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

IAIN BLACK: History’s shown us that if you can draw people in on those basics, then you're going to win. If we don't, we'll lose.

Last night I had the opportunity to meet the Conservative Party of BC leadership candidate Iain Black.  The following is a condensed version of our conversation


ME:
  I’ve been involved with the BC Conservatives since 2010 ... and I’ve seen lots of ups and downs with infighting, and it’s been extremely disappointing.  Now, in this leadership race, we have some that are calling for purity. How blue are you? Light blue? Royal blue? How do you answer that”

IAIN:
  Great question. I love the setup because it tells me where you stand because sometimes you get asked that question and you're like, okay, which side of this issue is this person on, right?

So, thank you for telling me at least kind of you're thinking on it. We are violently in agreement.

I very much disagree with all purity tests because I think it's artificial and I think most of the people who are going down that path are new to being involved in politics.  I kind of don't understand why they suddenly feel self-anointed that they should be asking everyone at this table (candidates in the leadership race) about how conservative are you, and I don't even know how to answer the question to be honest.

Here's what I know. No one's come at me because my pedigree is pretty clear. Like I ran as a, you know, Conservative Party of Canada candidate in April of last year. I chaired the campaign in my local area, the election before that, and I've been raising money for the Conservatives for 20 years. So, my history is not up for grabs. So those who have been making cheeky little comments online about how conservative the other opponents are in the race; none of that's been pointed at me. But maybe that's why I feel both empowered and a wee bit responsible to be standing up and saying this is not okay.

I don't think it's healthy, and I don't think it's particularly logical, because here's what I know for sure. We've got this competition going on to elect next leader. We also have to win the next election because that's what this competition is all about -- and we are going to win this next election by not compromising on conservative principles.

We’ll stick to the basic ones like as small a government that still delivers on the sacrosanct services of health care, education, and taking care of our most vulnerable. I believe that, and it’s kind of an in Black cliche, so if you put TM next to it, “The government's job is to pave the way, and then get out of the way.”

I think freedom is a very important word, (however) I don't like how it's been used in the last half or decade or so. It's about people having the ability to live the life that they want to live. It's not our job as conservatives.

You may or may not be a religious man. I don't really care and that's actually how it should be. It's not my job to tell you if you should pray and if you do to whom you should pray, when and how ... up and to the point where your faith system is encroaching on the rights of others. Then it's not okay anymore.

I have no idea who, or how, you love. I don't care. It's not my business as government. I think when you stick to that kind of basic principle and values, that takes you to principal-based decision-making, you then come up with a plan; an optimistic view of where we can go with the province.

ME:
  We’ve all seen the weaknesses of the NDP, but how do you show people what it would look like if we were in the role of government to turn things around.

IAIN:
  Inspiration if you want, but it involves hope. It's really important; and I think that if you do that, you're going to attract people, and you stay true to those (conservative) values. You're going to paint the picture in a narrative, a plan, let's call it God forbid, a platform.

That's going to draw in people who voted for the NDP last time, and who realize these guys have screwed things up so badly, and who no longer have confidence in them (the NDP).

You're going to attract people who didn't vote at all last time, and really passionate people of no really fixed political address, who just want to hear you out. And we'll win.

History has shown us, for 100 years, if you can draw people in on those basics then you're going to win. If we don't, we'll lose to the NDP every time. If we go down purity test path.

The conversation then looked at the NDP’s latest budget:

IAIN:
  Like I want Eby gone. Let me be very clear. I want him gone. But do I think he's a loving husband and father? Yes, I do. He's wrong. I think he's dreadfully wrong. I think he's been sneaky ... I would suggest you saw evidence of that in this budget ... because of several reasons.

Number one is the way that they went after seniors. That's their base. They went after funding for autistic children. That's their base.

They went to renters and who will now be paying PST on their strata-fees.

And then going after bookkeeping, now they go up to small businesses.

In short, my theory is that when a budget goes after your own base like that, it's because the premier swooped in on in in the 11th hour and said there's no way we're putting a $15 billion deficit on the books. We've got to make changes to pull back -- and the only bullets they had left was to fire was at their own base.

If you hire a lawyer, get services, you tax them. Bookkeepers, architects, engineers and the development industry; you tax them.

It's gob-smacking. A $13 billion dollar deficit. That's not going to go away.

ME:
  Let’s look down the road.  It’s May 30th, and you're like the new leader of the Conservative Party. What are you going to do, because last election we got hit with all kinds of lies about alleged cuts we were going to make?  That deficit, the next leader will inherit is not going away anytime soon, so what do we do?

IAIN:
  So, a few things. I am burdened by my experience in this one. We actually don't know what this (the actual states of the provinces books) looks like -- and I know that gets used a lot when governments change.  They come out and say, "Oh, we can't do all these things, we promised," because the books are a lot worse than we thought.

The unfortunate reality is it's almost certainly true. You don't know till you get a look under the hood and you actually get to sit with the deputies, and the assistant deputies, to understand how money has been spent – and what you have to show for. 

It took us 158 years, give or take, to get to that $66 billion total accumulated debt load, which your children and grandchildren will have to pay off. Within a year and a half it's going to hit at a minimum $158 billion ... and likely 189 is the top end.

Three times. Three times what it was when these clowns took office.

I would be fired if I went into any board meeting. I would at least get asked by a thoughtful board director, “What do you have to show for the money? For all that extra spending and all that extra debt.”?

Show me the new hospital in Kamloops. 

Show me the Red Bridge being replaced. 

Show me new high schools. 

Show me connection roads. Make another crossing across the river. 

Show me something that you've got for that money, and not just in Kamloops.

I think the first thing we do is try to get better value for the money being spent. If I can't eliminate the deficit and debt overnight, can I at least get better value for the money spent? That would be job number one. I try to calculate how do I right this ship financially.

We've already had, I think, four downgrades to our credit rating. And I expect another one based on the strength of this horrible budget as well. So, you now have interest rates that must be considered ... and this would be a key part of the challenge as well.

You now have interest payments as the third largest ministry of government. Health care, education, and then interest on the debt. And that's with interest rates still at a near 40 year low. So, what happens if the go up another point or two?

I mean, God forbid you could see interest payments on our debt being greater than what we spend on the public interest (public services).

So, you've got to change what you spend money on the on the big items that you can't just cut. Change the way you spend money, try to get better value for that money, and then try to bring things back in line.

But we also need to grow the size of the pie. I could focus on other ministries as well. In fact, I will for just a second.

Things like mining, forestry, and natural gas and oil as well -- but definitely mining and forestry. The thing is, we can't save our way out of this. We can't spend our way out of it either. We have to grow the pie.

We have yanked away the welcome mat of investment yet again. When Gordon Campbell took over in 2001, British Columbia was the last place in Canada across every one of 10 or 12 economic measurements. Six years later, we were quite literally first in every one of those same economic measurements.

And I won't suggest that was easy, because it wasn't. I would suggest to you that the challenge in front of us right now is more complicated. And it's complicated because the chess pieces are smaller because the economy is bruised and broken -- industry being a great example.

You have got now cohort of 35- to 40-year-old people just graduated from university, for whom whatever this, is isn't working.

They work for 20 years like their parents, but they don't get to buy a house like their parents did – if they're lucky, they have the down payment for a townhouse.

When they want to take their child out, they can't take him for a walk in the park because we surrendered our public spaces to drug addicted people and criminals and that's become the norm.

They can't get a family doctor.

ME:  The thing I heard loud and clear, through-out the conversation, was a comment you see on his campaign website:  "I believe government should be a partner in growth, not an obstacle. It should set clear rules, spend responsibly, and deliver services people can depend on."

Our 
conversation went on for a few minutes, but I’m getting short on time here, so I’m to wrap up.  Overall, I believe that given what I heard, Iain is the kind of candidate that would make a good leader, but to this point he is just the third one I’ve had the opportunity to meet with.

Tonight I’ll be hearing from Caroline Elliott, and I’ll let you know my impressions tomorrow.  If you have the opportunity, come out and meet her yourself – she’ll be at the Noble Pig on Victoria Street from 6 to 8pm.



Comments

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...

Delays to the replacement of the Red Bridge? Kamloops North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer says they are, “Totally Unacceptable.”

I think it’s totally unacceptable that on one hand the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) is saying they’re going to be responsible for putting together multiple replacement options with public engagement, and then in the same breath they're saying, ‘Oh, and by the way, we're going to start our geotechnical environmental and archaeological site assessments on both sides of the river, possibly beginning this summer.’ According to Stamer, that should already have been done. “Obviously, we're pretty sure it will be in the same location because there's really no other place to put it. So, if you're going to put in a bridge, you think that at least you'd be doing the archaeological assessments first off”, stated Stamer.   “If it's determined it has to be a free-span bridge, and it can't have anything or very minimal impact in the riverbed, they should already be determining that. It would help in the design, wouldn't it?” Stamer indicated...

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...

Labels

Show more