BC Political Discussion: Election 2020 and Beyond

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Aren't there no future hydro generation projects after Site C?

Maybe politically, but I'd be surprised if the engineers have run out of ideas.

[WarrenC12]

Given we're at a weekday and the hottest day of this heatwave, I expect this record to be busted again today. Stay safe everyone!

[Sheba]

Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services: Budget 2022 Consultation

The Select Standing Committee on Finance and Government Services invites British Columbians to share their ideas and priorities for the next provincial budget.

You can participate in three ways:

1. Present to the Committee. Indicate your interest by completing this form by July 16.
2. Fill out the online survey by September 30.
3. Send in comments in writing or in audio/video format below by September 30.

...

[Klazu]

A super woke candidate got elected into the Burnaby city council thanks to the abysmally low voter turnout.

Burnaby Voters Elect Alison Gu and Mike Hillman to City Council

Alison Gu and Mike Hillman have been elected to Burnaby City Council in the 2021 by-election, which was held on June 26, 2021.

Chief Election Officer Nikolina Vracar officially certified the results on June 30.

Gu and Hillman will serve as Councillors, filling the roles left vacant by the passing of Councillor Paul McDonell and Councillor Nick Volkow. The new Councillors will serve alongside other members of Burnaby City Council until the next scheduled General Local Election on October 15, 2022.

Voter turnout in the by-election was 8.36% per cent, with 13,518 ballots cast.
Detailed official results will be presented in a report to Council in July.

https://www.burnaby.ca/About-Burnaby/New...ke-Hillman-to-City-Council_s2_p7681.html

[Sheba]

Originally Posted by Klazu

A super woke candidate got elected into the Burnaby city council thanks to the abysmally low voter turnout.

I blame that on the heat dome we just had. I make a habit of voting but didn't this time due to having to walk about 20 mins each way in extreme heat. If it was mail-in or online I would have voted, and I have little doubt a lot more people would have as well.

Anyway these two will only be there for a little over a year until the next regular election. October isn't the time for heat waves and it'll be before major rains kick in, which will make it a lot easier for people to vote.

[zahav]

Originally Posted by rofina

Tough go for Liberals.

They have problems similar to those of the GOP down south.

Their base is pretty right leaning, left over Bible belt folks. That's a tough core to appease while trying to expand the electorate.

The supreme irony; Liberal polices drove the urban folks out further and further spreading a more liberal mindset around the province and rendering them unelectable in the process.

Something poetic about that self own.

What can the Liberals, or whatever they call themselves, offer that the NDP doesn't?

NDP has been a largely non controversial government, and the economy most certainly hasn't come off the rails, COVID aside.

Yes this is certainly true. The economy will really be the determiner in the next election, if things are the way they are now, the NDP will sweep in again. If the economy turns bad, then it will be easy for a rival party to paint the NDP as a party that ruins things and can't manage. It likely wouldn't be a 2001 situation though, things are different now.

People can hate on the Liberals all they want, but they really did the hard work in turning the province around. Even John Horgan has agreed that the Liberals did a lot to really make BC a powerhouse again, not like the state it was in 2001 when Campbell took over. But the Liberals in the end years really did a bad job at reading the room, and the NDP capitalized on that well and became a legitimate alternative, even to traditionally BC Liberal voters. In 2020 even more-so than 2017, which is a big win for the NDP.

A new party incarnation would be a good idea, a rebuild. Things might be going well now in the province, but that might not be the case next election, to there will need to be a strong alternative if that happens (I hope it doesn't happen, I don't want a rough period to emerge). By and large, BC has been doing well since 2003, especially compared to other provinces and the world. We fared the 2008-2010 recession better than most, and same in this latest recession and with COVID. Basically it's been 20 years of better-than-average times in the province.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by Klazu

A super woke candidate got elected into the Burnaby city council thanks to the abysmally low voter turnout.

But the same abysmally low voter turnout elected Mike Hillman - and as your local paper noted "the last thing this council needed was another old white dude".

[Klazu]

Originally Posted by Changing City

But the same abysmally low voter turnout elected Mike Hillman - and as your local paper noted "the last thing this council needed was another old white dude".

Ugh, what a garbage and racist opinion piece. I cannot understand how some people have not progressed beyond continuing to see race in everything. It is a sad state of things and hate like that should not have any place in here.

But yeah, if candidates like this continue to be voted in, Burnaby can kiss goodbye that billion-dollar rainy day fund the city has and throw it into the endless pit of social equity. One has got to love the priority list for the Citizens Association and how they will truly focus on the biggest problems of every Burnaby resident, all while promising to keep fees, taxes, and costs low for residents. I almost want to see this perpetual motion machine they have come up with!

- Apply equity and anti-racist lens to all City policies.
- Implement Truth and Reconciliation calls to action for local governments.
- New targets to make Burnaby carbon neutral by 2050.
- More bike lanes and social housing.

At least they say that they are fighting for a Burnaby for everyone, so I bet they will also work for me in adding car lanes to alleviate congestion and will work to keep homeless hordes on the Vancouver side of Boundary Road...

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Klazu

A super woke candidate got elected into the Burnaby city council thanks to the abysmally low voter turnout.

So woke voters don't feel the heat as much as others? I don't get it. Low turnout is what it is. There's no reason to suspect it's not representative of the larger population who couldn't bother to get off their 🞵🞵🞵.

[CanSpice]

Originally Posted by Klazu

- Apply equity and anti-racist lens to all City policies.
- Implement Truth and Reconciliation calls to action for local governments.
- New targets to make Burnaby carbon neutral by 2050.
- More bike lanes and social housing.

These all look perfectly fine to me.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by CanSpice

These all look perfectly fine to me.

I would be willing to bet, given a quick study, the majority of most populations is against anything resembling equity.

Equality of outcome is a cancer on any society, and its a pillar of all things "equity."

Equality of opportunity is precisely what should be strived for and guaranteed for all citizens by their government.

[Changing City]

Originally Posted by rofina

I would be willing to bet, given a quick study, the majority of most populations is against anything resembling equity.

Equality of outcome is a cancer on any society, and its a pillar of all things "equity."

Equality of opportunity is precisely what should be strived for and guaranteed for all citizens by their government.

Maybe not if they understood how the terms equity and equality differ, (and how the difference might apply in practice). To take an example; if TransLink apply their resources equally between the Coast Mount Bus Company and HandyDart (say $ per 100km of service) then the outcomes for the passengers of those two services would be very different. An equity seeking approach would acknowledge that equality of outcome is exactly the goal for both sets of passengers - to conveniently get from point A to point B at the same cost to the passenger.

For some members of society providing the service to achieve that costs less (or more) than for others. In a civilized society I would hope the majority of the population would want equal outcomes to be the goal, and not have an attitude of 'too bad, so sad, you have a disability so your mobility issues mean you can't go anywhere, or if you do travel, it'll cost you a lot more'. I fully acknowledge there are people who think like that, and places where it would be true.

[rofina]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Maybe not if they understood how the terms equity and equality differ, (and how the difference might apply in practice). To take an example; if TransLink apply their resources equally between the Coast Mount Bus Company and HandyDart (say $ per 100km of service) then the outcomes for the passengers of those two services would be very different. An equity seeking approach would acknowledge that equality of outcome is exactly the goal for both sets of passengers - to conveniently get from point A to point B at the same cost to the passenger.

For some members of society providing the service to achieve that costs less (or more) than for others. In a civilized society I would hope the majority of the population would want equal outcomes to be the goal, and not have an attitude of 'too bad, so sad, you have a disability so your mobility issues mean you can't go anywhere, or if you do travel, it'll cost you a lot more'. I fully acknowledge there are people who think like that, and places where it would be true.

Smart example.

Its reasonable for majority of able bodied citizens to subsidize services for those not so fortunate.

You are correct, it is preferable to have equal outcomes in situations that surround accessibility issues.

Its not reasonable to guarantee equal outcomes in situations where merit should be considered first, for example; employment opportunities at City Hall.

Its also not reasonable to guarantee equal outcomes in fields like education; for recent example see the cancellation of programs for gifted kids.
Handicapping gifted children to level the playing field is not a reasonable solution to guaranteeing an equal outcome.

The intent is admirable, the end result wont be. It never is. Road to hell is paved with good intentions.

[Migrant_Coconut]

Originally Posted by Changing City

Maybe not if they understood how the terms equity and equality differ, (and how the difference might apply in practice). To take an example; if TransLink apply their resources equally between the Coast Mount Bus Company and HandyDart (say $ per 100km of service) then the outcomes for the passengers of those two services would be very different. An equity seeking approach would acknowledge that equality of outcome is exactly the goal for both sets of passengers - to conveniently get from point A to point B at the same cost to the passenger.

Equal funding per capita/distance would be a good thing; equal funding overall... not so much.

[chowhou]

In my eyes, the equality-equity debate is best summarized by the French Poet Anatole France,

Ils y doivent travailler devant la majestueuse égalité des lois, qui interdit au riche comme au pauvre de coucher sous les ponts, de mendier dans les rues et de voler du pain.

They must work there in front of the magistic equality of the law, which forbids the rich just like the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal loaves of bread.

- Le Lys Rouge (Ch. 7) - Anatole France

Equality is a noble goal, but do be reminded that policies that are equal on the surface, do not necessarily even result in equality of opportunity. When people are starting life in different situations, in order for there to be equality of opportunity, sometimes you need some equity.

[whatnext]

Raising a finger to Gordon Campbell, the BC NDP has brought hospital food and cleaning workers back under the union umbrella:

B.C. hospital housekeepers, food-service workers being brought back under public sector
BY CLAIRE FENTON
Posted Aug 30, 2021

SURREY (NEWS 1130) — B.C. brings back housekeeping and food-service workers into public sector.

Health Minister Adrian Dix says B.C. is bringing back thousands of workers in acute care facilities previously contracted out to private companies into the public sector.

Dix says it will lead to improved wages, better working conditions, and job security for workers.
https://www.citynews1130.com/2021/08/30/...-being-brought-back-under-public-sector/

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by whatnext

Raising a finger to Gordon Campbell, the BC NDP has brought hospital food and cleaning workers back under the union umbrella:

B.C. hospital housekeepers, food-service workers being brought back under public sector
BY CLAIRE FENTON
Posted Aug 30, 2021

SURREY (NEWS 1130) — B.C. brings back housekeeping and food-service workers into public sector.

Health Minister Adrian Dix says B.C. is bringing back thousands of workers in acute care facilities previously contracted out to private companies into the public sector.

Dix says it will lead to improved wages, better working conditions, and job security for workers.
https://www.citynews1130.com/2021/08/30/...-being-brought-back-under-public-sector/

You know it's a good program when they don't mention how much the change will cost.

[mezzanine]

IMO this is a good thing. a lot of the cost savings were passed down to workers, often female, who lost pay, pension and benefits. not sure how much money sodexo and aramark made, but it's not nothing. political winds back then were different and the militancy of the HEU at the time didn't help them IMO, but it's definitely not 1998 anymore.

Originally Posted by jollyburger

You know it's a good program when they don't mention how much the change will cost.

"We clapped for you guys almost every day for a few weeks in 2020 at the onset of a global pandemic. Isn't that enough?"

[jollyburger]

Originally Posted by mezzanine

IMO this is a good thing. a lot of the cost savings were passed down to workers, often female, who lost pay, pension and benefits. not sure how much money sodexo and aramark made, but it's not nothing. political winds back then were different and the militancy of the HEU at the time didn't help them IMO, but it's definitely not 1998 anymore.

"We clapped for you guys almost every day for a few weeks in 2020 at the onset of a global pandemic. Isn't that enough?"

Why are security guards inside hospitals contracted out to private contractors? Seems like they should also be public sector.

[mezzanine]

Originally Posted by jollyburger

Why are security guards inside hospitals contracted out to private contractors? Seems like they should also be public sector.

"I mean, we gave you all the claps. My hands hurt for a few minutes after"

no, we don't have to bring in everyone that works in a hospital. IMO, it depends on how you view food service and cleaners in the role of a mission of a hospital. How often would you need security guards vs cleaners in ER, versus chemotherapy versus dialysis. IMO cthe pandemic has shown how important cleaners are especially

I realize that public sector workers are not infallible and I hope that the HEU will realize this and be rapid to feedback. BUt I am unsure of how privatizing this will improve this, aside from saving money by cutting staffing and wages to workers, while ensuring contracting companies get a profit.

Time and again, hospital insiders told Marketplace that cleaners were being asked to do more with less. "We used to have one person to one wing of a hospital to clean," one cleaner said. "Now, we have three floors to clean."

A cleaning supervisor at one hospital told Marketplace host Erica Johnson that it's "common practice" for cleaners not to change the cleaning solution in the bucket when mopping up. "They just don't have the time," the supervisor said.

Sometimes there aren't enough cleaning supplies. A nurse, whose identity Marketplace protected, said she's seen a cleaner mopping common areas after having mopped the rooms of infected patients because she didn't have enough mops to change. "She's just cross-contaminated the whole area, so there's no area that was actually clean."

Sometimes, only one cleaner would be on staff in an entire hospital during night shifts. "That kind of day-night difference is very common, and it makes no sense," says Dr. Michael Gardam, an infectious disease expert at the University Health Network in Toronto.

With hidden cameras, including Canada's first hidden camera glow-gel test, the consumer show Marketplace visited several hospitals in Ontario and British Columbia, secretly applying a harmless gel to high-touch surfaces, then returning 24 hours later to see whether the gel had been removed, which would indicate the surface had been cleaned.

The program revealed many instances where cleaning had not been carried out, and that sparked a response from the Niagara Health System (NHS), the biggest in the country, whose hospitals have suffered a recent Clostridium difficile outbreak. It has decided to end its relationship with the private U.S. cleaning company Aramark.

NHS authorities wouldn’t specify why they made the move, but did tell CBC News they will be adding "the equivalent of 18 new full-time cleaning positions." It has been suggested that Aramark was at least partly to blame for the C. difficile outbreaks.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/cbc-s-dirty-hospital-report-sparks-changes-1.1291510