I nominate Bill Vaderzalm.

“He says the party will build a coalition of MLA, s who speaks for and behalf of their constituents”. Heck, don’t they all?

I nominate Mucky Moose!

Krusty – no they don’t. My MLA sure hasn’t spoken for me nor on my behalf that I know of. Not once.

I can hardly even get in touch with my MLA or MP on the few occasions I really would like to.

Well need see what platform they are standing on, what there goals are, how are they going to be our representitives. I will look at anything so long as it makes sense and isn’t another whack job party (current parties are included).

There is more information about this new party on their website:

http://www.bcfirst.ca/

That makes about 53 registered BC parties, I think. It will take 100 years for any of these parties to be recognized. I nominate me for their leader so I can explain the facts of politics to them —

Most of those Parties will die a natural death without ever making the slightest impact politically.

BCFirst will likely be the first to expire after the next election.

For the most part they’re just different people wanting to get their snouts into the same old trough.

Some have some single issue they’re focused on, usually one that’s not of great or long lasting interest to the general public. Legalising pot, forbidding abortion, re-writing the Constitution, joining the USA, etc., etc.

I’m not aware of any of them that are dedicated to achieving what should be of great interest to the general public.

Ensuring that our ongoing ‘financial’ cost of living is lowered in ratio to our ‘physical’ standard of living, which for most, is still rising. With ever increasing, and increasingly unrepayable, debt, (both public and private), bridging the gap.

This negates an enormous part of the benefits that should accrue to us all from improved productivity as a result of constant technological advancement. Their universal failure to meaningfully address this most fundamental issue marks them as permanent ‘also rans’, no better than the hopeless lot in any of the mainstream parties that will end up as government.

The BC First Party has some good things they could do if they could elect some more independents to the legislature and thereby thwart some of the power that the established party insiders weld over the political body of BC. I think it would all depend on their ability to get a minimum of 4 MLA’s elected and whether they had some quality candidates that could be the swing vote deciding factor in a minority legislature.

That said they don’t really have much for core principles that would guide and unit them as a political force. Its kind of a trust us and the merit of ones character sort of program and that can go sideways quickly.

I like that they talk about electoral reform that empowers the voter, and I like that they want to do away with party insiders running the show… those are things most people can agree on… I don’t think its enough to win elections though if they don’t take a stand on some issues.

What BC really needs is a free enterprise advocate that clearly and succinctly describes the values and merit of our free enterprise heritage, and how best we can protect those values to enable future generations of British Columbians to have opportunities equal to or greater than those of past generations… protecting our economy from monopoly capitalists as well as the monopoly socialists (the greatest threat to our province). A proper free enterprise party enables independents and is enriched by competition, but is defined by process and rule of law.

We had that, once, Eagle. Back when Social Credit was first elected, and for several elections afterward. Inflation did it in. And governments since haven’t tried to understand why, or do anything about it.

Some, like the BC Liberals, even seem to embrace inflation and believe they can gull the general public into believing rising prices are a sign of prosperity. When they’re anything but.

While those on the other side rail against ‘corporate concentration’ and ‘obscene profits’. Never telling us that the ‘money’ represented by those obscene profits actually buys LESS and LESS of anything, and taken as a percentage of sales is actually smaller and smaller. And that they’d fight corporate concentration by making it more absolute ~ vesting ownership into another government monopoly. NOT so that WE might get the products of that monopoly at ‘cost’, but rather so that the monopoly can do what businesses still subject to competition cannot ~ raise the price to us, keep us poor, and under THEIR control.