Find Cheap Textbooks - Save on New & Used Textbooks at AbeBooks.com
Feed on
Posts
Comments
Christy Clark announcing her cabinet in 2013 (Flicker CC Licence / Government of BC)

Christy Clark announcing her cabinet in 2013 (Flicker CC Licence / Government of BC)

Can Christy Clark, the Gumshoe (Rich Coleman) and the other sad cast of characters occupying the cabinet offices in Victoria win the next election, about 17 months away?

Your damn tooting they can and the way things look right now, I think they will.

This certainly isn’t what I want to happen nor, if the social media are any indication, is it the wish of the public. Experience tells us, however, there are other traditional forces at play that somehow always surprise us when they happen.

“Not a dime without debate”

The “right” has done a masterful job of convincing a substantial segment of voters that the NDP are wastrels and incompetent when in office.

This takes me back to younger days when I went to a federal Liberal rally where one of their cabinet ministers, Lionel Chevrier, gave the main speech. He made just one point: “It is said, ladies and gentlemen, that Liberal times are good times and Tory times are bad times – the Tories claim this is just a coincidence but I ask you, which coincidence will you be voting for?”

Not a terribly honest question but winning politics.

I still read about Bill Bennett and his “not a dime without debate” caper and how he demonstrated, back in 1975, that Dave Barrett was a wastrel.

As a procedural matter, the NDP had proposed that debate of ministers’ estimates be confined to 135 hours in total.

This was an entirely reasonable proposition but the Socreds deliberately slowed down the debates until the Minister of Finance was reached. Now the Minister of Finance himself spends very little money – his job is to dole it out, not spend it, and often he’s not even questioned.  This was different!

The Socreds kept questioning, until, as expected, the Speaker stopped proceedings, saying that the opposition had run out their 135 hours, ending debate on Estimates. The Socreds, keeping up the facade, protested lustily and Bennett went around the province hollering “not a dime without a debate”. Just in case that wasn’t enough, Premier Barrett cut off his legislative stipend making him a martyr to democracy. More than anything else, this won the 1975 election for the Socreds, including me.

The label still sticks

After we got in it occurred to us that this 135 hour rule was not a bad one so we dispatched our House Leader to meet with the NDP House Leader to make arrangements to bring it in. The NDP leader, Dennis Cocke, almost died laughing, as did the entire NDP caucus, and, in fact, they extended estimates longer than ever before in the history of the legislature!

During the NDP administrations of Harcourt, Clark, Miller, and Dosanjh the opposition Liberals worked overtime to demonstrate that they couldn’t run a peanut stand. The NDP cooperated often enough to make it stick. One need only look at the last election to see how Clark and Brad Bennett, at the last minute, played the business card, stating to all who would listen that business would vanish from British Columbia if he NDP were elected.

A modicum of chicanery

British Columbia voters are divided, roughly 35% right wing, 25% NDP, the balance switching according to the mood of the moment. It’s very instructive to look back at the Barrett years – in 1972 he upset WAC with a popular vote of 39%, achieving a near landslide. In 1975 Barrett lost to Bill Bennett but received – are you ready for this – 39% of the popular vote. It takes very little for the Liberals to get from 35-40%. A modicum of chicanery does it very nicely.

If the Liberals can make the case in 2017 that they’ve been good stewards of the public purse and that business is good, it won’t matter that they have actually done neither.

The myth of the “balanced budget”

The critical ingredient of Liberal self-congratulation is a balanced budget. Everyone who thinks about it knows that’s because they’ve cut social services dramatically or not increased them as necessary. But that argument won’t prevail with the 10% who naively accept a balanced budget as the litmus test of success, no matter how it’s achieved. Statistics will be trotted out to show how good business is even though it’s hard to find what the Liberals did to achieve this – they will say that just by not being NDP was enough, the Lionel Chevrier rule.

All can be forgotten

Gone will be all the arguments about LNG, dead children in government custody, deleting of emails, the shocking health department scandal, lying ministers much including the Premier, the Mount Polley coverup and so on and so forth.

Today’s announcement by the Liberal Government that it’s opposing Kinder Morgan’s pipeline proposal is a reminder that they’re not to be underestimated politically and creates yet another messaging problem for the Official Opposition.

I wish I had some words of consolation for Mr. Horgan – I’ve tried words of advice but he pays no attention.

Elections are always a crapshoot and anything goes when the whistle blows. But if the Liberals go into the next election with reasonably full employment and a balanced budget, no matter what fiscal artifices they used to balance or mumbo jumbo they use as explanations, they go in stronger than the Horgan bunch and the words of Damon Runyan come to mind “The race is not always to the swift, nor the contest to the strong, but that’s the way to bet”


3 Responses to “Why the BC Liberals could easily win the next election”

  1. Gavin Bamber says:

    Mair’s Axiom II. You don’t have to be a 10 in politics; you can be a 3 if everyone else is a 2.

    Christy gets a bye by being a 3.

  2. Richard R says:

    Well put. Rafe, I’d be interested on your thoughts on the timing being good for a viable third party in BC. Perhaps an update on your article from a few years back: http://rafeonline.com/2010/11/more-on-a-third-bc-political-party/

  3. John F says:

    I’m no right winger, but in an age of reduction in public services, cutbacks and ‘balanced budgets’ in BC there is no sign of reduction in internal government spending, or the number of ministries or number of bureaucrats. Why?
    Since employing a massive bureaucracy is probably the largest annual cost to the taxpayer in BC, when will this group feel some of the pain they meet out to the public? Or is government such a well insulated and self serving institution that they are immune to cuts?
    It’s sickening to watch the gold plated pensions, inefficiencies and non accountability of the government get a free pass, while the public they are meant to serve become more desperate as more costs are downloaded onto them.
    If government were a company run in the same way as the private sector, it would be out of business in a week. Some inefficiency is inevitable because in government there is no profit motive and an inexhaustible well of money to draw from. But an occasional reality check is much needed. Start with asking why we have so many doing so little for so few.

Leave a Reply