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

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...

Stamer: Hope for Forestry Completely Shattered After Another Provincial Review Driven by DRIPA

IMAGE CREDIT:  Provincial Forestry Advisory Council Conservative Critic for Forests Ward Stamer says the final report from the Provincial Forestry Advisory Council confirms the worst fears of forestry workers and communities; instead of addressing the real issues driving mill closures and job losses, the NDP has produced a report that ignores industry realities and doubles down on governance restructuring. Despite years of warnings from forestry workers, contractors, and industry organizations about permitting delays, regulatory costs, fibre access, and the failure of BC Timber Sales, the PFAC report offers no urgency, no timelines, and no concrete action to stop the ongoing decline of the sector. “ This report completely shatters any remaining hope that the government is serious about saving forestry ,” said Stamer.  “ We didn’t need another study to tell us what industry has been saying for years. While mills close and workers lose their livelihoods, the NDP is focused on re...

FORSETH – My question is, ‘How do we decide who is blue enough to be called a Conservative?’

How do we decide who’s blue enough to be a Conservative? AS OF TODAY (Friday January 30 th ), there are now eight individuals who have put their names forward to lead the Conservative Party of British Columbia. Having been involved with BC’s Conservatives since 2010, and having seen MANY ups and downs, having 8 people say “I want to lead the party” is to me, an incredible turn-around from the past. Sadly, however, it seems that our party cannot seem to shake what I, and others, call a purity test of ‘what is a Conservative’. And that seems to have already come to the forefront of the campaign by a couple of candidates. Let me just say as a Conservative Party of BC member, and as someone active in the party, that frustrates me to no end. Conservatives, more than any other political philosophy or belief, at least to me, seems to have the widest and broadest spectrum of ideals.   For the most part, they are anchored by these central thoughts --- smaller and less intru...

Labels

Show more