2001 replies to this topic

[Kapten Kapsell]

It looks like the Green Candidate will not win in West Vancouver Sea-to-Sky ; the Liberal incumbent there has finished ahead by 41 votes, and this triggers an automatic recount.

Edited by Kapten Kapsell, 08 November 2020 - 10:12 AM.

[Mike K.]

Wow!

[Casual Kev]

It looks like the Green Candidate will not win in West Vancouver Sea-to-Sky ; the Liberal incumbent there has finished ahead by 41 votes, and this triggers an automatic recount.

 

That's crazy. Valeriote had a 600 votes cushion. If the result stands that's a crushing loss for the BC Greens.

[RFS]

Looks like the libs have officially lost parksville qualicum, meaning total Island shut out

[Nparker]

...If the result stands that's a crushing loss for the BC Greens.

A loss for the Greens = a win for the province?

[Kapten Kapsell]

Note that the Greens need to retain just 2 seats to retain Official Party status, and they are on track to do that with Adam Olsen's seat and Sonia Furstenau's seat.  

 

With 57 seats, the NDP have the second-largest majority in the history of the legislature; I assume that the NDP's seat count won't change since the only recount (West Vancouver - Sea to Sky) is a contest between the Green and Liberal parties.

[Nparker]

It's absurd that 2 seats are enough to obtain official party status. Just more taxpayer money down the drain.

[Jackerbie]

It's absurd that 2 seats are enough to obtain official party status. Just more taxpayer money down the drain.

 

Yah, that was part of the GreeNDP agreement, to bring the number down from 4 to 2

[Nparker]

Yah, that was part of the GreeNDP agreement, to bring the number down from 4 to 2

It was a bad idea then and worse idea now.

[JohnsonStBridge]

It's absurd that 2 seats are enough to obtain official party status. Just more taxpayer money down the drain.

 

If I recall from the 2017 agreement reached to amend minimum party status, taxpayer funding was reduced as a result of the Greens receiving official party status. The Green MLAs got additional pay for positions as party leader etc. but got less funding for office/staffing as they were no longer considered 3 separate "independent" offices and therefore received a lower amount per MLA to set up a combined party office.

 

Might be closer to being a wash with only 2 members this go around but the official party status was always about having more power in terms of being guaranteed time in question period and the like. I wonder who Sonia picks as the party whip from her vast rank and file?

[lanforod]

The NDP can change it back now, can’t they? 🙃

[Casual Kev]

At face value 2 seats for official status seems too lenient, but remember that a third party usually needs to have a high baseline of votes to get a seat at all. The BC Greens had 15% of the popular vote at the end of the day.

 

Remember when the Bloc Quebecois was the official opposition in the federal legislature with only 13% of the vote? 

[Nparker]

At face value 2 seats for official status seems too lenient, but remember that a third party usually needs to have a high baseline of votes to get a seat at all. The BC Greens had 15% of the popular vote at the end of the day.

So perhaps we shouldn't rely on FPTP voting to represent the wishes of the electorate. 

[vortoozo]

So perhaps we shouldn't rely on FPTP voting to represent the wishes of the electorate. 

 

I would tend to agree, however, that was put to the people twice, and twice pro-rep failed. So FPTP it is.

[FogPub]

A loss for the Greens = a win for the province?

A loss for any small party is a loss for the province, if one wants to hear anything other than the same old stuff from the big two.

[Nparker]

The BC Greens have had 3 years to impress us with fresh ideas. We are still waiting.

[VIResident]

I hope this and the addition of one more new ministry happens:

(a single ministry 100% dedicated to Municipal Affairs)

Comment: We are an ocean province, let's act like one

 

"Isn’t it time B.C. acted like the coastal province that it so clearly is?

 

The new B.C. government should create a ministry and bring forward — and quickly — a strategy and a Coastal Protection Act."  https://www.timescol...-one-1.24237801

[vortoozo]

The BC Greens have had 3 years to impress us with fresh ideas. We are still waiting.

 

Why should they need new ideas?
By nature of what they stand for, the BC Greens take the long term view when other parties are looking for short term solutions that have little consideration for long term impacts.

The Greens are concerned about policies that will ensure good quality of life for people one, two and more generations from us. However, that means that difficult and unpopular decisions need to be made that will require sacrifices in the short term. Most people don't see/care about the big picture. They just want to improve things for their own quality of life now.

An example is LNG. Yes, it provides jobs and helps the economy in the short term. But the long term impact is not that great. Those jobs will disappear eventually, and we'll have release a whole hell of a lot more carbon that will continue to create more severe weather, more deaths, changes in habitat, etc. Meanwhile, if the same investment in jobs and the economy was made into long term solutions that improve our world, we will be in a much better place next generation even if it means a negative impact on today.

 

A great example is Alberta - the UCP cancelled a bunch of non-oil investment, laid off workers in non-oil sectors. But then the price of oil tanked and everyone is hurting now. The decision made a year or two ago to focus on the short term win has already backfired.

[RFS]

 

An example is LNG. Yes, it provides jobs and helps the economy in the short term. But the long term impact is not that great. Those jobs will disappear eventually, and we'll have release a whole hell of a lot more carbon that will continue to create more severe weather, more deaths, changes in habitat, etc. Meanwhile, if the same investment in jobs and the economy was made into long term solutions that improve our world, we will be in a much better place next generation even if it means a negative impact on today.

 

 

 

If BC were the world, this makes sense.  In a global context this doesn't work.  We just lose our jobs, the prospective LNG buyers still burn their carbon, they just buy it from someone else, often actually worse for emissions overall than buying from us

[gstc84]

If BC were the world, this makes sense.  In a global context this doesn't work.  We just lose our jobs, the prospective LNG buyers still burn their carbon, they just buy it from someone else, often actually worse for emissions overall than buying from us

 

Aren't defenders of capitalism always saying that it drives innovation? So why should we be content to sit back, shrug and say "our LNG is less awful for the planet than other sources" rather than investing more in new, more sustainable, less harmful energy sources/technologies like the Greens advocate for?

 

I agree they still need more of a cohesive vision beyond environmental protection if they ever want to lead the government, but they certainly deserve a stronger voice than our political system has given them.