New BC Political Discussion - POST BC Election 2017

[retro_orange]

After all the biased nonsense in the previous political thread, I thought I would take the initiative to start a new thread for our future political discussions in regards to BC politics.

I will not shut down anyone who thinks differently from myself, so those who feel they would get shut down for posting elsewhere are more than welcome to post your views on our current situation with the NDP and Green political parties in power.

Whether the other thread gets closed or not, hopefully this thread will have more prominence from this point on.



Sincerely,
-retro_orange

[trofirhen]

retro ....
Thanks for starting this new thread. The election is over, and it's time to move on.
Also, perhaps here we could embrace a wider range of politically related topics, particularly focussing on urgent matters like housing for those without gobs of cash.
I hope this thread succeeds. It is very timely to start it.

[Caliplanner1]

Thanks for the fresh/independent start. Hopefully we can avoid acrimony by simply sticking to clear/verifiable (if/when possible, SCHOLARLY) data and facts towards the benefit of mutual intellectual growth/honesty.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Or if we're arguing ideology, posters need to remember to attack the argument - not the person making it. Name calling and insults (and meaningless talking points or rhetoric, while we're at it) are just unnecessary.

Good thinking, retro.

[Caliplanner1]

Originally Posted by Migrant_Coconut

Or if we're arguing ideology, posters need to remember to attack the argument - not the person making it. Name calling and insults (and meaningless talking points or rhetoric, while we're at it) are just unnecessary.

Good thinking, retro.

Yes, we should indeed strive to focus on the merits/demerits of a position/argument based on the evidence provided and not let personal attacks cloud/distort the value of the given debate.

[waves]

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

S. 44 was not relevant to matters at 3rd reading, matters of confidence, etc.

Yet, it doesn't say this in the legislation, and therefore there is no legal obligation to follow it, regardless of convention.

Originally Posted by Stingray2004

Frankly, a political panel would not understand the BC Constitution Act and implications thereto IMHO (if they even brought it up). Budgets, Throne Speeches, etc. are also "Final Decisions of House"

So Martyn Brown, former chief of staff of Gordon Campbell, Norman Specter Deputy Minister for Bill Bennett, and Elizabeth Cull who has served as both Minister of Health and Minister of Finance have no idea what they are talking about?

Not sure where you are getting "Final Decisions of House" from because that specific wording is not mentioned in the constitution, in Craig James' speech, nor anywhere else I can find.

[Sheba]

I for one am looking forward to the next year. We've had a long time of the Liberals turning their backs on Metro Van - not surprisingly they lost votes here. It'll be interesting to see what the NDP / Greens announce for our region.

I doubt it's always going to be a tie between the two sides and the speaker has to be the tie breaker absolutely every time. If they have any sense (and when it comes to politics that's always debatable) the NDP will put forward some things that the Libs at least somewhat agree with.

[GlassCity]

Originally Posted by Sheba

I for one am looking forward to the next year. We've had a long time of the Liberals turning their backs on Metro Van - not surprisingly they lost votes here. It'll be interesting to see what the NDP / Greens announce for our region.

I doubt it's always going to be a tie between the two sides and the speaker has to be the tie breaker absolutely every time. If they have any sense (and when it comes to politics that's always debatable) the NDP will put forward some things that the Libs at least somewhat agree with.

Especially given the Liberals' throne speech, the NDP should have no problem finding unanimously supported legislation at all!

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by GlassCity

Especially given the Liberals' throne speech, the NDP should have no problem finding unanimously supported legislation at all!

B.C. Liberals cite windfall revenues as grounds to adopt NDP/Green proposals

New promises included $1 billion in new child care spaces, a rent-to-own housing program, a $100-a-month increase in welfare rates, and a ban on corporate and union donations that would extend to municipal elections.

On education, the Liberals pledged to restart a “Royal Commission on Education” for the first time since 1987 to examine major reforms to the system. They would also review the per-pupil funding formula for school districts and fully fund new playground upgrades. The government would restore adult basic education programs and ESL courses, which had been cut in recent years.

Social reforms included a poverty reduction strategy — something the Liberals have argued for years was unnecessary. Children in government care would get basic income support from the age of 18 to 24 while transitioning to independence, as well as free post-secondary education.

On health care, the Liberals promised a minister of state for mental health — echoing the NDP pledge for a ministry of mental health — a reduction in surgical waiting times, more doctors, more residential care beds, a new hospital for Surrey and a previously promised cut to MSP rates.

Oh to see the Liberals vote against any of that...

[Migrant_Coconut]

Alternatively, the Liberals could convince one or two Greens (not having a whip or really anything to make them vote as a bloc) to vote against the NDP.

"Political gridlock" seems like hyperbole at this point... especially compared to the situation down south for the last eleven years.

[Migrant_Coconut]

^ If only it hadn't taken an election for them to realize that funding education (or at least not slashing it) was a good idea...

[Bcasey25raptor]

NDP appointed Geoff Megg's as chief of staff.

Yeah this already looks like a disaster and Horgan hasn't even been sworn in yet.

[Metro-One]

Oh fuck no.....

Geoff Meggs?

The worst guy from Vision?

I guess we can pretty much expect our entire highway network to be neglected, not just the much needed Massey tunel replacement being cancelled.

Seriously, with him being a big part of the show I wouldn't be surprised to see projects such as the North Shore #1 improvements and the Sunbury Interchange projects being shelved.

I may be fear mongeting a bit but it is not outside of the realm of possibility now.

[Cypherus]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Oh fuck no.....

Geoff Meggs?

The worst guy from Vision?

I guess we can pretty much expect our entire highway network to be neglected, not just the much needed Massey tunel replacement being cancelled.

Seriously, with him being a big part of the show I wouldn't be surprised to see projects such as the North Shore #1 improvements and the Sunbury Interchange projects being shelved.

I may be fear mongeting a bit but it is not outside of the realm of possibility now.

You're not fear mongering. Geoff lives in a hi-rise in False Creek away from all the traffic troubles South of the Fraser deals with. He won't be happy until everyone is smoking weed while walking to work.

[Pinion]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

Seriously, with him being a big part of the show I wouldn't be surprised to see projects such as the North Shore #1 improvements ... being shelved.

That would be one of the few things that would make me mad enough to not vote NDP again, unless they announced north shore skytrain at the same time (still wouldn't vote Liberal though). I generally align with them but don't agree with the anti-road thing. They're not just for cars and are essential for a good economy in a port city.

Originally Posted by Bcasey25raptor

It'll be like Gregors city council on a province wide scale, an utter disaster.

Can we ease off on the hyperbole a bit, nothing has happened yet.

[Bcasey25raptor]

Honestly I just want the NDP in fopr enough time to fix our minimum wage and welfare state and rental regulations.

After that, don't care who wins.

But Geoff meggs? Are you freaking serious?

Yeah this is going to be a disaster.

[logicbomb]

I am never ever voting for the Green party again.

We are now subject to the most incompetent morons running this province again. I had hope that the 2010's NDP would be different than the 90's NDP but assigning Geoff Meggs a Chief of Staff role is one of the most idiotic things Horgan could do and proves that this incarnation will be no different.

Fucking morons. Are we going to see James and Dix gifted cabinet positions now?

[waves]

Originally Posted by logicbomb

I am never ever voting for the Green party again.

We are now subject to the most incompetent morons running this province again. I had hope that the 2010's NDP would be different than the 90's NDP but assigning Geoff Meggs a Chief of Staff role is one of the most idiotic things Horgan could do and proves that this incarnation will be no different.

Fucking morons. Are we going to see James and Dix gifted cabinet positions now?

I am not sure what your expectations were going to be when you voted Green, but at least from my eyes, this is probably the most favourable position for an NDP government to be in from a Liberals perspective. They are at the whim of the Green Party, and, to a degree, the Liberals as well. The NDP won't be able to do just anything they want. Even budget wise, the NDP will have to consult with the Greens.

As for the Surrey LRT I hope the Greens will be the ones to put their foot down and force the NDP to backtrack and do a proper business case.

The Liberals have deservingly got their butt kicked; the NDP will be at the whim of the Greens and Liberals while governing; and the Greens will hopefully keep their campaign promise of evidence based solutions to keep the NDP from making terrible financial decisions.

But, then again, maybe I am being to optimistic.

[LeftCoaster]

To be honest I'm surprised everyone here didn't see Meggs coming, he's been very open with his provincial aspirations and allegiance to the NDP.

If you take a deep look into a lot of the core who wield power in the NDP Meggs is actually one of the least concerning.

[logicbomb]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

If you take a deep look into a lot of the core who wield power in the NDP Meggs is actually one of the least concerning.

Has taken donation from luxury development lobbyists and those with ties in the taxi industry. He is venomously against Uber and fully backs the taxi industry. He was one of the few on council that initially saw no issue with the real estate market in the past few years.

Let's not forget he has been on record as saying that our road infrastructure is the least of our concerns and has been a proponent of LRT in Surrey.

Lastly, he was deeply entrenched in the Glen Clark administration and has largely developed a reputation of a slime-bag by the way he perceives the general public. Anyone who has been to any meeting with him knows how big of an ass he can be.

But you are right. We are deeply fucked.