected what does that matter?

But who says that they can’t win?

Premier Clark must still make decisions on the BC Rail Scandal, the environment and energy. These will be issues impossible to avoid. If nothing else, BC Rail will raise itself as soon as one Liberal accuses Dix of scandalous behaviour in doctoring a memo while trying to pull a hot chestnut out of the fire for the earlier Premier Clark. In fact Dix might be wise to raise the issue himself saying I made a dumb mistake but I’ve made a full confession – now it’s up to you Premier Clark II to do the same by opening up the IPP contracts and coming clean on BC Hydro.

The Liberals will paint Dix as being bad for business – but does that matter if he has good policies for small business? Do voters like being screwed by Big Business? In my day, admittedly a century ago, one could not go wrong by bashing Big Business and Big Labour. Now, of course, the NDP must avoid angering Labour but if Mr. Dix understands that Big Labour doesn’t lend itself to great support on the ground for the NDP and he can play to that while skating the fine line between that and Labour leadership, he might be able to do something that the NDP have always had trouble with: getting the blue collar worker.

We at the Common Sense Canadian retain our stated policy: we will support candidates who will stop the destruction of BC Hydro by Independent Power Producers and the destruction of our environment.

What about third parties, namely the BC Firsters and the Tories?

Given time, the BC First Party could do some serious damage. But they aren’t going to get time – look for an election in June, September at the latest, Chris Delaney has spent too much time hand in hand with Bill Vander Zalm and John Cummins inherits right wing nuts. Both these two parties could hurt the Liberals if they had their ducks in a row – but they haven’t. Too late to the game and no money for tickets anyway.

Share

Dix Clinches Leadership of BC NDP

Share

From the Globe & Mail – April 17, 2011

by Ian Bailey & Justine Hunter

B.C. New Democrats have selected Adrian Dix as their new leader,
embracing his agenda to reach out to disaffected voters as the key to
defeating Liberal Premier Christy Clark in a provincial election that
could come as early as this fall.

The second-term MLA and onetime chief of staff under former NDP premier
Glen Clark mapped out an agenda to raise taxes on banks and big
corporations to finance social programs – an approach he said will
sharply define the party from its Liberal rivals. He narrowly defeated
Mike Farnworth, who had offered a more centrist vision for leadership,
with 9,772 votes to Mr. Farnworth’s 9,095.

In a campaign that was framed around which candidate would have the best
chance of ending the NDP’s decade-long shutout from government, the MLA
for Vancouver-Kingsway said his plan would lure back to the ballot box
the 1.4 million B.C. voters who sat out the past provincial election.

Although Mr. Farnworth was regarded as the unity candidate, Mr. Dix promised to offer key roles to his fellow candidates.

“It’s time to get down to work and defeat the B.C. Liberals,” Mr. Dix told cheering delegates after the final outcome.

After some words about party unity, he swiftly went on the attack on Ms.
Clark’s record, particularly on education and child protection.

“They are going to try to win the election on personality,” he said. He
promised a positive – and very different – agenda. “We are going to
bring change to British Columbia.”

The province is not due for a general election until the spring of 2013,
according to the fixed-date election law. However, Ms. Clark, who won
her party’s leadership in February, has floated the idea of an early
vote to earn a mandate from the province.

Mr. Farnworth has consistently topped public-opinion polls as the
candidate best positioned to challenge the Liberals, but New Democrats
found more appeal in Mr. Dix’s sharply partisan rhetoric.

The three-month-long campaign ended on a night when many B.C. voters
were wrapped up in a different contest – the third Stanley Cup playoff
game for the hometown Vancouver Canucks. The game was carried on large
screens in the convention hall in between rounds of voting.

With just about 800 delegates in the room, most party members – around
18,000 – had cast their ballots in advance polling by telephone or via
the Internet.

Another 1,832 delegates voted on Sunday. On the first ballot, Mr. Dix
was leading over Mr. Farnworth by a little more than 600 votes – less
than 4 per cent of the ballots cast. Mr. Dix had 7,638 votes and Mr.
Farnworth, 6,979.

John Horgan was in third place in the first round, with 4,844 votes,
while marijuana activist Dana Larsen garnered just 531 votes.

In the second round, Mr. Dix increased his lead slightly to almost 800 votes – 7,748 to 6,951. Mr. Horgan had 5,034 votes.

In his final speech to candidates at Sunday afternoon convention in
Vancouver, Mr. Dix urged delegates to opt for his sharper, more
ideologically driven agenda. He said the NDP would make a mistake by
tacking to the political middle. “We are not going to win the next
election by sidling up to the Liberals,” he said. But he also won
applause for pledging to work with all of his rivals in the next
election campaign – regardless of who was chosen leader.

Throughout the campaign, Mr. Farnworth portrayed himself as a centrist
who would carry on along the path of former premier Mike Harcourt,
reaching out to business and labour alike. “If you are ready for change,
I am ready to lead,” Mr. Farnworth told delegates.

John Horgan used his address to urge the party to use the leadership
contest to reinvigorate the party. “We are going to change the direction
for the New Democratic Party,” he said.

There were no sharp personal divisions among the candidates during a
strangely collegial leadership race in which the rivals spent much of
their time expressing their admiration for each other.

The leadership convention opened with a tribute to former leader Carole
James, who had led the party through two elections but could not break
though the B.C. Liberal hold on power. She urged the party to wrap up
the leadership process, united to defeat the Liberals.

The leadership contest was launched after Ms. James, party leader for
seven years, was forced out amid a caucus revolt involving just over a
third of her 34-member caucus.

The rebellion was led by party stalwart Jenny Kwan, one of three MLAs
who quietly approached Ms. James in November, shortly after Gordon
Campbell announced he was stepping down as premier and Liberal leader,
saying she should do the same.

Ms. James initially dug in and won a decisive vote of her party’s
governing body, but the dissent continued to split the party. Ms. Kwan
finally went public: “I have seen debates stifled, decision-making
centralized and individual MLAs marginalized.”

On Dec. 6, Ms. James quit as leader, leaving her critics – whom she
described as self-serving bullies – with no excuses for further discord.

The so-called Baker’s Dozen of 13 NDP MLAs who said the party was
stagnating under Ms. James, did field two candidates – Harry Lali and
Nicholas Simons, but both dropped out before voting began. They both
endorsed Mr. Horgan.

The leadership campaign was a chance for the debt-mired party to renew.
It’s membership stood at just 12,500 before Ms. James stepped down, and
the party was having to lean heavily on its riding associations to repay
its 2009 election debts.

With the membership signup drive, the party now has 28,500 members. 

Read original article

Share

Bolivia Set to Pass ‘Law of Mother Earth’

Share

From The Guardian – April 11, 2011

by John Vidal

Bolivia is set to pass the world’s first laws granting all nature equal
rights to humans. The Law of Mother Earth, now agreed by politicians and
grassroots social groups, redefines the country’s rich mineral deposits
as “blessings” and is expected to lead to radical new conservation and social measures to reduce pollution and control industry.

The
country, which has been pilloried by the US and Britain in the UN
climate talks for demanding steep carbon emission cuts, will establish
11 new rights for nature. They include: the right to life and to exist;
the right to continue vital cycles and processes free from human
alteration; the right to pure water and clean air; the right to balance;
the right not to be polluted; and the right to not have cellular
structure modified or genetically altered.

Controversially, it
will also enshrine the right of nature “to not be affected by
mega-infrastructure and development projects that affect the balance of
ecosystems and the local inhabitant communities”.

“It makes world
history. Earth is the mother of all”, said Vice-President Alvaro García
Linera. “It establishes a new relationship between man and nature, the
harmony of which must be preserved as a guarantee of its regeneration.”

The
law, which is part of a complete restructuring of the Bolivian legal
system following a change of constitution in 2009, has been heavily
influenced by a resurgent indigenous Andean spiritual world view which
places the environment and the earth deity known as the Pachamama at the centre of all life. Humans are considered equal to all other entities.

But
the abstract new laws are not expected to stop industry in its tracks.
While it is not clear yet what actual protection the new rights will
give in court to bugs, insects and ecosystems, the government is
expected to establish a ministry of mother earth and to appoint an
ombudsman. It is also committed to giving communities new legal powers
to monitor and control polluting industries.

Bolivia has long suffered from serious environmental problems from the mining
of tin, silver, gold and other raw materials. “Existing laws are not
strong enough,” said Undarico Pinto, leader of the 3.5m-strong
Confederación Sindical Única de Trabajadores Campesinos de Bolivia, the
biggest social movement, who helped draft the law. “It will make
industry more transparent. It will allow people to regulate industry at
national, regional and local levels.”

Foreign Minister David Choquehuanca said Bolivia’s traditional indigenous respect for the Pachamama was vital to prevent climate change.
“Our grandparents taught us that we belong to a big family of plants
and animals. We believe that everything in the planet forms part of a
big family. We indigenous people can contribute to solving the energy,
climate, food and financial crises with our values,” he said.

Little
opposition is expected to the law being passed because President Evo
Morales’s ruling party, the Movement Towards Socialism, enjoys a
comfortable majority in both houses of parliament.

However, the
government must tread a fine line between increased regulation of
companies and giving way to the powerful social movements who have
pressed for the law. Bolivia earns $500m (£305m) a year from mining
companies which provides nearly one third of the country’s foreign
currency.

In the indigenous philosophy, the Pachamama is a living being.

The
draft of the new law states: “She is sacred, fertile and the source of
life that feeds and cares for all living beings in her womb. She is in
permanent balance, harmony and communication with the cosmos. She is
comprised of all ecosystems and living beings, and their
self-organisation.”

Ecuador, which also has powerful indigenous
groups, has changed its constitution to give nature “the right to exist,
persist, maintain and regenerate its vital cycles, structure, functions
and its processes in evolution”. However, the abstract rights have not
led to new laws or stopped oil companies from destroying some of the
most biologically rich areas of the Amazon.

Coping with climate change

Bolivia
is struggling to cope with rising temperatures, melting glaciers and
more extreme weather events including more frequent floods, droughts,
frosts and mudslides.

Research by glaciologist Edson Ramirez of
San Andres University in the capital city, La Paz, suggests temperatures
have been rising steadily for 60 years and started to accelerate in
1979. They are now on course to rise a further 3.5-4C over the next 100
years. This would turn much of Bolivia into a desert.

Most
glaciers below 5,000m are expected to disappear completely within 20
years, leaving Bolivia with a much smaller ice cap. Scientists say this
will lead to a crisis in farming and water shortages in cities such as
La Paz and El Alto.

Evo Morales, Latin America’s first indigenous
president, has become an outspoken critic in the UN of industrialised
countries which are not prepared to hold temperatures to a 1C rise.

Read original article and watch video

Share

Federal & Provincial Elections: Crucial Choices for BC’s Future

Share

The Common Sense Canadian is not a supporter of any political party but deals in issues and essentially we concentrate on the linked issues of the environment and energy matters.

The rationale for the Common Sense Canadian’s policy is this: every political party has the “cure” for all our social needs and each of them declares that it and only it has the ability to make the right moves to bring the actual result for what is demanded. But we have reached a crossroads – a true moment of truth.

There is surely one lesson we have learned: no matter how bad the opposition says the government is, the fiscal damage is reparable. Moreover, we ought also to have learned that each incoming government says that the situation was worse than they thought yet somehow they don’t turn out to be much of an improvement.

There is a huge difference in the messages. The Provincial Liberals, following the Socred line, tell us that the NDP left the treasury empty and ruined the economy. They make no allowances for what was known as the “Asian Flu” that so damaged BC’s export business. The fact that the NDP balanced their last year’s budget and that Premier Campbell thus saw fit to give better off people an instant billion dollar-plus tax break seems lost in the rhetoric that is politics.

I think that the case can be made that the Campbell government missed the clear signs of a recession which were there to be seen and simply didn’t tell the truth about that, and, of course, the HST.

The 1991-2001 NDP left a lot to be desired, especially in the leadership department – with four premiers in that period – and were so incapable of keeping the ship steady they were forced to bring outsiders into cabinet.

It’s not my purpose to defend or vilify either party but simply to make the point that no government has a monopoly on stupidity and no government has really wrestled the problems of health care, education, welfare and unemployment to the ground and none are likely to.

In the many years I’ve been involved in political life this is the first time I’ve seen a situation which, if not changed, will permanently leave longstanding wounds – wounds which will get worse and be incurable to boot. One of these is of a visual nature which goes to the very root of what British Columbia really is; that goes to the very root of how we keep being prosperous or at least give stability to our province in economic terms. These issues are intertwined.

The first is the environment. Virtually all mankind has played havoc with the environment but that’s surely no excuse for us to falter. We don’t have to destroy our forests to make a living. We have no need to jeopardize, indeed kill off our wild salmon so that people other than British Columbians can provide dividends for their shareholders.

We have no need to sacrifice our rivers so, once again, outsiders can profit from the electricity produced.

The second is BC Hydro, the main gem in the provincial crown. WAC Bennett saw three areas where the people, through those they elect, could use crown corporations for good policy decisions.

Bennett knew that no private ferry system would keep unprofitable routes yet he also knew that all British Columbians must have decent, affordable transportation options, so he bought Black Ball Ferries and created BC Ferries – which Gordon Campbell privatized. It left us the worst of all results – BC no longer directs its affairs but must still subsidize it.

Bennett knew that BC, large and bountiful as it is, needed a rail system that would lose money on some runs in order to open the province up and thus should be owned by the people and again a vehicle for public policy. Campbell gave this away to the private sector which won’t tolerate losing lines.

Bennett also knew that for British Columbians to compete and prosper it must have certainty of power both at home and in industry, so he bought out BC Electric Railway and created BC Hydro. This company was a huge success yet Campbell has developed a private power scheme leaving BC Hydro in a position that, if it couldn’t go on raising rates to subsidize its mandated giveaway program, would be bankrupt. It will be sold by way of bankruptcy, a bankruptcy which is clear on the horizon.

We must surely re-evaluate our political priorities. If the sale or disposition of our public assets would bring us prosperity thus making us better able to meet social obligations that would be one thing. But the fact is that each of these privatizing schemes hurts our economy badly.

For the first time in our history we have embarked on a program to destroy our environment and our ability to make our own rules about transport and power – and we have done this for the immense enrichment of others.

For the first time we have policies in place that will deliberately destroy the environment for private energy we can’t use, the profits from which go to large out of province corporations.

I believe that the last chance we’ll have to save the situation is in the forthcoming federal election and the provincial election most likely to occur this Fall, if not sooner.

This means, in my view, we must make a stark decision: are we, in exchange for the usual promises about health care, education, and welfare, going to put back into government those who are destroying our environment and giving away our power?

To this must be added that both the Federal Conservatives and the provincial Liberals have lied through their teeth in doing their destructive deeds.

The federal Conservatives are as much to blame as the Campbell/Clark bunch. One need only look at what’s coming out of the Cohen Commission to see how the destruction of our salmon by fish farms is not an accident but a very careful and deliberate policy. Moreover the feds have actually been financing the Independent Power Producers with our tax money! Can you beat this? Your tax dollars are going to help General Electric destroy our rivers and our power system!

In one line I want to dispose of the notion that we need majority governments: can you imagine what the Harper government would have done if they had a majority?

At The Common Sense Canadian we will support candidates who will end the giveaways and recover that which can be recovered, knowing that painful though the decision may be to many of us, our environment and energy will continue to be stolen from us, with one of the clear consequences that we have even less money to look after our hospitals, schools, universities and those who need help.  

Share

Horgan Puts Private Power Industry on Notice

Share

EDITOR’S NOTE: Over the past several weeks, The Common Sense Canadian has published the energy positions of the BC First Party and NDP leadership hopeful Mike Farnworth. Now we are pleased to bring our readers a statement from NDP leadership candidate John Horgan.

—————————————————————————————————————————————–

Early on in my campaign to lead the BC NDP, I put independent power producers on notice that a John Horgan-led government will immediately put a moratorium on run of river power projects and conduct a review of existing power purchase agreements to determine if they are in the public interest. That might not make me many friends, but it’s the right thing to do.

The days of secret agreements that guarantee huge profits for private power operators at the expense of ordinary ratepayers will be over. The days of pet projects at the whim of politicians without any regard for the public interest will be over too. I would immediately move to restore the BC Utilities Commission to its rightful place as an independent oversight body that looks out for all British Columbians.

I was part of the Mike Harcourt administration that encouraged run of the river power projects – but only when it made sense. We had a plan that would see small communities served by true micro-hydro projects that would get them off diesel generators. Our plan required projects to be small in scale, without fish implications, and built for local energy needs.

But the BC Liberals saw the potential for their friends to make a buck (A LOT of bucks!), and the result of their ideologically driven agenda is what you see today – a crippled BC Hydro forced to jack rates by 50 per cent to keep up to rising costs from tens of billions of dollars in contractual obligations so their rich friends can get richer on the backs of British Columbians.

The reckless energy policies culminated last June when the government forced the so-called Clean Energy Act through the legislature with closure and no debate. Now our new “families first” premier has instructed her new energy minister to find a way to keep those rate hikes low because we’re heading into an election and she wants to appear the hero. That is just not good enough. The Clean Energy Act needs to be revisited and may need to be re-written completely, and I am committed to doing that as Premier of British Columbia.

As the BC NDP’s energy critic over the past five years, and an energy advisor to NDP governments in the 1990s before that, I recognize that energy issues are inextricably linked to environmental issues. That’s why I have embedded the two into my comprehensive environmental protection plan, and made that plan one of four key priorities of my campaign along with economic growth and social justice, education and training, and honest government.

My plan for the environment includes addressing climate change and creating a real green energy plan, protecting our environment including reinvesting in parks and the land base, providing real land and water stewardship, and protecting our ocean and coastline. I am committed to restoring the integrity and strength of our environmental assessment process that was groundbreaking when we introduced it in the 1990s, but has been seriously eroded under a decade of BC Liberal rule.

I will work with the environmental and business communities, working people, and experts to develop effective ways of reducing our carbon footprint, conserving energy, and protecting our natural environment. I also believe that we must create opportunities for young people to acquire skills necessary to build and compete in the new green economy. That includes replacing a plan to spend a billion dollars on smart meters with a plan to make a smart investment in home energy retrofits.

My environmental plan won praise from the Wilderness Committee when I was the first to release one. Gwen Barlee said, “Horgan’s environmental platform is far-reaching and comprehensive. It makes a commitment to a healthy environment and sets the bar for other leadership candidates to follow.” Noted environmental activist Vicky Husband recently told The Tyee, “[John Horgan has] shown a very strong environmental bent and sense of responsibility. If he becomes leader of the opposition, the environment will become a major issue.”

British Columbia is a commodity based economy that is transitioning to a new green economy. That transition will require us to both protect our environment and invest in green technology development and training to ensure British Columbians have the skills to take on the jobs of the future. Under my leadership, an NDP government will ensure that the natural legacy we inherited from those who came before us is protected for those who will come after us.

Share

Worm Turns for Private Power as NDP Leadership Hopefuls Get It

Share

The chickens are, at long last, coming home to roost! The Campbell Government’s Energy Policy, now Christy Clark’s, is being seen for what it is – an egregiously ideological giveaway to large corporations. Even that Liberal suck, the Vancouver Province calls the policy “folly”. Yes, after 8 years of silence, of indifference, the Province in one word describes a policy it has, by its silence condoned for nearly a decade – a policy they and the rest of the media could have likely stopped had they chosen to deal with it. Meanwhile, the Vancouver Sun, having a Fellow of the Fraser Institute, Fazil Milhar as editor of the Editorial Page, has indeed by its silence kept the spotlight off this massive giveaway of our province.

The evil consequences of BC’s current energy policy, drafted in large part by Alcan in its move way from smelting aluminum into a big-time energy producer, are many.

As official spokesman for The Common Sense Canadian, I’ve spoken throughout the province and found one constant obstacle: people find it difficult to believe that any sane government could come up with such a policy. They’re starting to realize that they’re right – no sane government would:

  • Forbid BC Hydro from developing any new public power projects (Site C, exempted, is not a “new” project – it’s been on the books for decades)
  • Give all development to private companies with secret sweetheart deals
  • All but give them licenses to use our rivers (the original price for a private power water license was around $170)
  • Force BC Hydro to buy this private power at almost 3 times what they pay for it or some 9-12 more than they can make it themselves, thus placing BC Hydro in a position that if they were in the private sector, they would be headed for bankruptcy.

That’s right folks – these private power projects can’t store much energy, meaning it must be used when it’s created. Because they can’t generate much power when their rivers are low, which they generally are except during the annual spring run-off – when we need their power the least – BC Hydro gets stuck with power it must use or sell at a huge loss.

One cannot blame people for not believing this. It is indeed incomprehensible. But it’s true.

It’s so hard to believe that the NDP in the ’09 election didn’t make this into the big issue of the campaign.

The worm has turned – not implying that the NDP are worms! – and the leading candidates for their leadership have clearly stated that there will be no more of this sweetheart cronyism and that the secret contracts must be opened up to the public’s scrutiny.

You will recall that during the Liberal Party’s leadership process this environment/energy issue wasn’t debated at all. It was if it simply didn’t exist! Assuming that the NDP select either Mr. Farnworth or Mr. Horgan, this issue is automatically in the forefront of the debate and must be dealt with – as long as the NDP keeps its nerve.

On a related matter, John Cummins, leader of the Conservative Party, has long been an ardent foe of the Liberals’ Energy Policy and even if, which I don’t believe, the NDP were to lose their nerve, the Conservatives won’t. With no seats going into the race, and with Mr. Cummins’ reputation for fighting for what he believes in, the Liberals will finally be forced to face the music.

Finally, what will Mr. Campbell do now?

On the Liberal leader election night, Mr. Campbell was said to be in Washington, DC. This is not the time of year he normally takes a vacation there and it would be interesting to know what his itinerary was.

My guess is that some plumy directorships will be coming his way from grateful titans of industry.

Share

Rafe in the Tyee: BC Liberals in Bed with P3 Industry

Share

I want you to use your imagination, hard as it might be
under the circumstances. Suppose there is an NDP premier (see, I told
you it would be tough!) who, it’s disclosed, is the honorary chairman of
the B.C. Government Employees Union and let’s suppose the BCGEU grants
him prizes for his good service to the unions involved, including the
highest award they can bestow.

Now, you might just ask how can a
government that has to negotiate for us with the union have its leader,
our premier, supping at the union’s table, drinking their mead,
surrounded by their bonhomie, winning prizes, and then sit on the other
side of the table and negotiate as hard as nails on our behalf?

I ask you, Premier Christy Clark, what you
would say if you were the opposition leader and it became clear that
Premier Farnworth, or Horgan, or Dix was that premier?

You would be apoplectic! Admit it! And you
would be right for there before your eyes would be the clearest possible
big-time conflict of interest. Not a perceived one but a real one where
a premier, with the trust of the people’s purse, is encouraging those
who want a chunk of that money that he “is one of them.”

Hold that thought because I want to speak for a moment about public-private-partnerships or what they call P3s.

This is the deal in a nutshell. Usually
without any bidding, a favoured corporation does a deal with the
government that guarantees them a minimum cash flow to satisfy lenders;
in fact, lenders require a cash guarantee for more than the
projected cost of construction so a deal, always sweet, nearly always
secret, is struck. You rely upon the government to assure you that your
money is wisely spent and your premier is working both sides of the
street.

This, from the book titled Public Service; Private Profits by John Loxley, published in 2010 (pages 7-8):

“The P3 concept [in Canada] has benefited from the lobbying efforts of
organizations like the Canadian Council for Public Private Partnerships
(CCPPP), an increasingly strong lobby group, which was established in
1993 and draws its membership from both the private and public sectors.
In 2009, it had fifty-eight sponsors, fifty-seven of which were
companies with commercial interests in P3s, such as construction
companies, banks and their financial offshoots, bond houses and bond
rating agencies, lawyers and consulting companies such as SNC-Lavalin,
RBC Capital Markets, John Laing, Carillion, Deloitte and Touche,
Bombardier Transportation and United Water.

“… the CCPPP has a solid membership and financial base on which to
promote P3s and has been able to attract prominent politicians and
ex-politicians into its fold, such as PREMIER GORDON CAMPBELL of B.C.,
who is currently (2009) the honorary chair. The CCPPP can be considered
the main ideological proponent of P3s in Canada.” (My emphasis)

It takes barely a second to appreciate that
here in B.C. we have had a premier and cabinet pretending to look after
the public interest while concurrently and aggressively looking after
the interests of private P3 partners. It is difficult not to imagine a
more blatant demonstration of conflict of interest.

Giving and getting awards from P3 industry

This from the Dec. 4, 2010 press release by the CCPPP.

“A Gold Award for Infrastructure was presented to the Canada Line in Vancouver, BC, partnership of Canada Line Rapid Transit Inc. and InTransit BC Limited Partnership and the Sea-to-Sky Highway
Improvement Project, partnership of British Columbia Ministry of
Transportation and Infrastructure and Sea-to-Sky Highway Investment
Limited Partnership with participation by Partnerships BC.

“A Silver Award for Project Financing was presented to the Royal Jubilee Hospital Patient Care Centre,
British Columbia, partnership of Vancouver Island Health Authority and
Health Care Projects Canada Ltd. Silver Award for Infrastructure went to
Golden Ears Bridge (British Columbia), partnership of Translink (South Coast BC Transportation Authority) and Bilfinger Berger Project Investments Inc

An Award of Merit for Project Financing was also handed out.

… recipients of the Champion Award [have] included the Hon. Gordon Campbell, Premier of BC, Pierre Le François, the late James MacLaren, Donald Macdonald, Mac Carson, Glenna Carr, the late Chuck Wills, Gary Collins and Michael H. Wilson. Premier Campbell continues as the Honourary Chair of The Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships…” [My emphasis]

And, who do you suppose Gary Collins is?

You got it — our former finance minister
who, along with the premier, was saved by the bell from having to
testify in the Basi-Virk “trial.”

‘Stinging rebuke to Macquarie model’

There is also the curious case of the
Macquarie group which is a prominent fiscal agent for the B.C.
government and other public agencies and itself a big player in the P3
game.

Here is what Michael West of the Sydney (Australia) Morning Post reported back on April 4, 2008

“New York-based corporate governance
service RiskMetrics Group has delivered a stinging rebuke to Australia’s
infrastructure sector, and in particular the ‘Macquarie Model’ which
has … spawned a generation of toll-roads, airports, telecommunications
and power generation stocks.

“In the most detailed independent research
of Macquarie Group and Babcock satellites to be published, Risk Metrics
critiques the financially-engineered infrastructure model for its high
debt levels, high fees, paying distributions out of capital rather than
cashflow, overpaying for assets, related-party transactions, booking
profits from revaluations, poor disclosure, myriad conflicts of
interest, auditor conflicts and other poor corporate governance.

“RiskMetrics is a leading adviser to
institutional investors both in Australia and overseas … [this] is the
first time they have strung all the pieces together, and raised doubts
about the model’s viability…”

The above situation was made clear, by
private letter, to Premier Campbell yet the Macquarie Group continues to
take part in P3 operations with the province and is still prominent in
P3 contracts here.

Citizen suckers in a rigged game

One more point before I sum up — the P3
arrangement is supposed to remove the risk from the province of B.C. It
does no such thing for if the private company defaults, the province is
liable.

What we have here are sweetheart deals for
large corporations, which get selected without a proper or often any
bidding process and, if the going gets tough, can and do demand more
money from the province.

Far from a monetary benefit for us taxpayers, in fact the evidence is clear that we pay more.

We’re the suckers in the Three-Card Monte game run by big business and government “carnies.”

Now the clincher. Surely at the very least,
taxpayers would expect the negotiations between the province and
private companies to be at arm’s length, not between buddies.

In fact, this is outrageous. I think of
Bill Vander Zalm, who got into trouble for using Government House to
entertain a potential buyer of Fantasy Gardens and had to resign. That,
in my view, pales into insignificance compared to the conduct of
Campbell and Collins.

Why worry about this now they’re both gone?

Because Premier Clark and all other
Liberals are running on Campbell’s record. That record now includes
sweetheart deals with huge companies that were repaid by honours
recognizing him not as a good premier but a valued friend to the private
construction industry doing business with the government.

It’s pretty clear, isn’t it, why Gary
Collins and Gordon Campbell didn’t want to appear at the Basi-Virk
trial, where they would have been cross-examined on dealings analogous
to the big giveaway of BC Rail.

I recommend all recent P3 contracts be
examined by an out-of-province forensic accountant to determine the
scale of any unearned premium and conflict-of-interest evidence and, if
necessary, advise that the contracts ought to be re-opened.

As to the future, Premier Clark must
acknowledge this outrageous conduct and assure us that the corrupt
practice of P3 contracts is at an end and that hereafter all
government-funded projects will go to tender, not into the corporate jam
jar.

Read original article

Share

Environment unites B.C. NDP hopefuls at leadership debate

Share

From The Province – April 2, 2011

by Cassidy Olivier

They joked around about what kind of salmon they would be, drew big
laughs with their self-deprecating humour and elicited cheers from the
packed auditorium with their directed jabs at the governing Liberal
Party.

But the main message coming out of Saturday’s B.C. NDP
leadership debate on environmental sustainability in Vancouver was a
serious one: The province needs a government who makes the environment a
top priority. And that’s what they promised to do.

Like the
previous six leadership debates, the five candidates vying for the top
job differed little on the policy issues — ranging from water
stewardship to pollution taxes — raised at the Creekside Community
Centre in the former Olympic Village.

All agreed that the
province’s environmental assessment process needs beefing up, that
issues of ­poverty and sustainability are inextricably linked, that
damaging practices need to be stopped and that the controversial carbon
tax needs rejigging.

Similarly, all five said they were against
Site C, the proposed mega-dam on the Peace River, the cross-province
Enbridge Pipeline project and offshore drilling.

They also expressed a need to take a closer look at B.C. Hydro’s IPP contracts.

As
John Horgan, MLA for Juan de Fuca, put it in a line borrowed from
himself Thursday in Victoria: “It’s another love-in, as you can see.
There’s not a lot to divide the five of us with respect to policy or the
issues of the day.”

The differences, then, were found in the way
they performed and the themes they pushed forward as part of their
ultimate goal of convincing party members that they are the right choice
to lead New Democrats into the future, and the best bet of beating
Premier Christy Clark at the polls.

Vancouver-Kingsway MLA ­Adrian
Dix, one of three perceived front-runners, spoke passionately about the
need for environmental assessment legislation that was “worthy of its
name.”

He said the carbon tax shouldn’t be revenue neutral and promised a rollback on the tax to fund transportation and education.

Dix also tossed the most vitriol at B.C.’s new premier, saying in his closing remarks that he “couldn’t wait” to take her on.

Earlier,
he questioned Clark’s decision to lobby the federal government on the
proposed Prosperity Mine near Williams Lake, after the feds had said the
province’s environmental assessment had been inadequate.

“Stephen
Harper’s government said no. Then the new premier of B.C. demands that
the federal government overturns its decision,” said Dix.

“You got to be pretty far out on the political fringe to be on the right of Stephen Harper.”

Mike
Farnworth, MLA for Port Coquitlam and another perceived front-runner,
spoke frequently of unity — both in terms of uniting the province under a
shared vision and progressive voters who are desperate for change.

Farnworth
spoke of ­adequately funding the Ministry of Environment so that “they
can do what they are supposed to do” and of a government that looks at
sustainability, as it applies not only to the environment, but also
public policy.

“Our best days, our best public policy is when we
do what we do best which is bring the people together,” he said. “We
don’t divide the people, we bring them together.”

Horgan, who
appears to be making a late push and arguably drew the most laughs of
the day, said the Liberals aren’t adequately protecting the province’s
resources.

He said more science needs to be applied when making
decisions that have environmental impacts, and spoke of putting forward a
strong agenda based on sustainability that the voters are proud of.

Nicholas
Simons, MLA for Powell-River Sunshine Coast, also spoke of the need to
bring in experts and seek differing opinions when making policy
decisions.

In perhaps the most eloquent close of the afternoon,
Simons, a cellist, likened his role as leader to a conductor in an
orchestra.

Marijuana activist Dana Larsen said it was critical
that we move away from a carbon-based society to one that uses more
renewable energy such as hemp.

B.C. NDP members will vote for a new leader April 17.

Read original article

Share

The Tyee: A New, Greener NDP in British Columbia

Share

From The Tyee – April 1, 2011

by Andrew McLeod

Even before British Columbia NDP leadership candidates headed into an April 2 debate in Vancouver centred on environmental sustainability, observers were noting the role green issues have had in the campaign.

That role provides a contrast both to the recent BC Liberal leadership race and the NDP’s own record in the 2009 election.

“They’re talking about issues unprompted by
us,” said Kevin Washbrook, a Conservation Voters of B.C. board member.
“Generally I’d say it has a place of prominence in the race. More so
than it did in the Liberal race.”

CVBC is evaluating Mike Farnworth, Adrian
Dix, John Horgan, Nicholas Simons and Dana Larsen’s positions and may or
may not endorse anyone, but won’t have that ready for at least another
week, he said.

The group Organizing for Change put a list of questions to all of the leadership candidates in both the Liberal and the NDP races.

“In the Liberal race it was like pulling teeth to get answers
to those questions,” said provincial OFC lead Lisa Matthaus. Of the
Liberals, just Mike de Jong answered, and he did so at the very end of
the campaign, she said.

“With the NDP they’ve all responded, except
for Dana Larsen,” Matthaus said. And since responding, they’ve
continued to release environmental positions. “It’s interesting to see
how much more the NDP is making the environment part of the debate among
themselves.”

‘Huge departure’ for NDP: Vicky Husband

All the front runners have picked up the
environmental banner, said long time environmentalist Vicky Husband, who
added she believes John Horgan is the most committed among them.

“We never saw Carole James take a strong stand on an environmental
issue,” said Husband. Comparing the race to where the NDP was in the
last election, she said, “I think it’s a huge departure. I think they
were on the wrong side, certainly on the carbon tax issue.”

While the NDP championed other important
environmental issues in the campaign, including re-evaluating
run-of-the-river hydro projects, the carbon tax position put them
offside with a large part of the environmental community, said Husband, a
past conservation chair of the Sierra Club B.C. and a veteran of
campaigns to preserve Clayoquot Sound rainforest, the Great Bear
rainforest and wild salmon fisheries.

The Pembina Institute’s Matt Horne, who was
among prominent environmentalists who denounced the NDP’s axe-the-tax
position in 2009, said the NDP candidates all support keeping the carbon
tax, though they would tweak it in various ways to make it work better.
“[It] is a significant change from where they were in the last
election,” he said.

While there’s further to go if B.C. is to meet its goals for carbon emission reductions, it’s a positive step, he said.

Platform details

John Horgan
was the first to release an environmental platform. The Juan de Fuca
MLA’s long list said he’d expand the carbon tax, invest in transit, pass
an Endangered Species Act and protect more old growth forests.

Port Coquitlam MLA Mike Farnworth’s
environmental platform includes keeping a steady amount of land in the
Agricultural Land Reserve, moving salmon farms to closed containment,
giving local governments more say on significant projects, restricting
raw log exports and planting more trees. He’d keep the carbon tax and
extend it to industrial emitters, using it to pay for transit and other
green initiatives.

Adrian Dix,
who represents Vancouver-Kingsway, would use carbon tax revenues for
transit and green infrastructure, invest in the park system and protect
endangered species and ecosystems. He’d also recreate Environmental
Youth Teams to create jobs for young people doing green work.

Read full article

Share