Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

To (site) C or not to (site) C ... with apologies to Shakespeare


To (site) C or not to (site) C ... that is the question (sorry Shakespeare)I

It seems some people, when called to justify their action, and or statements, become master of the duck, dive, and weave method of politics.  On Wednesday Keith Baldrey posted this note on Twitter, “NDP denounces deal struck between BC Hydro-Building Trades Union to build Site C dam. #bcpoli”. 
 
This was picked up by Emile Scheffel who referenced Baldreys post and made his own comment stating, “Today's #BCNDP: opposed to 10,000 family-supporting jobs for union, non-union, and Aboriginal workers. https://twitter.com/keithbaldrey/status/603677885522640896 … #bcpoli” 
 
Both comments are fair and accurate, given that anyone can go online and check the facts for themselves.  For example:
 
Construction of Site C will create approximately10,000 person-years of direct employment during construction, and approximately 33,000 total person-years of employment through all stages of development and construction.

A new labour deal means union and non-union workers as well as independent First Nations' contractors will build the $9 billion Site C hydroelectric dam innorthern British Columbia.

BC Hydro president and CEO Jessica McDonald said the new agreement puts a premiumon the value of labour stability – over cheap labour. “In our discussions withthe building trades, we have found common ground that I think defines the new and modern model for large construction projects,” she said in an interview.

“The agreement represents a compromise and reflects the desire of our members to work on the project at union wages and benefits while also respecting the mixed site model of the employer,” said Tom Sigurdson, executive director of the BC Building Trades. “I am sure that we can get through the next steps and ensure this critical project will be built to the highest standards by British Columbians.”

BUT THIS IS WHERE IT GETS INTERESTING …


Mike Lowe, BC NDP Director of Caucus Services , from Colwood, took exception to me retweeting the Twitter post made by Emile Scheffel as I noted above at the start of this post.  He took exception so strongly that he replied to me by saying, “Lies and BS, but carry on gents”

Mike Lowe‏@milowe May 28
@AlanForseth @emile_bc Lies and BS, but carry on gents #bcndp #bcpoli

Alan Forseth ‏@AlanForseth May 28
@milowe @Emile_BC So you're saying #bcndp isnt opposed 2 #SiteC & union jobs construction union will get with agreement theyve made? #bcpoli

I pressed him several times to clarify how the comment was, as he indicated, ‘lies and BC’, however he refused to do so.  The fact is the NDP, through former leader Adrian Dix, is indeed opposed to the Site C Dam and power project.  He said so in the BC Legislature last Thursday (May 28th).  Dix is even going so far as to slam the BC Trades Council --- a union organization that one would expect to be an ally and supporter of the NDP – for signing on to have unionized workers develop and build the site.

Or maybe Mike Lowe is also calling Vaughn Palmer a liar as well, for a story he wrote on May 28th in the Vancouver Sun where he stated:
 
Not content with reiterating the NDP view that Site C should be subjected to a thorough review by the independent B.C. Utilities Commission, Dix launched into an over-the-top and mostly shouted critique that offered only grudging praise to the unions for “doing the best to represent their workers under the circumstances.”

The capstone was a reference to Liberal policy that “repeats itself first as tragedy, then as farce.” Yes, a quote from Karl Marx and no, you can’t make this stuff up.

Palmer is correct in saying you can’t make this stuff up … and it isn’t the first time that Adrian Dix has taken the boots to a group (unions) that support the NDP.  Recall the last time?  It was during the last provincial election when Adrian Dix managed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory with his Kinder Surprise moment.

Here again is Vaughn Palmer, from June 2013 with a story headlined, “Dix’s KinderMorgan surprise turned blue-collar vote in heartland against NDP”   

As to why that happened (losing the election), the most plausible explanation comes from Harry Lali himself, one of the longest serving NDP members in the past two decades.

“The real kicker was Kinder Morgan,” Lali told The Vancouver Sun’s Jonathan Fowlie in a recent interview in the provincial capital where he’d come to clean out his desk. “When the announcement about the Kinder Morgan pipeline was made, it basically decimated Interior and northern B.C. for us — rural B.C., basically.”

The reference being to party leader Adrian Dix’s mid-campaign change of position on the proposed twinning of the existing heavy oil pipeline between Alberta and Burnaby.

On the eve of the campaign he was still saying that as a “matter of principle” the NDP would not take a stand one way or another until the developer submitted a formal application for the project. Then in the second week, Dix, without prior consultation with his own MLAs, came out against the pipeline in an apparent bid to shore up support with urban, Green-leaning voters.

However much support the NDP gained in those quarters, Dix confirmed the worst suspicions of another segment of the electorate, according to Lali.

If I was current NDP leader John Horgan, I would be very nervous.  Last time Adrian Dix opened his mouth to say he was against a major project that would benefit unionized workers in a big way, he took what appeared to everyone to be a majority NDP win, into a huge lose on election day in 2013.

If Dix keeps opening his mouth like he has been, he could very well cause some very big problems again in the 2017 BC provincial election.

I'm Alan Forseth in Kamloops, and I'm curious what you think.



UPDATE:

It appears that Mike Lowe has decided to add some clarity to his comments of last week.  After this piece went online late last night, he went he was on Twiter to say the following:

Mike Lowe ‏@milowe 8h8 hours ago
@AlanForseth @BCBuildingTrade @Emile_BC (1) Dix did not say he was opposed to #SiteC, and (2) he did not slam the Building Trades #bcpoli

I am still not clear however if that means Adrian Dix and BC NDP will stop pushing against the Site C project … so I asked Mike for a clear Yes or No on the project

(1 of 2)  So UR saying that given #SiteC has Fed / Prov enviro approval, & prov green light, that #bcndp 

(2 of 2) … onboard with the 1000s of #BCTradeCouncil jobs its going to create

I’m waiting to hear, and whatever his response I’ll let you know

 
   
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Given the noted infractions of this agreement with OneBC leader Dallas Brodie, I request the Party immediate suspend the leadership campaign of Yuri Fulmer

I have personally emailed the following to the Board and Administration of the Conservative Party of BC:   TODAY (03/30) Yuri Fulmer, a candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party of BC, made a pact with ONEBC leader Dallas Broldie, that if he is elected will commit the Conservative Party to the following. Specifically, the pact states : This Memorandum of Understanding outlines the definitive electoral and governing alliance that will be executed upon Yuri Fulmer’s election as Leader of the Conservative Party of British Columbia OneBC Party commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in 88 of British Columbia’s 93 electoral districts. In exchange, the Conservative Party of BC, under the leadership of Yuri Fulmer, commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in five (5) specific electoral districts . OneBC will be the sole standard-bearer for the right in those five districts. The specific ridings will be determined through mutual negotiation and fin...
Post a Comment
Read more

FORSETH -- Focus on the nine things I mentioned. That’s what will allow the Conservative Party to win the next election

IMAGE CREDIT:   Darryl Dyck, the Canadian Press. I thought I had already made up my mind who I would be ranking on my ballot, in the Conservative Party of BC leadership race; now I am not so sure.  That means that, at least for me, and perhaps many others, it’s a good thing voting hasn’t already taken place. There were initially only one or two of the candidates that I thought might be a little too right of centre for my liking, now it seems that list is growing. I consider myself more closely aligned with what used to be called a Progressive Conservative, regardless, I feel more than comfortable within the Conservative Party of BC.  Some, however, in messages to me on my political Facebook page, have been rather, shall we say, a bit mean-spirited in comments they’ve made about my ‘purity’ as a conservative. To tell you the truth, I really don’t care! Some leadership candidates, in comments made online, have also been raising the issue of who is a pure enough conservati...
Post a Comment
Read more

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more