I felt the Commission was a bad joke at 5 minutes speaking time so I didn't even bother. How can you even get some facts across to make a point in 5 minutes.

I submitted the following letter to their web site as well as to the Premier himself (who ultimately decides), in addition to the Vancouver Sun, The Province, and The Times Colonist. I suggest others take that root as well.

------------------

Dear Editor,
I write today about the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission and its recent recommendation to remove 3 seats from the BC interior. This impacts everyone in BC’s future representation, as well as threatens the proposed BCSTV referendum in 2009.

The BC Interior losing representation to the mega city-region in the lower mainland is one problem, but is it possible that urban and rural BC share a common problem in our BC Legislature and how that elected body is selected for the most effective representation of all citizens in BC? That problem is the two-party Single Member Plurality (SMP) system that is currently used to elect our governments; and the monopoly of power that is exercised by party insiders making a mockery of our true democratic will.

The BC Electoral Boundaries Commission wishes to take representation from the Interior, so as to alter the eventual outcome of the BC-STV (BC-Single Transferable Vote) process (as envisioned working by the BC Citizens Assembly). The 59% of BC citizens that voted in favour of the BC-STV electoral reform in 2005 have a right to not have this system manipulated for the benefit of the two established political parties. If the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission is allowed to proceed with their recommendations they will have effectively killed off the BC-STV process before the citizens of BC even have a chance to again show their majority support for this much needed electoral reform.

The current two-party system of MLA’s elected through SMP ridings dominated by party pre-selected and appointed candidates divides the population into extreme camps to play off of each other, and as a result win power for the partisans with less than a 43% majority playing on the fears of a motivated minority base.

The BC-STV smashes the two-party monopoly. The BC-STV does not allow for the divide and conquer of the SMP, because it empowers the voter to select their representation (positive politics), and not the all or nothing single candidate fear bashing option of the backroom party hacks that work for foreign corporations and union insiders and have no interest in the citizen majority much less the average citizen. Those people can be weeded out with BC-STV. The BC-STV further promotes democracy, because it requires every single MLA be elected only once they have 50%+1 support. Thus, the 50%+1 requires that politicians represent the majority through compromise, and not their extreme base of the SMP party controlled politics.

The threat to the BC-STV is that the BC-STV system is designed to work best with 4-6 MLA’s per district. With the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission proposing to take two MLA’s out of the Prince George region they not only create super ridings larger than Germany, but these ridings will only have 2 MLA’s when combined for the proposed BC-STV districts. BC-STV is designed to perform in a 4-6 MLA district and a 2 MLA district benefits only the established parties in power through their same politics of fear splitting the available seats and making the districts that provide 70% of BC’s exports politically irrelevant. BC-STV will be a hard sell to anyone in the BC Interior if it will result in politics as usual with next to no representation for the irrelevant already decided Interior. The BC Interior will still have the power to stop BC-STV if it is not mutually beneficial.

I would like to propose the BC Legislature put aside the theft of BC Interior representation for the 2009 election and instead support a Triple EEE BC-STV system for the province to bridge the rural-urban divide. If the people of BC turn that down in the next election then redistribution could then take place with a more accurate census data.

I propose the Triple EEE BC-STV boundaries become the 20 districts as set out by the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission (that had no BC Interior representation), but that each of these 20 districts be equally represented with 4 MLA’s each. That is 20 BC-STV districts with 4 MLA’s each, which would equal 80 MLA’s in the 2013 election. Under this Triple EEE boundary model for the BC-STV voting system Greater Vancouver would have 40 MLA’s or 50% of the BC Legislature. Each of Northern BC, the Okanogan, and the Island would each have 12 MLA’s, with the Cariboo and Columbia Kootenay having 4 MLA’s each district. The BC Legislature would be capped at 80 MLA’s of which greater Vancouver could not have more than 50%.

This would address the issue of MLA’s that represent dozens of municipal councils over hundreds of thousands of remote square kilometres coving diverse industries being able to provide the same kind of representation an urban citizen gets with their MLA that deals with a single municipality coving a few square blocks. It’s a Charter of Rights to have equal representation in Canada.

The Premiers Office has the power to make it so, and so I would hope every citizen in BC whether living in Atlin or Vancouver sees the wisdom in writing to the Premier and asking to have a Triple EEE BC-STV option for the 2009 referendum; and also to request that we have no boundary changes until after that referendum.

Thanks

Either that or Northern BC Independence IMO.

Also I thought the oil and gas comment was inappropriate as well. Kind of a pavlov experiment for the crowd I guess.

"would the President of the Chamber of Commerce , Garth Frizzell, quit spreading the myth that there is gas and oil exploration going on around this region?"

So he is the source of the rumours!!! No wonder! Taking advantage of a position ot spread rumours which may enhance the membership interests!!

;-)

As soon as Pat Bell spoke against the loss of our M.L.A.'s I knew this was a set up. If Gordo's puppets are against it, it is because Gordo told them to be. The sound of applause after Bell spoke told me that this was yet another ploy to regain support for Pat, Shirley and John. Sure enough the audience ate the act up like lollipops and See No Evil, Hear No Evil and Say Nothing were made out to be Hero's to the region. What a joke. We truly are all sheep.

People fall for it everytime REALIST.
All you have to do is tell them what you think they want to hear and bingo,they are in your pocket.
It's called political spin and manuvering,and Gordon and his band of merry men are masters at it!
And your right...we ARE sheep!

Yes I agree with you realist, it was a setup. The plan is to get everyone riled up then Gordo will ride in on his great white horse to the rescue, then everyone will be happy and vote for his three muppets. Anyone know how the three muppets can sleep at night. No conscience I suppose.

Seems to me that most of the people at the Commission hearings, were, recycled Politicians,
Mayors, Councillors, Shills from the University, CNC, School District, Initiative Pr George, etc;

There was no point in giving them more time to talk, or have more of them talk because they all said the same thing ad nausem.

(1) We want to keep our 3 MLA's
(2) We send all the money to Victoria, and we dont get the bang for our buck.
(3) The Southern half of the Province will dictate to the rest of the Province
(4) Our MLA'S have huge ridings to cover, while some of the ridings in Vancouver can be covered, in one hour.

Etc; etc; etc;.

The MLA's that everyone wants to keep are the same MLA's that they said didnt deserve a raise because they did diddlysquat to earn their salaries as it is.

The people of Prince George and surrounding areas do not own the resources of this Province and should stop acting and talking as if they do. All the resources are owned by the Province, so the revenue that goes to Victoria, has nothing to do with Joe Hot Dog working at Wal Mart.

There never has been really good representation for people in remote areas, either in BC or any other Province, or Country, that is just a fact of life. Get used to the idea.

Riding size has nothing to do with riding representation. Most of the square kilometers in these ridings are wilderness, and therefore the miles have no bearing on representation. Only the Citys, Towns, and Hamlets, that have people.

Most people at the meeting would have you beleive that these politicians travel to remote parts of the riding on a regualar basis, when in fact they go to remote places rarely, and usually before an election.

When one thinks about the presentation made by the UNBC student, one has to smile. The indication was that one less MLA would have a detrimental effect on the students at the University, however if one was to look at those people present at the meeting you would be hard pressed to find more than 20 under the age of 50, and probably 2 university students at best. So we can see that they take a huge interest in Politics. Same thing applies to CNC. Students conspicous by their absence.

Last but not least. At the present moment we have three MLA's from different ridings who all reside in Prince George, and are all members of the Liberal party. Now lets suppose that the ridings remain the same, and that in the next election only two Liberals are elected, and one NDP, and the Liberals form the Government. We would then have one riding represented by a member of the opposition, who has absolutely no power in Government, and therefore we effectively have no representation. So in effect we would have two MLA's in Government representing this area.


For years we had the Reform Party represent us in Ottawa, while the Liberals were in power and so we had no representation whatsoever. So representation in Government is a lot more than just ridings and MLA's it also has a lot to do with who wins the election.

Its time we quit acting like poor second class citizens with our hands out, asking for *more* *more*, and got about doing our business.

Every major business in this area was located here years ago when we had 2 or less MLA's and it seems we did just fine. We have sawmills, planer mills, pulp mills, and all sorts of other industry. One MLA in either direction will not make a hell of a lot of difference.

Palopo you're not much of a team player.

You seem to think northerners as stakeholders in the land we live, work, and play on should have less of a collective say in how that land and its resources are managed than an immigrant population in Vancouver that couldn't even find Northern BC on a map; much less care about the stakeholder issues other than their revenue source when decisions are being made regarding northern land and northern resources.

It is a shame Palopo doesn't believe in the basic divine and 'in-a-lien-able' right of self determination. Only lucifer or an illuminati mason apologists would deny those kinds of rights from their fellow citizens.

I believe governments are created to serve people; and to do this requires stakeholder representation. Laws passed down from Victoria on northern issues without Northern representation can only be described as a violation of the primary purpose of government.

In a real democracy representation should be defined as stakeholder representation and should not be defined by what party wins power, but rather by the aggregate of the stakeholders interest as chaired by the governing party.

This whole idea of appointed representation, or only the party that wins power counts, is a cancer on our democracy that is supported and advocated by the likes of... lucifer partisans.

Get real Chandermando. Most of the Industry in Prince George is owned by Companies who's head office is **guess what** in Vancouver. They fly in here on their Corporate Jets once in a while, but all the decisions are made in Vancouver or other areas of Canada or the USA.

The same thing applies to all your so called super stores. Ie; Wall Mart, Save on Foods, Simpson Sears, etc; all owned by absentee landlords, with local people manageing them.

Local people may have some say in what will be done in some area, but usually they are not co-herant. The new Kemess Mine is a good example. While most peope who work at the mine, and the company who owns it want to go ahead with the expansion and pollute a Lake the Natives in the area are against it. Who is supporting the Natives?????

There are a lot more examples. The contribution made from people in this area is usually in the form of a job, and very little else.

The total lack of turn out at the so called **Rally in the Alley** is a good example. Most people who were there were there because the Mayor asked them to participate, and they like to be part of **something big** Its rather strange that the 300 people who were present would say that this rally was a success, however the same **dudes** would say that 650 signatures on
a petition to save the Cameron St., Bridge was a failure.

It all depends of whose horse your riding. With 55000 voters in Prince George and a turn out of **inflated** 300 can only be discribed as apathy, certainly not a success.

The board listening to the submissions must have been bored to tears, and they have another 30 or more meetings to go to. If it was me I would resign and let the chips fall where they may.

Not one person to my knowledge even acknowleged the fact that maybe, just maybe, the commission had it right. We rejected their findings out of hand.

A closed mind will keep you in everlasting ignorance.

Your last sentence is correct. Good to see you recognize your situation.

I think you're sour grapes about the Cameron Street Bridge and as a result you crap on anything that is even remotely connected to the politicians involved regardless of stand alone merits for the issue. You also have a contempt for those who you feel are beneath you such as the lowly minimum wage employee. You give no credit to those who wish to have a voice in their government; because you feel they don't deserve a voice; most likely because you are on the losing side of most issues and thus don't respect anyone else’s voice.

Following Palopo's logic it is the bankers that create fake money out of thin air through hedge schemes, cheap debt industry consolidation for the chosen ones, and fractional banking derivative schemes that should make all decisions for all people. The people that actually provide the labour or live in the areas to be decided on mean virtually nothing; because that is what the corporate establishment funded by the banksters would like.

Palopop doesn't even feel a citizen is a stakeholder in the discussions of crown assets that have a direct or indirect impact on that citizens existence. Crown assets in Palopo’s world are to be divided up by the campaign financed governing party as per the needs of the corporations. It works great for Palopo because all political parties in his controlled political world share the willingness to be sold to the highest bidder and thus cheep to free money by those with the printing press can have all the money government will buy. This way Palopo can be a complainer, but feel happy for himself; because in the Palopo world there is nothing he can do about it anyways, thereby giving an out rather than facing the fact that he is actually a defeatist.

My advice would be to justify your defeatism on its own merits and why not stop trying to drag everyone else down with you. You like the kid that takes his ball and goes home because he can’t stand sharing the ball with anyone else.

How's that for a rant....

The rant is not unusual for you Chandermandoer, it seems you do it on a regular basis. You have now become a seer and are able to tell everyone how other people think and act, even before they do so.

To follow your logic, I as a resident of the North and a stakeholder I have a say in how the resouces in the area should be spent because of my location, however if I were to move to the mainland then I would lose this **right** because I would then be part of the immigrant population of Vancouver. Your logic is illogical.

We elect a Government who is in charge of the resources of all the Province, and it is their responsibility to see that they are looked after in a responsible manner. If we do not like how the Government runs things then we can kick them out. That is how a Democracy should work. According to your illogical thinking the People in Vancouver should have control of all the revenue generated by the Ports, Farms, Fisheries, Industry, etc; and the People in the North the Stumpage, Minerals, etc;

To follow your logic to the final conclusion those Citys and towns where the resource is based shuld get first dibs on the money. Ie; Vanderhoof, Smithers, Houston, Ft St James, Kitimat, Chetwyn, Terrace, etc; Once they take out their bite there would be little if anything left for Prince George. However the system doesnt work that way. Most of the trees are located in these areas, but most of the revenue is spent in Prince George. The people in the outlying areas, have the same argument about Prince George that you have about the lower mainland.

The Government of the day (The Liberals) were elected to run the Government. They through the Electoral Commission did a study on various ridings and came to the conclusion that this area should have one less MLA. This was all done by the elected Government and the Commission and all above board. Then we get a couple of hundred people who call for a Rally and they start to complain about the process. Well isnt that just to bad.

I will give you a hint Chander. The 200 plus people at the Rally do not represent me or the other 54000 voters who were not present. The Government is our representative, so all you vested interest, self serving, wannabee politicians, quit trying to Govern by Rallies.

Take a vacation or a vallium, and settle down.

Gotta agree with Palopu on this one :)

I think the $8 an hour guy working at Walmart has a say because maybe he works at Walmart as an indirect result of the policies that were made for short term gains by politicians with no local accountability. By having representation the issues that concern that $8 Walmart guy can be ballanced with the gold pot visions of short term dreamers from the urbanites.

It has nothing to do with this is my resource or your resource. I think it would be more to do with how those resources are managed for long term sustainability to the communities closest to those resources and how does that harvest effect other economic factors in the local communities as opposed to the provincial community as a whole who would gladly take the provincial revenues without taking into account long term direct and indirect factors that only local accountability could adress appropriately through the democratic process.

Again self determination - the inalienable right. Self determination to economic development input for the local economy, self determination to the long term environmenal decisions of the local trading area, self determination of the local infrastructure investment decisions prioritized with local resource royalty dollars.

BC is far to diverse to have 60% of our legislature controled by a single city. Every single state in the American union over time has seen fit to adopt a Senate to balance the need for regionalism verse pure rule by majority, and that can't be a coincidence I don't think.

"I think it would be more to do with how those resources are managed for long term sustainability to the communities closest to those resources and how does that harvest effect other economic factors in the local communities as opposed to the provincial community as a whole who would gladly take the provincial revenues without taking into account long term direct and indirect factors that only local accountability could address appropriately through the democratic process."

Interesting theory, that those closest to the resources are the ones better equipped to manage them from a long term sustainable point of view.

However, in the case of natural resources it does not work that way, or does not always work that way.

I have written about the forest stewardship certification process on here before. That process to try to ensure that wood fiber is produced in a sustainable matter and that the local communities get as much advantage from the product of their labour was a direct result of the action of those foreigners in the Urban centers all over North America and the western world for that matter. That movement is not supported by the “locals”. It is viewed by many locals as those foreign urbanites telling us what to do. The so-called “bambi syndrome”.

I do agree with you about the fact that we should seriously look at having a Senate with equal representation from each of the regional districts. Two per district would make it 46 senators with about 1/3 rd of those from the North.

As Palopu states with respect to the mines, using Kemess as an example, they are concerned about jobs, not about sustainability of the environment AND jobs. There is little if any integration of systems thinking by the locals.

Using the State of Kansas USA as an example here is what you get.

State is 211 Miles Wide, 417 Miles in length.
Population 2,688,418 . 33 people per sq mile.

State Representation.

I Governer, 1 Lt Governer.

125 Members of the House of Representatives serving 2 year terms.

40 Members of the Kansas Senate serving four year terms.

Federal Representation;
2 Senators to the US Congress

4 representatives to the House of Representatives.

To me this is over representation by any stretch of the imagination.

PS:
British Columbia. Pop. 4,352,798

364,764 Sq Miles, 12.2 people per sq mile.

Provincial
79 MLA (Includes Premier) 1 Governer General.

Federal.
36 Members of Parliment 6 Senate Seats.

Total Provincial and Fed. 121

Total Kansas 173.

Do we really need 40 more Senators for the BC legislature???