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

FORSETH: Without a strong local presence, there is NO reason for anyone to tune in to local(?) radio

LOCAL HOMETOWN RADIO IS DYING … and without serious measures put in place, it will likely never see the light of day again. For well over four decades, the Canadian Radio and Television Commission (CRTC) has presided over its’ demise, and for that I say, “Shame”. Without out a word to say enough was enough, the CRTC has allowed corporate Canada to buy up one radio station after the other, and then allowed them to slash staff to the point where some so-called local radio stations do nothing more than air programming that originates from communities well outside the region in which they are located. Case in point?   On CHNL* 610 in Kamloops, the morning show hosted by Vinnie and Randi, DOES NOT originate from Kamloops -- it doesn’t even originate here in BC. It’s a program that Stingray airs across multiple radio stations in Western Canada. It doesn’t end there. Not only are Vinnie and Rando doing mornings on CHNL, but they also show up on sister station Country 103 … and of course o...

Conservative Economic Team Responds to Urgent Industry Concerns

 " For far too long, the BC NDP has ignored the economic challenges facing British Columbians. Manufacturing jobs are vanishing, forestry is in decline, and private sector employment growth has stagnated. Meanwhile, affordability has worsened for both families and businesses. British Columbians deserve better, and we’re here to deliver real solutions to rebuild our economy and create jobs that support everyday working people and their families ." – Gavin Dew, MLA and Shadow Minister for Jobs, Economy, Development, and Innovation.   December 3, 2024, Vancouver, BC – The Conservative economic team met today with business leaders and stakeholders to tackle critical issues impacting British Columbia’s economy. Attended by 9 critics from the Conservative Caucus, this meeting was convened by MLA Gavin Dew – Shadow Minister for Jobs, Economic Development, and Innovation - as a direct response to an October 30th open letter from seven of the province’s largest industry associations. ...

WARD STAMER -- We need certainly in our markets, and certainly in our fibre supply, before we no longer have a forest industry in this province

Image Government of BC I think we all realize that the threat of Trump’s 25% tariff is like other provocative statements he’s made in the past. That said, we should have reason to be concerned. Tariffs don’t benefit anyone. A tariff of that magnitude – included on our own softwood lumber exports, will make things more expensive for Americans, and cause friction in the supply chain. If imposed, a twenty-five percent tariff will be equally detrimental to the citizens and economy of the United States, as well as the people of BC. There are two things, however, of equal concern to the threat of punitive tariffs by incoming U.S. President-elect Donald Trump. One is our antiquated stumpage fees. It is a legacy from decades ago, and one incapable of responding to changing market conditions. We need to revamp our stumpage system to better reflect market conditions, and our economic costs. Instead, a value-added tax system will be instantly responsive to current market conditions and will encou...

Labels

Show more