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

ADAM OLSEN: Why do politicians act on consequences, instead of conscience? Because, they are rewarded for it


I heard a quote the other day; "They act out of fear of consequence, not out of conscience - Why? because you reward them for it!"  CNN anchor and Sirius XM host Chris Cuomo was talking about politicians.

Cuomo is brash. This quote comes from the middle of a rant about the political divide in the United States. It was actually very good, perhaps it was more of a verbose lamentation. Nevertheless, at a high level this is applicable in our divided politics.
LNG Canada

The wrong incentives motivate us.

In the debate on the LNG tax bill last week, more of that was exposed. Even though the votes on the record for these tax breaks show every BC NDP and every BC Liberal standing for them — and only the 3 Greens against — this does not accurately reflect the sentiment in the Chamber.

I can see it, and I have been told otherwise. While I deeply respect the challenge that each of my colleagues struggle with - personally, professionally and politically, I wonder why do they stand with such confidence when Mr. Speaker calls the vote?

Rewards for bad decisions

One explanation is the perverse incentives in our political systems. To Cuomo's point: for decades now, politicians have been acting out of fear of consequences, not on their conscience.

I had numerous conversations with my colleagues last week "who agree with much of what I am saying" in my speeches about the LNG tax bill. Yet, when the vote was called, there were only 3 of us standing to reflect that.


There are not strong enough consequences for knowingly disconnecting information. For example, how is it that there can be a majority of support for the LNG industry in British Columbia and an almost perfectly equal opposition to fracking?

It's because for many British Columbians the two are not directly connected. The LNG pitch based on a false premise that it is our duty to the rest of the world to help them get off coal, because burning gas is cleaner than burning coal.

But fracking is really bad for the environment. Concerns about water use, earthquakes, toxic tailings ponds pock-marking the landscape, habitat destruction and more are all realities of the fracking industry. They are our burdens and British Columbians are very concerned about that.

The whole supply chain

The LNG narrative has been, and continues to be, dishonest. An honest discussion would account for all aspects of the fracked gas supply chain, not just the convenient chunks.

An honest accounting of the economics does not stop at the revenue projections, but decision-makers would have to reflect on the projections of the environmental, social and other costs of the decision as well. Unfortunately, potential revenue is the only thing dangled in front of British Columbians.

My guess is that this decision about LNG and the future of our planet is being made by political operatives measuring consequences.

The BC Liberals will tell British Columbians:  
"This is our work; it was always this timeline; the BC NDP have done nothing (except make it worse). All this aside, we support it because we always have."

There are political consequences for them to vote against it.

The BC NDP on the other hand are calculating that if they can accomplish what the BC Liberals could not, then they will get a political win. If they can all weather the storm for a few weeks, while this bill is in front of the House, and keep their numbers in line (standing up when their supposed to), they might win some seats in non-traditional areas.

Adam Olsen, Green Party MLA
for Saanich North & the Islands
Finally, they are gambling that there will not be any consequences with their voting base. They’re betting their voters will look at the ballot, in the next election, and do what they have always done.

That's the final part of Cuomo's comment. Why do politicians act on consequences instead of conscience? Because, they are rewarded for it.



Adam Olsen is the Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia for Saanich North and the Islands

Born in Victoria, BC in 1976, Adam has lived, worked and played his entire life on the Saanich Peninsula. 

He is a member of Tsartlip First Nation (W̱JOȽEȽP), where he and his wife, Emily, are raising their two children, Silas and Ella.





FOR YOUR INFORMATION:

"BC government News:  Legislation introduced to complete fiscal framework for LNG investment, jobs and benefits"

Read full story by CLICKING HERE

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

RCMP gag order comes after BC NDP catch heat for diverted safe supply (Northern Beat)

In the wake of several high-profile police drug seizures of suspected safer supply that put the BC NDP government on the defensive last month, BC RCMP “E” division issued a gag order on detachments, directing them to run all communications on “hot button” public safety issues through headquarters in the lead-up to the provincial election. “It is very clear we are in a pre-election time period and the topic of ‘public safety’ is very much an issue that governments and voters are discussing,” writes a senior RCMP communications official in an email dated Mar. 11 in what appears to have gone out to all BC RCMP detachments . . . . CLICK HERE for the full story

KRUGELL: BC NDP turns its attention from BC United to BC Conservatives

The BC NDP turning its attention, from BC United, to BC Conservatives was reported over the weekend from a variety of sources. It is the result of the surge in the BC Conservative's polling numbers and the subsequent collapse of BC United. The NDP has largely ignored the BC Conservatives, instead they opt to talk about issues directly or attack their old foes BC United. Practical politics says that parties closer to the centre tend to ultimately prevail over the long haul. They do wane but often make comebacks. A good example is the federal Liberals going from third party to government in 2015. Centrism has a lot of appeal on voting day. The NDP shifting its fire from United to Conservative is a reflection of reality. BC United did buy advertising online and radio over the last few months. Did that shift the polls back to them? Nope. The reality is today, the BC Conservatives are the party of the Opposition, and day by day the Conservatives are looking like a party not ready to fig

Baldrey: 2024 meets 1991? How B.C. election history could repeat itself (Times Colonist)

NOTE ... not the original image from Keith Baldrey's op/ed 1991 BC general election -- Wikipedia   A veteran NDP cabinet minister stopped me in the legislature hallway last week and revealed what he thinks is the biggest vulnerability facing his government in the fall provincial election. It’s not housing, health care, affordability or any of the other hot button issues identified by pollsters. "I think we are way too complacent,” he told me. “Too many people on our side think winning elections are easy.” He referenced the 1991 election campaign as something that could repeat itself. What was supposed to be an easy NDP victory then almost turned into an upset win for the fledgling BC Liberal Party. Indeed, the parallels between that campaign and the coming fall contest are striking ... CLICK HERE for the full story

Labels

Show more