Congrats Pat and Shirley.... I am very happy your hard work has paid off and that you will be working for us for another 4 years.....
way to go!!!

Canwest Media is the real winner. They conned the public into ignoring the issues. Even Stonewally won his seat thanks to Asper Nation' fear mongering and white-washing.

The North lost out big tonight. Health care in PG will continue to be sub par.

I think Carol James was the big winner. She got exactly what she wanted with her gender based strategy. James was aiming IMO for the official opposition all along. Maybe wanted a more narrow gap, but she didn't want to lead this province, because that would mean she is accountable for her decisions and her policy. James has it made now for the next 6-7 years as the leader of the official opposition where she can critic and blow hot air without ever being wrong, then retire with a nice pension.

As for the BCSTV I figured it was done for. I hoped it would still pass, because it would have been flexible for future changes that could better our voting system and was an improvement over what we have now... because it gave choice on the ballot... but it didn't provide for majority elect candidates and thus the legislature as a whole.

The big problem with BC-STV that turned me off was that it didn't require a majority vote to get elected. That was a huge mistake that was driven by the Lower Mainland interest in having a proportional system... they even called it a proportional system, rather than the transferable ballot it was originally intended to be. Under BCSTV in a seven member riding a person could get elected with less than 15% of the vote. That was stupid IMO and killed BCSTV, because people don't want fringe ideologies elected, but rather centrist candidates with majority support.

We should have just had a single member riding that is elected by a STV (single transferable ballot), rather than a multiple member riding. The multi member ridings were to get proportionality in a ballot... and a counting process that no one can understand.

A single member riding elected by STV would be the voting system already used in BC in the 1952 election that saw the Socred party go from nothing to the governing party that made BC what it is today. A single member riding with a transferable ballot is the same as first past the post if one candidate gets a clear majority on the first ballot... if 50%+1 is not reached the second choice of the last place candidates would be counted until one candidate reaches the 50%+1 threshold. Its simple in that the only way one gets elected is if they have a 50%+1 majority plurality of support from the voters, thus centrists candidates will win every time, rather than the ideologs appointed by party insiders.

The main argument of the political parties against BCSTV was the multi member ridings. I see no reason why Gordon Campbell can't have a province wide referendum next civic election date for a STV option in a single member riding constituency that could be implemented for the next election. I think the people of BC deserve to have that option to vote for a system that has been proven to work in BC before in the past.

That said I think this election will be remembered as the election where Northern BC lost its ability to influence its own future. With electoral reform now dead we can look forward to an ever shrinking share of our democracy as the population centers down south gain inflated representation at our expense, and increasingly Northern BC will be seen as the economic colony of the Southern taxation empire.

AIMHO

In my opinion, the STV will be back on the next vote, it is like the Performing Center , it will never go away until they get what they want.

Too bad, get ready for another tough ride for four years of increased taxes and pay reductions. Say goodbye to the rest of the few publicly owned utilities we have left. BC just gave Campbell the green light to sell off Hydro.

I wonder if Campbell drove to a bar and then home last night?

Yes Ruez, you are absolutely correct, we did lose big time. I was hoping for improved health care but now that won't happen. The Olympics is more important to the Liberals than looking after the people of BC.

Being a good citizen within a democracy is never over. If conservation is important to us it doesn't have to end with the election. Social justice also need not come to an end if we believe these things are important. I do not believe that the all the folks who voted in this election do not care about our environment and social infrastructure.

The sad fact is that too many people didn't understand STV and this resulted in lost votes for it. For instance, the northern regions would potentially have had more power under STV, certainly all voters would. All this information is available from several non-partisan sources on the internet and through your local library, and yet so many people told me they didn't understand and one woman said "no one explained it to me, up here we are being told it will result in minority governments and that is bad isn't it?"

There are lessons to be learned here on all sides. In my travels in northern BC I have been told there was a lot of fear about change. Change is always a little scary, especially in uncertain economic times. I think the status quo won the day for this reason and the sad fact that so many people chose not to vote - especially those in their 20s. One young man I spoke to, an avid Conservative, votes federally, but never votes provincially. He claimed no one here represents his interests. Makes you wonder.

I love what is being done in the schools where young people are participating in their own elections. This offers hope for the future I think. Perhaps we need to consider innovative programs to encourage citizenship engagement more widely.

So what will be Gordo's first lie? Hydro sell off, oh sorry we will still own the wires.

no probably the transmission wires might go first. but the new agreement with the first nations that was proposed before the election that you didn't hear much about could be a ploy to sell off resources without environmental assesments with the money going to a few native leaders and not the whole nations

There was a lot of ignorance re the single transferrable vote, in fact, I suggest that there were rumours that were untrue that were widenly circulated. One being that the riding of Prince George Valemount would extend to Kamloops! As long as people don't do their own research instead of listening to rumours we will always have same old, same old. Sure wish we could clone Obama.

Pat and Shirley have worked hard for the region in the past hopefully this will continue

Lets hope the STV defeat this time means what it should've meant last time. That it's dead, and should be buried. There's no reason to mourn it. We've wasted more than enough taxpayer money on this ridiculous notion that it would somehow improve the electoral process.

The people, after any fair election, no matter whether it's conducted by way of FPP, MMP, or STV in either the version we once had, or the one just defeated, always get the kind of government they deserve.

If you want an effective reign-in on the dictatorial power of a Premier to prevent the kind of things Seamutt alluded to with his example of BC Hydro's 'sale' and our still owning the wire, you need an effective Voter's Veto.

One that doesn't defeat a government, or it's right to govern, but provides a sanction that keeps it in check from doing what it WASN'T elected to do.

"provides a sanction that keeps it in check from doing what it WASN'T elected to do."

And how does one get a special sense of what a government wasn't elected to do?

In our system we elect a group of people to govern. There is no system we have in place, such as the various propositions in California for instance, to distinguish what a government is allowed to do and what they are not allowed to do.

Maybe that is what we should be trying to advocate rather than STV.

Its kind of strange that in the last election when the STV supporters almost got this issue passed they indicated that those who voted for it were quite smart.

Now that they had another run at it and at least 20% who voted for it last time voted against it this time. (One can assume the approx same number voted) they try to indicate that the voters didnt understand STV.

Well guess what??? We do understand and we kicked the idea the hell out of the ball field, and hopefully it will stay there. We dont need a bunch of people picked at random through out the Province sitting down, and coming up with a convoluted system of Government.

Remember that a Zebra, is a horse designed by a committee.

So once again, one political party has all the power, even though most people voted against them.

Most of us voted for people who did not get elected. Most of us are "represented' by people we voted against. Most MLAs "represent" mostly people who voted against them.

And apparently, most people in BC think all of that is OK.

I don't think it's OK, and I'm not going to stop saying so.

Sure are a lot of sore losers out there. Sure is good to know that the province has a leader in power that can take us thru these turbulant times.

Sure the NDP can promise you the world, and do all kinds of name calling, especially when they know they can not win. Not only that, Carole wants to stay on as the leader.... sweet. May be we can get 8 years.

While I wasn't happy with any of the choices that were available, I still am 100% sure that I'm not OK with a leader that doesn't have enough judgement to not drink and drive.....

I am saddened to have another four years of a regime that is not supportive of ordinary working folks and families. And I've heard rumours of more cuts coming that will adversely affect families. At the end of the day, our province has to pay for 2010 somehow. Tragic.

Pal you say
"We dont need a bunch of people picked at random through out the Province sitting down, and coming up with a convoluted system of Governmen."
Participatory democracy is not the way to go then?

Lamb. I question the random selection of the people involved.

Who are they? Why were they picked? Who picked them? What is their political affiliations if any??

If their appointments were political, then the outcome was predetermined, which could hardly be considered participatory democracy.

Seems to me the Liberals were in favour of the committee when it was set up, but abandoned it later on., The NDP didnt seem to be much interested. The fringe parties liked it because it gave them the possibility of electing a representative even though they would not get a representative number of votes.

In any event it is now a done deal and we are back to first past the post, and if people want representative Government they can get off their butts and work for it, or they can sit on their butts and get what they get.

Congratulations to Pat, Shirley and John. Everyone 19 and older had the opportunity to go out and vote for the candidate of choice. Those that voted NDP and got defeated, should not be sore losers. It's obvious more people wanted a liberal government. Let it be....Not everyone is going to like every decission made every day...

I support the new regime, the leader will look after the working families, by ensuring that there employers are healthy.

I am a employer, if i can not afford to have my steady employees, i will set them free to do what they need to do to survive. Thus, the Liberals look after us with a vision of the long term. While the NDP are too short sighted to look beyound the four years.

The BC Government will never sell BC hydro. They can not afford to get rid of that cash cow.

I watched the election at the Liberal office than went over to the Coast had a nice dinner and was happy to see a group of people honestly care about where they live and the people they share this community with. I didn't feel any class thing go on at all. I did see however common peers that seemed to enjoy politics and each others company. My only bitch was to bad there wasn't more single women there. That would of been cool to have met a political junkie like myself. Enough said

Lamb - according to the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission, this is what the STV districts would look like: http://www.bc-ebc.ca/final_report/province_bc-stv

Looks to me like the Cariboo-Thomposon district starts at the southern boundary of the current PG-Valemount riding. So yes, the new STV district corresponding to that riding wouldn't encompass Kamloops, but it would be in the enormous "North" riding. Don't you think such a huge district is a bit crazy?

I for one am very glad BC voters saw through the STV hype. FPP may not be ideal, but it's getter than the proposed alternative.

Well all the people out there that voted for the Liberals better not complain when the province enacts the next part of the carbon tax, especially us up here in the North who struggle with jobs and the lack there of. Stupid Liberals

Well all the people out there that voted for the Liberals better not complain when the province enacts the next part of the carbon tax, especially us up here in the North who struggle with jobs and the lack there of. Stupid Liberals

Carbon tax, isn't that where you get a $100 bucks back. Sweet.

Despite all the scandals and problems with the current BC government, NDP team was not aggressive enough to raise these problems publicly in this election and tell the public what they will do if they are elected; they simply failed in their strategy. As a result, the percentage of NDP seats in the BC assembly has decreased.

Axe the tax was one of the mistakes, and NDP leader instead should have formed a coalition with the Greens for at least the swing seats. This has been done before in the UK and they can look at Labour and LibDem past coalition efforts there. Both Greens and NDP failed to learn a lesson from the last election and let the Liberals to grab to power for another 4 years.

Nowicki, you are correct. The best thing that happened was that the Green Party took the votes away from the NDP candidates.

I support the Liberal Party. But we would have been in trouble if the NDP had a stronger leader. The biggest problem with Carole, is that she does not have credibility in the political field. She needed to take off her blinders and see the whole picture. but she became too emersed on trying to smear the opposition. that the public wanted a person that looked forward, not backwards.

We all know what happened in the past, what could we do to change it, nothing. So deal with positives of your parties, instead of the negatives of the opposition. A fatal mistake on their part.

I see that if the kids voted the NDP would get in. Hmmm, makes you wonder how much the teachers are telling them about there personal views on politics.

The teachers are literally brainwashing your kids to believe that communism is good.

"Axe the tax" WASN'T one of the NDP's mistakes.

Combining it in a petition that meant your opposition to Gordo's 'carbon tax' was support for Carole James' 'cap and trade' alternative WAS the mistake. Many of us, probably most of us, if the costs to us were properly presented, don't want either.

The NDP should stop trying to get through the back door all those things that no one wants and would never let in the front door if it ever hopes to be government.

The Greens are a narrowly focussed fringe group whose whole platform would collapse faster than either the NDP's or the BC Liberals if it were closely scrutinized.

All this left wing psycho-babble is exactly what stops reasonable people from voting NDP. Grow up & you might stand a chance. Luckily, that will never happen.

Not true He spoke you are spreading slander.

Pal, it was a non-partisan group

WE won, you lost... ha ha ha ha

Like the STV vote, I sure hope the Green Party goes away too. IMO they are too one issue folks. Maybe they would have won a seat if Elly May would've come out here and stumped for them. It's all tax deductible for every one who ran. I'll pay for that. Just put it on my tab.

While I despise paying the carbon tax, it still would cost me a lot less money than having Carole's crew run the show

Look at the Politics divide everyone.
Now I see why nothing gets done properly.
Everyone work together.
;)

STV lost...yippee!!!

For what it's worth ... it was a CAMEL that was supposed to have been a horse designed by a committee.

And a darn good job the committee did of it, too.

BC Mary. Would that be a two hump, or a one hump CAMEL.

Remember the old adage. If you want to ensure something will not get done, refer it to a committee.

Gus;-"And how does one get a special sense of what a government wasn't elected to do?"
-------------------------------------------
Well, we can only go by what they tell us they aren't going to do when they're soliciting our votes. Things do often change as time goes on after office has been attained, no doubt. And sometimes it's necessary to do certain things that those who govern have told us they wouldn't ever do. Like running a deficit after promising a constantly balanced budget, for instance. When that's necessary because of changing economic circumstances.

Many elections ago, Premier WAC Bennett told us in one campaign that he wasn't going to take over the then privately-owned BC Electric Company. It was his hope that that Company would co-operate with his government in new hydro electric projects on both the Peace and Columbia Rivers.

When the type of 'co-operation' he envisioned wasn't forthcoming, and it became clear that the BC Electric planned to exact rates that were unconscionable before it would be, Bennett expropriated it, and BC Hydro was born.

I think it safe to say that there was pretty broad support for what he'd done, even though some in the Vancouver (and New York) financial community figured he was BC's version of Fidel Castro at the time.

If we fast-forward to more recent times, I don't believe there was quite the same kind of broad based support for privatizing BC Rail. At least not the way it was done.

Now maybe that was something that was necessary, and maybe it was not. But I think it's fairly safe to say that there was certainly a far broader base of people "against" the sale than there ever were "against" the take-over of BC Eclectric.

And that those against that sale were not all NDP supporters, but from a cross section of the body politic, including many BC Liberals.

Obviously those BC Liberals, and many others not of the 'socialist' persuasion had no desire to see a return of the NDP over this issue. But they clearly weren't happy with what the BC Liberals had done either, especially when a definite promise had been made NOT to sell that railway.

What we should have to deal with issues like this, which will undoubtedly surface from time to time, is an effective mechanism for a Voter's Veto.

Where a certain threshold of public opinion expressed in a Petition would mean such decisions would have to go to referendum before being implemented.

Defeat of some particular government initiative would not mean the end of that government, just that it could not proceed in a direction contrary to the majority of the public will.

If the initiative were still deemed by the government to be something vital to the its whole agenda, and it was turned down in a referendum, then let that government hold a general election on the issue. If it wins, the initiative is back on track and gets to go ahead.

I don't think it's a process that we'd need to use very often, but it would certainly be more effective to have some recourse like that than to try to tinker with different electoral systems, like STV and such like.

The Voter's Veto would be strictly negative ~ a sanction on the power of the government. It doesn't attempt to usurp the authority of the legislature in proposing legislation, or unduly limit government actions that are necessary in changing circumstances. It simply protects the public from self-serving politicians, when the public disagrees with their particular policies that have never been part of the public platform they ran on.

Awingline said:
"according to the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission, this is what the STV districts would look like: http://www.bc-ebc.ca/final_report/province_bc-stv"

Click on the various larger regions .... click on the north and you get this:
http://www.bc-ebc.ca/final_report/regions_bc-stv/5

Cick on North Central and you get this
http://www.bc-ebc.ca/final_report/districts/89
which depicts the three current ridings now having John, Pat, and Shirley as the MLAs

Nothing like the "north" shown on the map you linked to at all.

Sell it off Gordie - sell it all off! For some reason, NDPers think they own everything. Probably because in real life, they dont own a thing. Sell Hydro just to prove they dont own squat! You wanna own something? Go out and buy it like everybody else.

We have "bought it", Gamblor. We've already paid for it several times over. Once, at least, from the rise in the consumer prices of just about everything that occurred during the period of dam construction.

The only thing that's lacking is a share certificate in the hands of each and every British Columbian for proof positive that it's "ours".

If Gordie's so hepped up on the wonders of 'privatization', then send each and every one of us that share certificate, and let us decide whether WE, each of us as individuals, want to "own" it or "dis-own" it.

Far better he do that than enter into another deal like BC Rail.

If there's such big profits in exporting power to the USA ~ profits so great that we're told we have to pay "world price" to continue to access power that's already "ours" if we want to continue to get it in competition with the Americans ~ then maybe our BC Hydro shares should start paying us dividends on those big profits. Ones we can use to offset that "world price" we're going to be charged for "our own" hydro.

Wow if actually 'own' BC Hydro etc, I guess I should include that as an asset on credit applications. Socredible, if someone was to go bankrupt would the creditors get their portion? If so, there would be a good chance the banks would own a large part of BC Hydro...now that would be interesting

It's quite likely, if the truth were known, Zoom, that the Banks already do hold a 'lien' on BC Hydro, (and everything else that's continually in need of financing ~ which essentially IS everything else).

And they not only control BC Hydro's ability to access credit, the same way they control all of our abilities to do the same, but also have complete control over whether it, and we, (taken collectively), will be able to repay all the credit that's previously been extended.

In other words, by refusing to issue sufficient further loans, (as in the "credit crunch" we're now witnessing), the Banks can easily exercise their 'lien' by preventing re-payment of existing debt.

In this way, they acquire actual 'assets' for 'nothing'. Since in making a loan, or buying a bond or other form of debt-instrument, a Bank is not really parting with anything.

It's a power they should NOT have.