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

THE OLD GUY said it best; "The public should not be required to subsidize any party, or individual candidate"



Very late Saturday evening ... well actually it was VERY EARLY Sunday morning, I decided to pen the piece, "He was right ... he still is ... and yet the BC Liberals choose to take this money anyway. I hope they choke on it".

 

It has generated several comments, sadly some come as personal only, and the individual writing them cannot be identified for reasons it could cause them problems.  Regardless, here is an interesting dialogue I've had over the past day and a half, with one of my acquaintances in BC politics


I'd share your outrage but in this case it's transitional to zero subsidies so in the big scheme of things it's not a major issue.  Lots of other issues are more important, like electing the Tory guy in Kelowna!

Sorry __ xyz __ but I have to strongly disagree.  They can spend their own money on whatever they want, but taxpayers should not have to subsidize the Liberals, NDP, and Greens.  And as I mentioned, what about anyone running as an independent?  Is it democratic that they be shut out from this money?  Transitional or not, it is not right.

You are of course welcome to your own opinions but also you should be aware that all political donations also are tax-deductible up to a certain level. (YES I knew, and was aware of, that)

BC Legislature in Victoria (image from BC Liberal caucus)
IMO it doesn't help BC Conservatives' electoral hopes for you to be ranting against electoral reform when most people want it regardless of the details of how it is done.

Choose your fights wisely and learn when to stay strategically quiet, IMO.

Now here is where it gets interesting ... apparently this individual was NOT AWARE of the amount taxpayers were dishing out thanks to the BC NDP government:

When I saw the cost numbers last night, in someone else's writing, I was shocked at the bite, so I'll walk back my position a bit.

The Liberals were grossly abusing the old system but the transition to a new one is iffy and now (Todd) Stone says he won't take the taxpayers money anyway if he wins so it's a mess.

Let me be clear, if you have not been aware of this previously
... 
Commentaries posted on my blog site, "Thoughts on BC Politics and More", are personal reflections, and do not necessarily represent the viewpoints of the BC Conservative Party. I write as a small 'c' conservative, and though at times I will agree with the ideas of another political party, my allegiances are with the BC Conservatives.

That is why, as a Conservative, I totally rejected a commentary from Pierre on a re-posting of my commentary on the Armchair Mayors website:

The conservatives would not give the money to a social cause…because every time a conservative gets a change at governing, it does not give money to social cause.  When it does, it's for half-hearted, poorly conceived and ineffective programs.
Conservatives protect the interests of the rich and powerful.

My response to Pierre?
You ARE NOT a conservative Pierre, and you do not speak for them; and especially not me.

Protecting the rights if the rich and powerful? That could be said of any cold-hearted individuals – IN ANY PARTY.  Regardless of party however, it will never (I hope) speak for the majority of elected officials or members.

Conservatives, myself among then, want the best for society as a whole. Not a handout though; instead we should ensure we offer a hand-up

The Old Guy, again in the Armchair Mayor's website, probably summed it up best when he simply said:
The public should not be required to subsidize any party or individual candidate; however, if the organized parties are entitled, independent and non-aligned candidates should also be entitled. It's easier and far less complicated to not provide subsidies to any of them.

I'll wrap up by simply stating, anything that used taxpayer finances, should always be expended with these three thoughts in mind;

1) "Is this a wise use of taxpayer money?"

2) "Is there a better way we can do this"

3)  And finally, "Whose best interests does this serve?"

Judging by lower and lower voter turn-outs for elections, at all levels of government, I think we can safely assume (without making an Ass of You and Me) what the answers are to these questions are.

In Kamloops., I'm Alan Forseth.  Got a comment to make?  This is your chance to share it now.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Budget 2027: After a Decade of Decline, NDP Budget Delivers an Assault on Seniors, Working Families, and Small Businesses

Peter Milobar, BC Conservative Finance Critic, condemned the NDP government’s latest budget as the result of a decade of decline that has left British Columbians broke, unsafe, and paying more for less.   “After ten years of NDP mismanagement, this budget is an assault on seniors, working families, and the small businesses that drive our economy,” said Milobar. “The NDP have turned their back on the people working hardest to make ends meet and the seniors who built this province.” Milobar pointed to a new $1.1 billion annual income tax increase and warned that the government is piling new costs onto households already struggling with affordability.   “This government keeps asking British Columbians for more, while delivering less,” Milobar said. “The question people are asking is simple: Where has all the money gone?” Milobar noted that BC has gone from a surplus in the first year of NDP government to a projected deficit of more than $13 billion this year, while prov...

WARD STAMER -- Those are REAL forestry numbers, not just made-up numbers

The following is a condensed version of remarks Kamloops – North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer’s made, regarding Forestry, in the BC Legislature, on Tuesday afternoon (02/24/2026)   Let’s talk a little bit, when we talk about Budget 2026, about the forest industry, which is near and dear to my heart. Forestry remains one of British Columbia’s foundational industries. It’s a pillar that built this province. Entire communities depend upon it. Interior towns, northern communities, Vancouver Island regions, the Kootenays, the Lower Mainland, with manufacturing facilities in Surrey and Maple Ridge, just to name a few — everywhere in BC is touched by forestry. One word that was not mentioned in Budget 2026 was forestry. That’s a shame, an incredible shame. It wasn’t an oversight – it was intentional. This government has driven forestry into the ground .... INTO THE GROUND! We can talk a little bit about some of the initiatives that this government has brought forth, to try to resurrect ...

FORSETH -- Before anyone gets excited about one poll showing a candidate with a 25 percent lead, and 44 percent support overall, let’s give it a few more weeks

Is this based in reality -- how accurate are the numbers? In the past couple of weeks a couple of candidates, for the leadership of the BC Conservative Party, have been presenting polling results that they lead the pack – one even going so far as to say they have a lock on 44% of those who will be voting, and a twenty-five percent lead over the individual ranked second. I am going to say that this one, from Kerry-Lynne Findlay, is highly suspect. First of all the company conducting the poll, ERG National Research, is not a Member of Industry Bodies (the Canadian Research Insights Council), meaning they do not adhere to established industry standards for research, such as transparency, privacy, and methodological rigor. AI Overview states that ... based on alerts from the Canadian Research Insights Council (CRIC) and reports, ERG National Research should be treated with extreme caution regarding its reliability, and legitimacy, in conducting political polling. Before I even read this in...

Labels

Show more