Discuss the upcoming elections here.
- Generalissimo Postalot
- Posts: 852
- Joined: Aug 13th, 2015, 7:35 am
The Green Barbarian wrote:neilsimon wrote:Personally, I'd prefer to see it so that the parties are funded by the Province and donations of all sorts are eliminated. Prevents a party just representing the wealthier BC voters
But who decides what constitutes a party that then gets funding? Under your model, every crack-pot with an axe to grind and every lunatic who wants to get BC "off of oil" could start a party, get funding and now have a source of income they didn't have before, that would supplement their welfare income. So in other words, totally open to abuse by losers. Cutting off funding from unions at least prevents a party like the NDP from just representing disgusting self-interested unions who want to go back to the glory days of 1998 and sleaze-bag back-room deals with the NDP.
Where are you getting this from? I did not provide a detailed model, so why are you making up something I never provided?
Honestly, this kind of straw man argument is just complete BS.
Of course, I would not advocate for handing out money to everyone with a political agenda. I believe a system which provided party funding based on the square root of the number of votes achieved in the previous Provincial election (encourages economies of scale and makes sure that large parties are pretty much always equally funded). For those who have not run before and wish to run as independent or a new party, they would be allowed to provide a petition to be allowed to run and based on that petition, funding would be provided. Something like, an individual with more than 2,000 signatures and support of 20 municipally elected officials or 4 MLAs, would be allowed to run and provided an amount equivalent to the average Provincial candidate spend for the election. Of course, there are many details which would need to be worked out and the above is off the top of my head, but I am certain that arrangements could be arrived at which would encourage innovation in the spending of funds, at the same time keep the required public spend to a manageable amount and take out the influence of donors, which disproportionately favours the wealthier among us.
- Insanely Prolific
- Posts: 80955
- Joined: Sep 16th, 2010, 9:13 am
Kinder Morgan Canada won't make further concessions on its Trans Mountain pipeline expansion, the company's president said Friday, setting the stage for a showdown with British Columbia's potential government-in-waiting.
Ian Anderson said he is willing to meet with the provincial NDP and Greens, who have vowed to immediately stop the $7.4-billion development should they oust the Liberals from power.
But moments after toasting Kinder Morgan Canada's debut earlier this week on the Toronto Stock Exchange, Anderson had a blunt message for the two parties.
"We'll continue to listen," Anderson said after opening the market Friday morning. "But I don't have any concessions planned for any further discussion at this point."
The Trans Mountain expansion, which already has federal approval, could begin construction in September. The project would see a current pipeline that runs from Edmonton to Burnaby, B.C., twinned, effectively tripling its capacity to 890,000 barrels per day.
Despite the uncertain political environment in B.C. — not to mention myriad protests and legal challenges — Anderson brushed off concerns the project would be delayed and said he doesn't see any possibility of it being shelved.
"I'm not foreseeing any, any difficulty in the construction start this fall," Anderson said.
The company will be respectful of peaceful protests, he added, calling them "fair game for anybody." However, if people choose to break the law, Kinder Morgan will have the authorities take care of it, he said.
"We are well-prepared."
"The western far Left is habitually the most stupid, naive people you can imagine. They come up with these really goofy constructs and it's all about feeling good about yourself." - James Carville