CKNW Editorial
for March 13, 2001

About the very last thing Gordon Campbell and the Liberals need right now is an issue other than "when do we get to throw the bastards out". Yet Mr Campbell and the Liberals seem bound and determined to create one.

Let me back up a bit … before, underscore that word before, the Nisga’a treaty was signed I called for a referendum on the principles. I felt very strongly that to give away non native rights, to create a native only fishery and to create a third level of government required the consent of all British Columbians. The plain fact of the matter is that, subject to the lawsuit that the Liberals have, in part, taken – which at this stage is lost but is being appealed – there is a Nisga’a treaty in place, assented to by the Queen in the right of both British Columbia and Canada. It’s history … and it’s precedent setting unless and until it is overturned. This means, in legal terms, the issues upon which I believed there should be a public vote are moot.

Probably the hardest part of Mr Campbell’s statement to the chiefs last Thursday to understand is why he didn’t outline the questions he would ask. I have to assume that they would not include the three I would have asked before Nisga’a so what are they? I have heard that they might number as many as eight.

I can see him asking, for example, if B.C. should insist that upon settlement all native rights be extinguished … something I think both fair and wise. Beyond that, I can’t see anything he can ask that isn’t, for all intents and purposes, something we’re stuck with or is under litigation. Indeed we all must understand that the option not to settle is not there. The Supreme Court of Canada all but mandated a settlement under threat that if the governments wouldn’t do so, the courts would. However much some might wish this not to be so, it is. We will hear from, Mr Campbell in a few minutes and perhaps we can get some answers.

I question the politics of this. Again, if no deal had been signed with Nisga’a I could see a promised referendum as having much voter appeal. But now the deal is done, won’t many voters be inclined to buy into Premier Dosanjh’s likely argument that this shows that the Liberals are unwilling to settle native claims at best, racists at worst? Will he not be able to make the claim also that we will never get investment coming to B.C., something the Liberals claim that they can do, as long as native claims remain unsettled … something that certainly won’t happen if the process is shut down because of a referendum?

I very much disagree with Chief Bill Wilson, who’ll be on after the news break, that referenda are not democratic … the implication being that the result can be bought and paid for. If ever the lie was put to that one, the Charlottetown Accord did it. All the money and influence in Canada was on the yes side and we noes murdered them.

My questions are two in number, then – what’s there to ask now that the precedent has been set and why, in the name of common sense, would the Liberals want to hand this issue to the NDP?

Let’s deal with the politics a bit. I think that it’s scarcely possible for the Liberals to lose the election. But the word is scarcely. Sure thing elections are lost because the public gets sidetracked from the main issues and concentrates on a side issue or two. They are possible by reason of what we might now call Mair’s Axiom III – Axiom I is that you make a serious mistake believing people in charge know what the hell they’re doing … that axiom might well apply to Liberal pol Patrick Kinsella on this issue. Mair’s Axiom II is that you don’t need to be a 10 in politics, you can be a 3 if everyone else is a two. Very important, that axiom.

The latest is this – Once a party hits rock bottom no number of new blows will make it worse but one good thing can make it a hell of a lot better. It’s like a penny stock. Bad news no longer can do any harm so it can absorb limitless amounts of it. One bit of good news, however, and the stock is back in business.

The object of the NDP’s endeavours for the past year has been to get back it’s traditional support of about 30%. That’s been tough and so far Ujjal Dosanjh has failed at every turn. In fact, everything he’s done has turned out badly. But … remember … Axiom III. He only has to do a couple of things right and he will have his traditional folks back onside.

The bad news for Mr Dosanjh and the NDP is, of course, that you don’t start getting serious numbers of seats under our system until you get over the 35% mark. And I don’t believe Mr Dosanjh and his crew can crack that barrier.

Still, if I were the Liberals I wouldn’t be wanting to let the NDP even reach the launching pad stage of 30%.

It takes a lot of nerve to avoid creating new issues in an election. All the political instincts tend to make the politician and his advisors look for new ways to make the other guy look bad. And, perhaps, this leads to Axiom IV – when you’re opponent is over his head and gulping water instead of air, don’t even throw a twig his way much less a branch. Let him drown.