Mark Thompson - BC Conservatives

[Castanet News]

This thread is for the discussion of the candidacy of Mark Thomson - BC Conservatives.

[RndmAccnt]

The B.C. Conservatives are rolling out some exceptional candidates this election, which is great for the Okanagan region that overwhelmingly votes Conservative Federally. I hope those who traditionally vote Liberal seriously consider voting Conservative this time around. I have gotten to know Mark over the last few months, and believe he would be a great representative for his constituents. I have been to the shared office for Mark, Peter Neville and Mary-Ann Graham, it is right beside Pizza Hut on Harvey Avenue (near the Burtch Road intersection), and I would invite others to do the same. Mark’s website is also very well done, and provides a lot of important and understandable information:

http://www.electmarkthompson.com

Good luck Mark and the other BC Conservative candidates. I hope you are MLA’s after the next election!

Your friend,

JDS

[Freefalling]

I have never seen anybody so cut-throat, rude and just plain appalling. His random attacks at Steve Thomson at the Joe Rich community hall debate were disgusting. Shooting at Steve for "living outside his riding" (when Steve lives one block out of which used to be the riding), and accusing him of not knowing the issues (when Steve has lived here all of his life and Mark moved from Saskatchewan 4 years ago). He is riding on the fact that we have a conservative FEDERAL government...which has NO ties to provincial issues...

Overall, this man did not swing my vote I did not get a sense of what this man was about, only that he is a capitalistic cheeseball.

[mileslehn]

In response to the Fernie Finch: I feel it is unfair to criticize Mark for his lack of knowledge of the local issues and topics! He has shown that he has the intuition to realize that his Liberal nomination was not likely and that the B.C. Conservatives were a much better party. He is highly educated and has an extensive political background in Saskatchewan, I am told. Because Saskatchewan has an agricultural base he would be an asset to the riding because he has experience with farms and cows. He has had 4 years to get to know Kelowna and if elected he would have 4 more to work out any shortfall in local issues. He is one of two deputy leaders in the Conservative party and wrote most of the policy platform that was released to the party this last week. Perhaps you do not recognize the seriousness of the Recognition act and how it will give control to the Natives, First nations, Indians, Aboriginals and Indiginous people of B.C.. I urge you to contact Mark and learn how this Act will destroy the Province. One only needs to look at the current state of Federal Reserves to see where this is headed. Trust Mark to help stop this bad Act.

[Freefalling]

I was not saying that he does not have the knowledge nor experience, only that he cannot attack Steve for those reasons previously stated. It is plain unfair...

As for the Recognition Act, it's all a matter of perspective. Much of this land we enjoy, use and in some instances destruct, DID belong to First Nations. Currently, the government must deal with over 230 First Nation's bands. This act will reduce that number to 30 allowing for more efficient claims. We must not forget that the FN need a voice, they need to be respected and brought into Government to make decisions that effect them.

Also, when industries and corporations are looking to purchase and utilize land in BC, they can be bombarded by sudden land claims which would delay their business and even push them out. However, this act will draw clear lines so companies know what land is up for development and what is not...

[strikes&gutters]

2 Observations about Mark's performance @ Joe Rich.

1) How low do you have to be to attack a rival over where he lives, or who he supported in 1972?
Personal attacks are a sign you have nothing else useful to say.

Personal attacks are also not tolerated well in this town. Remember Nikki Hokazono's distasteful comments re: Sindi Hawkins in 2005. Perhaps you weren't living here yet.

2) It's interesting you decided to try to bring other party affilitations into the debate. It was even more interesting when you brought up issues you had with the BC Liberals. None of these issues were new issues, they existed long before you took out your papers. So you obviously had not done any research on the policies of the BC Liberals, yet you sought a nomination with that party, is that right? Not exactly a trait of someone who proclaims such political astuteness.

[Al Czervic]

2) It's interesting you decided to try to bring other party affilitations into the debate. It was even more interesting when you brought up issues you had with the BC Liberals. None of these issues were new issues, they existed long before you took out your papers. So you obviously had not done any research on the policies of the BC Liberals, yet you sought a nomination with that party, is that right? Not exactly a trait of someone who proclaims such political astuteness.

Actually the party affiliation comment is quite valid. From my research there are at least two BC Conservative candidates that were unsuccessful in running for the BC Liberals here in the Okanagan before becoming anointed as BC Conservatives.

I have nothing against someone running to be a BC Conservative however find it rather suspect how you can be running for a party for several months (one would assume because you support the party in question) and only once you are not successful do you suddenly decide that you now support a different party and attack the party you were just trying to represent weeks earlier.

Hmmm…the party did now like me so now I don’t like them anymore either.

[Markst]

The response to my communication at one specific meeting is very interesting.
Perhaps my Liberal opponent would like to come out to a real debate?

I certainly had no intention to be too strong or use an inappropriate tone, but if I did sound that way, it was certainly not intended. Nothing that I commented on was of a personsal nature. Rather it only referenced political realities. I am sure if you follow my candidacy you will see that I am for the people of Kelowna-Mission. I am passionate about people being informed on political matters.
I moved to BC approximately 8 years ago. I have lived the past 4 years in Kelowna. Most people recognize the advantages of having lived in different communities. In fact most people think that improves ones qualifications. Not only have I lived in different places but I have also been elected several times. I began politicaly as a President of a Community Association. I also worked as a pharmacist many years ago at KGH. I have been married for 37 years and have 4 children and 3 grandchildren. Three generations of our family live in Kelowna-Mission.

Given that we were not allowed to hand out campaign material at this all candidates meeting,
I encourage people to check out candidates and the platform of the BC Conservative Party by going to http://www.conservativesbc.com(I am not sure why there would be such a restriction at a meeting presumably called to inform voters.)

It is important to note that my brief review of the BC Liberal Party demonstrated some very serious issues existed and I quickly learned that BC Liberals are clearly not what they say they are. For your information I never did apply as a BC Liberal Candidate due to these serious issues.
An explicit letter to the BC Liberal Party identified many reasons for my choice not to seek the Liberal candidacy. I was appalled at the intimidation and gag attitude rampant in the BC Liberal Party. The BC Liberal Party seems most interested in attracting puppets. I suggest that you ask them for the formal documentation that they have candidates sign in an application process and you will soon see that only puppets should apply. This may well explain the large number of Liberal MLAs that have resigned. Carole Taylor was probably the most credible BC Liberal MLA. Unfortunately she resigned and we should ask why?

I want to be clear that this is a friendly communication which refers to comments that "I have never been a member of the NDP" or the fact that I "live in Kelowna-Mission and others don't." This information is considered important information for many voters to use in making their choice. Indeed the residency of a representive is a basic principle of democracy at its best. I acknowledge that it is only one factor and the degree to which it is important is all uo to an individual voter. It is not mudslinging or disrespectful to point out a competitors residency or their previous political association. It is factual political information rather than a personal attack. To continue, the fact that a Liberal candidate will not answer the question of who would be the best Prime Minister is clearly fence sitting at best and misleading at worst. I submit that a Liberal candidate not answering that question is because they will mostly support a Liberal Prime Minister and they don't want to come clean on that because it may offend some conservatives that have in the past been and some will continue to be hood winked into supporting BC Liberals. Liberals are concerned that many conservatives are no longer prepared to support them. It may be appropriate for the Premier to avoid answering the question but I submit it is deceitfulness for other Candidates to avoid a legitimate question. I respectfully ask you to review this evasive pattern on many questions and you may also become alarmed. Mudslinging would be to attack personalities or personal lives. Reminding people that Premier Campbell got a “Driving While Impaired Charge” isn't personal but rather factually a very inappropriate example for the person filling the Premiers position. I am sure you would agree. It is not personal mudslinging to point out that that the Liberal Solicitor General has now lost his driver’s license because he has flaunted the law too often. Rather this is simply pointing out that this is inappropriate behavior and an apparent pattern in the BC Liberal candidate pool. An attempt by Liberals to influence a poll on whether the Liberal Solicitor General should step down or not was in the minds of many unethical and a fraudulent attempt to mislead.

I am perplexed at how the BC Liberals seem to get away with such decitfullness. Some examples include: 1) BC Rail 2) Causing a first ever Legislative Raid 3) Gag Law 4) Gag attitude 5) Misleading 2009 Budget 6)Recognition and Reconcilliation Bill without full province-wide consultationon on how to best reconcile with Aboriginal peoples including a Referendum and other examples adequately prove this deceitfulness.

Indeed some of the Liberal policies are good however some policies are worthy of critiscism. For example I am unsure of how BC Liberals think it is fair for them to vote themselves a hefty raise of over 25% and a severance package equal to about another 25%. The MLAs were aware of the rules at the last election. My experience with this type of decision making is that you get the most responsible decisions in this area when you pass legislation that affects members serving the next term rather than the existing term. I respectfully ask how do they justify huge in term remuneration increases for MLA's while the same governement anilaites education? It appears that BC Liberals hate teachers as they have been feuding with education far too much.

I respectfully suggest, questions that candidates refuse to answer can be very telling. (See Vancouver Sun questionaire) It is also very telling that the Liberals and The NDP both failed to show up at the Right to Life all candidates meeting on Saturday in Kelowna. I recognize that difficult questions were being asked but that is not a valid excuse to simply not show up.

In closing I respectfully submit that education, work experience, real political experience, answers to current political questions and previous political perspectives are relevant. Furthermore we are told that the greatest portion of our value system is in place by age 6 and therefore an individuals political views even at age 20 is likely at least relevant in determining how they think now. While I agree more recent views are most important, previous expressions are important especialy when a candidate refuses to answer so many quesions. Voters have a right to know where people stand on issues. The people have a right to know more about how a candidate actually thinks. From what I see it is fair to say that Steve Thomson appears to more closely represent socialist views on the far left of BC Liberal spectrum rather close to the NDP. Perhaps this is appropriate for a BC Liberal candidate given that the BC Liberal Party is moving further to the left.

Public debate is needed to improve the quality of representation in government. Little to no public consultation on the Recognition and Reconciliation Bill that gives Aboriginal Title to over 90% of the land in this province is an under-handed toxic Liberal policy. This matter deserves real consultation, discussion and debate.

I encourage all to look at the facts and vote as they see fit. I expect the BC Liberals to attack me on every front just as they are now doing on Castanet. I submit that the Policies of the BC Conservative Party are worthy of review. I look forward to debating important issues. Perhaps my Liberal opponent would like to come out to a real debate?

Cheers,
Mark Thompson
Deputy Leader and
Candidate Kelowna-Mission
BC Conservative Party

[leobing]

I will be voting for you Mark. I have never voted for Liberals, NDP, or Green parties.
I never will. I was a Socred while they were around and since then have looked at several other parties and now that there is some activity in the BC Conservatives, I have something to look forward to. I know you won't get much success in this election but in the next election in 4 years you will.
All the best.