Showing posts with label BC Election 09. Show all posts
Showing posts with label BC Election 09. Show all posts

Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Beware where we place the ethical and moral bar

Following the publication of his "inappropriate" Facebook photos, I can see how the BC NDP and its former Vancouver-False Creek candidate, Ryan Lam, thought it was best to part ways and find a new candidate. Nip the story in the bud and don't let it distract from bigger issues.

It really is unfortunate, though that it has come to this. He shouldn't have had to step aside. And we're all going to be the poorer because he did.

I think both the public, and political partisans, need to do some thinking here, because with the coming generation of young politicians having embraced the digital era, the world of Facebook and blogging and Twitter, stories such as Lam's are going to become all the more common.

So he consensually groped a woman. Anyone who has spend any time on Parliament Hill knows such behavior is hardly foreign to our politicians, going back to Sir John A MacDonald's era. I'd have loved to have seen Pierre Trudeau's Facebook photos. Or read Sir John's tweets:

BigJohn: Getting on boat to PEI to talk Canadian union. Picking up Cartier in Montreal we're gonna get soo drunk y'all.

This isn't new behavior by our politicians. Technology is just exposing us to visual evidence we didn't have before. And while sharing such information online is perfectly acceptable for their generation, for the older generation it's decidedly not.

We need to think though about where we're going to draw the line. For the public, we need to ask ourselves, what kind of political representatives we want. Politicians are people like you and I. Set the bar of ethical behavior so high and the only people willing to put their names on a ballot will be closeted loners. Not a positive advancement.

And for partisans, sure, it's easy to jump on any potentially embarrassing misdeed and demand resignation. But we need to remember, when we encourage the bar to be set that high it's going to be a level we have to reach as well. Be ridulous and it'll bite your own team in the ass too.

Maybe the BC NDP has an itchy trigger-finger after its federal cousins lost three candidates in BC last election. Frankly, I thought only two of them really needed to go: Dana Larsen (only because he was driving while high) and Julian West (exposing yourself to underage girls and asking them to paint your genitalia is incredibly wrong to all generations). But I'd have fought for Kirk Tousaw were I the NDP, who cares if he smoked pot on TV?

But with the Lam case, both the NDP and the Liberals set an unfortunate precedent that future candidates will have to be held to. And we should all be asking ourselves: is this a good thing?

Hell, if we held everyone to Dana Larsen's standard, Gordon Campbell wouldn't be the Liberal candidate in Vancouver-Point Grey, now would he?

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Go Canucks! The playoffs get political

A good start to the playoffs by my Vancouver Canucks last night. They need to watch the penalties or they’re going to get burned, but 5on5 they were stellar and Bobby-Lou was his usual awesome self. The man has something to prove, so watch out.

This isn’t a sports blog though, so let me bring it back to politics. Getting politicians to blog and embrace social media has always been tricky. If they get too real and unscripted, it can backfire. But canned repetitions of talking-points ghost-written by comms staffers are boring, and run contrary to the rules of the medium.

With the BC election mirroring the Stanley Cup playoffs the Vancouver Sun is trying a novel approach to this dilemma: invite BC Liberal leader Gordon Campbell and BC NDP leader Carole James to blog for them … about hockey.

Yes, while Stephen Harper is pretending to write about hockey, Campbell and James actually will be.

The Sun is calling the joint Campbell-James blog “Faceoff” and it got underway yesterday. So far, Gordon has filed three entries and Carole has filed two. Or, more likely, their staffers have.

Here’s some post-game analysis from Gordo:

Getting Sami in on the scoring bodes well. We always do well when our defense plays their game, and then scores a goal or two for good measure…I also thought Ryan Kesler showed how a real leader contributes without necessarily scoring. It's not just scoring goals, it's stopping them…The Blues will get better, but with that game under their belts, so will the Canucks. It was a game where special teams did as much as could have been expected and we got the W.

And some pre-game scene-setting from James:
I'd like to think that playoffs are a lot like the election campaign…Anything can happen. It doesn’t matter what happened in the regular season. I feel optimistic about the Canucks’ chances in the playoffs. They've got their game together and they’ve been going in the right direction for the past several weeks…The Stanley Cup playoffs are a marathon, not a sprint. The campaign is the same. You can’t afford to conserve energy, but you can’t be frivolous about it either.

It’s early, but so far it seems Campbell is focusing more on hockey analysis while James is trying a little harder to draw political parallels. Or maybe Campbell is just being subtler.

We’ll see how the experiment goes. And maybe the Sun can invite some Canucks to write political blogs. Does Mats Sundin support the carbon tax? Does Roberto Luongo favour electoral reform? Inquiring minds, etc.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

The politics of green

And by green I don’t mean money, although dolla bills are certainly part of the equation. No, by green I mean environmental policy, and specifically carbon shifts, carbon taxes, green shifts, NAMBLA, whatever you want to call it.

With two green policy motions (dating back how many years, I don’t know) set to be debated at the upcoming Liberal convention that mention a carbon tax (in passing, it should be noted, as one possible component of a wider environmental policy) the issue is back somewhat on the federal scene. The Conservatives are/will also try to make something of Ignatieff’s original support for a carbon tax.

I’m fairly confident that a carbon tax won’t be part of our election platform. Even though every expert agrees it’s the superior solution. We took it to the people last time, and they said no. They didn’t like the tradeoffs. That’s democracy. We’ll try other approaches. C’est la vie. If public opinion comes around in the future, we can revisit it.

What’s more interesting though is what’s happening on the carbon tax front in British Columbia, where the provincial election is underway. There, the carbon tax is already implemented by the BC Liberals (no relation). And it caused us federal folks no end of frustration during the last election, with both the NDP and the Conservatives teaming-up to spread lies and misinformation, scare-mongering about double taxation and promoting other myths.

But federal headaches aside, it has been fascinating to watch the carbon tax drama unfold in BC.

There was a time I might have looked at a carbon tax as an ‘Only Nixon could go to China’ kind of thing. It’s good policy, but the fed Libs would (and did) get slammed on the right for trying it (my idealistic hopes we could pull it off to the contrary). But if you sold a conservative government (like the BC Libs) on a carbon shift, which every environmental expert will tell you is the right policy, and had that conservative government put it forward, then surely the more progressive parties would be on board, and Bob’s your uncle.

Well, the first half worked. Gordon Campbell went to China. And then the BC NDP went all Joe McCarthy on his ass.

It’s hard to see the NDP’s decision to oppose the carbon tax as anything but political opportunism, designed to win rural votes in Northern British Columbia, where the carbon tax is deeply unpopular. Any support their stance wins them though may cost them support with their traditional base, however:

"A step backwards for climate action." That's how three environmental organizations described the provincial New Democrat's campaign platform during a media briefing today, stating the "positive ideas" included in that document are "insufficient to compensate" for the party's promise to cancel the carbon tax. At the same time, they applauded the Liberals for taking British Columbia from being a climate change "laggard to leader in four years" by introducing that tax, among other measures.

Or maybe not. Because while three groups were present for yesterday’s presser attacking the BC NDP’s climate change platform (the David Suzuki Foundation, ForestEthics and The Pembina Institute), a year ago 16 environmental groups came together to support the carbon tax. Because I guess, for some environmental groups, while criticizing NDP opposition to a carbon tax is one thing, doing so on the eve of an election is quite another.

From the Western Canada Wilderness Committee:
"Yes, the wilderness committee is disappointed that the NDP do not support the carbon tax. But, in a broader environmental sense, we are very pleased with many parts of the NDP platform - including their protection of BC Hydro and keeping it public and protected, our best tool for fighting climate change."

(snip)

"Well, I understand their disappointed over the NDP not following the carbon tax, but for God sake! The sucking up to large industrial polluters, the gutting of everything from the Forest Practices Code to the very right for citizens to know whose polluting in their neighborhoods, the catering to the carbon spewing industries - including those industries that profit from sprawl development - why in the Hell would you support that or pander to it in this way?"

Fair enough. A carbon tax is just one element of environmental policy. It’s one that the BC Liberals have gotten right, and it’s a significant step, but it’s perfectly legitimate to argue they’ve dropped the ball in other areas, and that the NDP platform is superior in other areas.

And one wonders, even if the NDP does piss off some of their green base, where is it going to go? It’s like the federal Conservatives pissing off the so-cons: where are they going to go?

Some may go BC Liberal, but probably not in large numbers. They fundamentally disagree with Gordo on too many other issues to hold their noses. What would be interesting is if we see NDP supporters going to the Green Party, particularly in urban seats. It could be enough of a margin to swing a few seats. Most though will probably take the pragmatic view and hold their noses, remembering Kang and Kodos’ advice about voting for third-party candidates.

So, it will be fascinating to see how the carbon tax issue plays-out in the BC election campaign. As an interesting sidenote though, consider how this could play out if we’d passed STV in 2005 (hopefully we’ll pass it this time). Rather than feeling they need to vote NDP to stop Campbell and with the impact of those that do go Green being muted by FPTP, under STV green NDP supporters would feel freer to vote Green to express their carbon tax displeasure. And it wouldn’t take much of a percentage shift to see a number of seats go from NDP to Green. You’d also likely see the BC Liberals bleed seats to the Reform/Conservatives/ whatever they’re calling themselves these days.

It would be a very different legislature, with very different dynamics, to be sure. This could be the last election where the NDP could get away with a strategic calculation like this. Time will tell.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers

Sunday, March 22, 2009

Third-party mud starts to fly in BC election

BC politics has always been a little out there. From the Bennetts to Vanderzalm, from bingogate to hydrogate to Taxman Glen, politics in Lotusland have always been a little wacky. There will be an election May 12 and things are starting to heat-up again.

Rather that fling mud themselves though, right now it looks like its third-party proxy groups that are getting their hands dirty. Possibly the most outrageous example is an advertisement called "Gordon Campbell Hates You" from MoveForwardBC.ca, a group launched by the Canadian Office and Professional Employees Union, Local 378 (COPE 378) to attack the BC Liberals.



This moves beyond negative to downright insulting and disgusting, with a big dash of stupid thrown in. Far from being effective, I think it just undermines the credibility of the organization promoting it.

On the other side of the spectrum is Vote Smart BC, set-up by the Independent Contractors and Builders Association of BC (ICBA), to take on the BC NDP. They oppose unionization in the industry. They don't have the option of embedding their videos (bad social media strategy, ICBA!) but they have a number of ads on their site. They go after the BC NDP in a much tamer although still negative way, using two animated yard signs to slam the NDP's record in government in the 1990s. There's also a game where you can race a fast ferry using a rowboat. You always seem to either get swamped in the wake, get pushed to victory by a rip tide, or win when the ferry gets hauled off to auction.

Just a taste of politics, BC style. And the increasing influence of third-party money and advertising, particularly when fixed election dates gives everyone time to get the mud ready to fly well in advance.
_____
**Help send a BCer to BC for the Liberal convention. Any support is greatly appreciated.

Recommend this Post on Progressive Bloggers