Why the NDP is in power now

[Cactusflower]

So, blindly partisan it is. I'll wait until I see how the NDP performs before making further comments. It never ceases to amaze me how the BCLP supporters continue to trash a new government long before the legislature sits for the first time.

[hobbyguy]

It isn't partisan. Brar essentially admitted that the NDP bought him enough votes to win with the phony bridge toll issue.

1 more seat, and the Liberals would have been at 44 - a majority, they win the confidence vote.

I have said all along that my preference would have been half of the Green platform and half of the Liberal platform, and none of the NDP so called platform. That's not partisan, that's policy and platform analysis.

The NDP never had a real platform.

A real platform is costed, has a budget, future budget projections, and a taxation plan. Even the tiny Green party managed to put up a platform with all of those elements. The myopic and incompetent NDP could not.

The NDP did have the longest platform (118 pages) but it said nothing besides "we're against everything", "we hate Chriisty", and "you can have everything you want for nothing". It was, and is, a load of simplistic con job nonsense sprinkled heavily with rancor.

Above all, the NDP presented, and obviously have no, plan for governance. A failure to plan = a plan to fail. That is showing already in the few things the NDP have done - and even more so in what they have not chosen to even talk about since the election.

Nothing about eliminating portables.
Nothing about day care options.
Nothing about affordable housing.
Nothing about opiod addiction strategies.
Nothing about freezing BC Hydro rates
Nothing about freezing ICBC rates
Nothing about rolling back ferry fares
Nothing about MSP premiums
Nothing about about increasing health care access and reducing wait times
Nothing about new conservation officers and park rangers

We did hear about the $15/hr minimum wage - which the BC NDP are back peddling away from.
We did hear about the crooked deal on bridge tolls.
We did hear about moving toward messing up the power grid by going after site C.
We did hear about hiring lots of NDP cronies, including a new crony home political secretariat that taxpayers are paying for - and wrongly.
We did hear about hiring an NDP crony to waste taxpayer $$$ in an unconstitutional dog and pony show against Kinder-Morgan

We did hear about two sensible things: increasing welfare/disabilities and free post secondary for foster children. Both small potatoes in the grand scheme of things, but good things.

[rustled]

So, blindly partisan it is. I'll wait until I see how the NDP performs before making further comments. It never ceases to amaze me how the BCLP supporters continue to trash a new government long before the legislature sits for the first time.

What do you think about the way they have performed so far, Cactusflower?

What do you feel we can expect them to accomplish during the next session of the legislature?

[Cactusflower]

I see nothing wrong with what they've done so far. They are simply doing what they promised in their election campaign. The really hard work is yet to come.

[Urban Cowboy]

I seem to recall something in their campaign about changing the party contribution rules, yet they voted against it when presented, and now here they are conducting pay for access events, the very thing they so vehemently criticized the Liberals for. I guess they're just selectively following through on promises.

[flamingfingers]

I seem to recall something in their campaign about changing the party contribution rules, yet they voted against it when presented, and now here they are conducting pay for access events, the very thing they so vehemently criticized the Liberals for. I guess they're just selectively following through on promises.

It was never presented so it wasn't voted against. The vote was against the Liberals' right to conduct business before the confidence of the house was tested.

The legislature needs to sit so that the Bill can be presented and discussed and go through First Reading, any amendments made, Second Reading, any amendments made and finally pass Third Reading where it will be passed into law.

[rustled]

I see nothing wrong with what they've done so far. They are simply doing what they promised in their election campaign. The really hard work is yet to come.

Isn't it interesting that when people do not fully support the NDP, they are told they are partisan by those who see nothing wrong with what the NDP are doing. Well, at least you're not one of the ones who constantly criticized the previous government for some of the very things the NDP are doing now. Partisanship is a very interesting thing, isn't it?

You mention the really hard work is yet to come, and I would agree with this. Still, it's rather a generic answer. So instead of asking again what you hope they will accomplish during the upcoming session, perhaps something a little less difficult.

When should we expect to hear what action they're considering taking toward, say, addressing the portables in Surrey?

[rustled]

I seem to recall something in their campaign about changing the party contribution rules, yet they voted against it when presented, and now here they are conducting pay for access events, the very thing they so vehemently criticized the Liberals for. I guess they're just selectively following through on promises.

It was never presented so it wasn't voted against. The vote was against the Liberals' right to conduct business before the confidence of the house was tested.

The legislature needs to sit so that the Bill can be presented and discussed and go through First Reading, any amendments made, Second Reading, any amendments made and finally pass Third Reading where it will be passed into law.

Still splitting hairs?

You know perfectly well the NDP could have voted to ensure the inappropriate fundraising ended, and used a subsequent vote to bring down the government. Instead they used their vote to ensure they brought the government down before the bill could be read, and therefore before it could be passed, thereby killing said bill with their vote.

The NDP and the Greens could easily have dealt with this single issue using the high moral standard you expected of the BC Liberals: make sure the people of BC are put before the interests of your party. It's not lost on anyone here (including, I'm sure, any NDP supporters not blinded by partisanship) that you have no such expectation of high moral standards from the NDP. A couple of them have spoken up to express their disappointment with some of the NDP's inappropriate activities, but to date you have not. And that's fine, as of course you are entirely entitled to your opinion, but surely you can see what a double standard this is.

I'd suggest it's not lost on anyone here that the NDP are in power because they and the Greens, like the BC Liberal party before them, are not above putting their wants before our needs.

[The Green Barbarian]

The NDP is in power now because enough people were sick and tired of the way the BCLP were running (ruining) this province. Those who were happy with how our province was being run were either blind, or simply blindly partisan.

you would think if things were truly that bad that the NDP would have been given a resounding majority. That certainly was the case in 2001 when things were so bad, and the government of the time such bumbling inept incompetent boobs, that they were punted out 77-2.

[flamingfingers]

IF the NDP and Greens would have accepted the Bill(s) for first reading and THEN brought up a vote of nonconfidence, it would have immediately triggered another election. Did you really want to suffer through another campaign and trek to the voting booth? I sure as heck didn't!! And I'm sure that most everyone else felt the same.

Now, when the Leg is convened on Sept 6, the Opposition Liberals certainly can call for a vote of confidence but unless every single Opposition member shows up and votes in favor (before any Bills are accepted for First Reading) they will lose the vote since the NDP/Green alliance has a 2-vote margin thanks to Christy resigning. Or, perhaps some of the NDP or Greens vote with the Liberals.. Maybe some of the Liberals will just not show up?....It will indeed be interesting......

[flamingfingers]

GB wrote:

you would think if things were truly that bad that the NDP would have been given a resounding majority. That certainly was the case in 2001 when things were so bad, and the government of the time such bumbling inept incompetent boobs, that they were punted out 77-2.

Thanks to the exaggerations by the MSM re: Glen's 'deck' issue.... the Liberals played that to the fullest extent.

Funny how in the next election the NDP bounced back to 33 seats in 2005 and essentially kept building their seat count, eh?

[LordEd]

IF the NDP and Greens would have accepted the Bill(s) for first reading and THEN brought up a vote of nonconfidence, it would have immediately triggered another election.

No it would not have. The decision is the same to the lt gov.

I found precidence in a federal case where the party was in power for months and lost confidence over scandal. They asked for an election but it went to a coalition instead.

Or close to that. I'll have to find the link and check my answer.

Nothing in tradition pinholes the lt gov to not allow an opposition coalition/agreement to take government.

[rustled]

IF the NDP and Greens would have accepted the Bill(s) for first reading and THEN brought up a vote of nonconfidence, it would have immediately triggered another election. Did you really want to suffer through another campaign and trek to the voting booth? I sure as heck didn't!! And I'm sure that most everyone else felt the same.

Now, when the Leg is convened on Sept 6, the Opposition Liberals certainly can call for a vote of confidence but unless every single Opposition member shows up and votes in favor (before any Bills are accepted for First Reading) they will lose the vote since the NDP/Green alliance has a 2-vote margin thanks to Christy resigning. Or, perhaps some of the NDP or Greens vote with the Liberals.. Maybe some of the Liberals will just not show up?....It will indeed be interesting......

You're suggesting the end justifies the means? The NDP and the Greens only threw their morals under the bus to save us from the possibility of going back to the polls too soon?

Well, that would make a bit more sense if the NDP were not currently engaged in a complete and total pig-out at the fundraising trough.

In the end, though, it seems to me having the election after the NDP have shown their true colours to the voters of B.C. is going to matter. No, not to you, not to Cactusflower or other people who seem to feel their actions are above reproach simply because they're not the Liberals. But at least two people who voted NDP expecting better have been on this forum expressing their disappointment.

No, two voters in the Interior won't matter all that much, since it's ridings that count. And no, those disillusioned by Weaver's willingness to sell himself to the highest bidder may not translate to any more ridings for the Liberals. But it may well be the folk who fell for empty campaign promises in the Lower Mainland swing ridings will be having a good rethink between now and the next election. Who knows?

As you say, it will indeed be interesting.

What's most interesting in the context of this thread, though, is how willing some previously high-minded folk are to dispense with the morals of "do the right thing" when it's their own party doing whatever it takes to seize power for themselves, and then pigging out at the fundraising trough as long as possible.

[flamingfingers]

^^Ah, High Moral Values is it? So how did you feel about Christy's 'Clone Speech' which ripped planks from the NDP and Greens in her desperate attempt to claw onto power??

Ah, yes, the ChristyLiberals had such 'high moral values'!!

[mikest2]

Or..........The NDP could have done the honourable thing, like the Greens, and just stop accepting, let alone soliciting for big cash !!