What we really need is a PC party to get all the bone heads out of the Campbell government including Campbell. So that we have a true grit government to represent us.

The NDP does not have it. They want to reshape the world and it just dosent work. and the Greens just a bit to green. Their past leader was a great ball of fire but no one seemed to listen.

There is no doubt that we are PARTLY responsible for climate change and its not just carbon emmissions. The world has had climate change over the centuries and that also plays a part in the present changes we are having.Its the attitude to rape our enviroment that is very difficult to handle and to live like there is no tomorrow.

The Governments have gotten on the band wagon and are now going to financially penalize us and thats a big laugh because who cares when there are many still out there that drive vehicles where it costs a weeks groceries to fill the tank.

Cheers

I agree completely Bridge!
But unfortuntely for B.C.,I don't see a change happening anytime soon!
The Campbell government does not believe for one second that anyone can touch them in an election,and we are all paying the price for that arrogance!
They believe they have the ultimate right to govern, and that's a dangerous thing for all of us!
The only party that COULD have done anything about that IS perhaps the NDP, but true to form,they continue to shoot themselves in the foot at every opportunity!
I think any party has a shot if they have a leader that people believe in, and the NDP does seem to have an issue with that.
I also believe that in the end,that is what will also bring down the Liberals with Gordon Campbell at the helm!
He is working very hard at wearing out his wlecome!

"The Campbell government does not believe for one second that anyone can touch them in an election,and we are all paying the price for that arrogance!"

Chicken or egg???? egg or chicken???

Don't like the government? Throw them out ... it has happened in the past and will likely happen in the future ....

So not enough people want to throw the government out. Whose fault is that? The party in power? They are so arrogant that they are providing the gorvernment that people want to throw out, but forget how to vote someone out of power at election time?

What am I missing here?

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

BTW .. an interesting article about Campbell in the Vancouver papers this weekend. The opinion is that he is not really a provincial permiere, he is a super mayor. Interesting notion. Especially since 85%+ of BC is urbanized .....

I think a third party that represented the middle working class and small business entrepreneur exclusively would have a shot at upsetting the two established parties apple cart by coming up the middle to take the high ground of integrity.

Such a party would need a leader that is not a political zealot of the type you usually find with new parties. That is likely why it will never happen, because only the political zealot would have the zeal to attempt to organize such a plot.

I think what we need is a constitution of a peoples party that represents the ideals of 5th century Athens in the view to how the democracy should work. With certain expected ideals built into a frame work it could then attract the kind of people that would represent those values.

If the politicians who would represent as those values built the party... than the party would represent the politicians values, and not the values of the people, therefor the party should be built as something akin to a citizens assembly which would then be turned over to political hopefuls that undertake to uphold those values. I would like to see nothing better then to see the provincial government support this foundation financially voted on by independent minded MLA from both the liberals and the n.d.p.

The truth of the matter is our democracy no longer works for the people, but rather for the politicians who represent corporations (both foreign and domestic), as well as unions (both private and in government). The rest of us (middle class workers and entrepreneurs )are basically beggars of favors from either of the lesser of two evils.

Any new party must be built with out the financing, aid, or help of unions and corporations... and any new party should only take support from actual citizens (of all affiliations). Only those who can vote should be allowed to support this new party and as such if such a said new party was to be born... then it would be the duty of all citizens that share its values to support it both financially as well as by public education in order to allow it the support to compete with the other two occupied parties of corporations and unions.

The financing is another reason why it will never happen... because the people of BC will not support a party that acts independent of the interest of the corporations and unions as most are bred from birth to see the world as right verse left with the middle being the appeasers of the other. Its the biggest failure of our public education systems we pay for as tax payers. We teach to follow instructions and rules, or what is ethical, but we do not teach how to decide for ourselves what is ethical or what is right through our own systems of reason that allow us to question the historical truths for their legitimacy, therefor we have a population that votes like sheep and not like lions.

Time Will Tell

"Not a Party of the Left, nor of the Right, but a genuine middle-of-the-road, grssroots, free-enterprise Movement."

Is'nt that what we want? We had it once. But we lost it. It was betrayed from within.

By a veer to the Right in its final years. By the overly inflated egos of some who'd been in office too long. Or had always had overly inflated egos regardless.

By lack of the necessary new talent for succession at the top, or any talent at all from some who wanted to be there.

By a lack of understanding, or forgetfulness of its original principles from too many of its members and supporters.

By the usual accumulation of innuendo of corruption and use of office for personal or family gain.

By over-confidence in its ability to endlessly continue the economic 'growth' that had become its God.

By the fallacy of a Balanced Budget under a flawed accounting system it had forgotten how to change.

And mostly, by the 'inflation' it abetted, unwittingly, and found itself unable to contain or control. An inflation that increasingly negated the benefits of the prosperity it had so fervently believed it was capable of continually delivering. But couldn't, not in the long run, with that flawed accounting remaining unchanged. No matter how many Budgets were 'balanced', or even in surplus.

To put it shortly, you can't ever have a functional 'political' democracy without first having an 'economic' democracy. And an 'economic' democracy CAN'T be dependent on endless 'growth'. As a people, you have to be able to totally pay FOR what you've done, FROM what you've done. Always. Not from what you're going TO HAVE TO DO. When you're in that latter position, 'money' controls both you and your government. And those we elect don't control 'money'.

"it would be the duty of all citizens that share its values to support it both financially"

There is the rub ...... those with the money will control which is the more powerful group ...... look at the country south of us and you see the result we could all end up with if we are not careful .....

Then again, the money is not really lost, it just goes to hotels, restaurants, aides, travel agents, airlines, cabs, limos, tour buses, newspapers, TV, billboards, writers, producers, etc. etc .... nicely distributed throughout the economy ...... but not to building shelter for the poor, health assistance, food, etc ....

in fact, it is money from the rich to the rich to determine who will be the supreme controller .... the person on the pedestal for 4 years no matter how stupid, how biased, how old and tired and how controlled by the power brokers ....

;-)

I don't think so Owl. Everyone wants to prosper so I don't see what the problem is with prosperous CITIZENS funding political parties as long as there are limits as to the individuals financial influences.

If one man makes a million dollars a year and the other sixty thousand a year, but they have a limit of $250 dollars for a tax deductible contribution then I see no reason why both wouldn't have equal influence on the party.

The problem arises when you have corporations (or unions) both foreign and domestic that are influencing our politicians through financial support for issues that are opposed to those of the sovereignty of our nation and the integrity of our citizens. This is the politics of today.

If the limit is $250 per individual than any working person could have equal influence on there party if only citizens could contribute. The Greek used to say a citizen that does not actively participate in politics is a useless citizen of the state, where as a citizen no matter how poor that participates in politics is the foundation of the state. Putting this ideal into practice requires that individual citizens not have to compete for political influence with the huge financial power of unions and corporations both foreign and domestic.

In BC the liberals have decided that only corporations and unions that contribute to the political parties can have a voice, because they dominate the party financing and severe restrictions for Joe citizen to express his opinion through the independent media advertising within 4-months of an election. A step backwards in the struggle for who controls our democracy... the citizens or the corporations?

Socred you are so wrong IMO. Inflation was a global thing that not only effected BC, but the rest of the world as well at that time. If anything the BC socred were victims of external forces, which so often is the case in BC politics.

The real demise of the BC socred party was because it was not inline with the global banksters and their global agenda for complete control of everything eventually.

Through finance BC was bent towards the globalist policy, and the rot in the socred party itself was a result of corporate finance of our political system wanting to shed the 'free enterprise' legacy of the Socred party so as to create a new brand (liberals) in which they could set in motion their privatization agenda. IMO its as simple as that.

I think reminents of the 'free enterprise' legacy was the BC reform party that polled 25% in the polls prior to the Bill VanderZalm over spending in a bi-election that promted the heavily (corporate) biased Elections BC to disallow them from the election giving Gordo a virtual dictatorship by default as all the 25% from BC reform had no where else to go but for the liberals. That ended BC reform as the vultures from unity BC and other zealot organizations picked the carcass clean.

Today the bankers got just what they want. A two party system where they finance both and one plays the good cop and the other the bad cop depending on what your political leaning is. Menawhile they take what tehy want and eventually while were not looking they will take it all.

IMHO

I believe that the people of British Columbia need to take some of the power away from the mere men we put into power. If we were allowed to vote on important issues such as the carbon tax and the olympics they may not have ever happened. It is going to cost the tax payers 35 million dollars to house the security on two cruise ships just for the Olympics. Think what that money could do for our failing medical system. I think our governments Federally and Provincially lost control 20 years ago and we are just now seeing the results. We are being sold to the highest bidder. There is so much coruption and greed that would not have happened if WE Canadians had a say. To many closed doors! Too many representatives who have a price and are easily bought to the point that Canadians are no longer the priority. So we will continue to sit and be had and say nothing. Shamefull.

Eagleone wrote:- "The real demise of the BC Socred party was because it was not inline with the global banksters and their global agenda for complete control of everything eventually."

I beg to differ, Eagle. BC Social Credit, at the time of both it's first and second electoral defeats was in perfect harmony with those "global banksters". That's one of the reasons it crashed and burned. At each time the Provincial credit rating was the highest accorded any Provincial Government. And you don't achieve that by being 'out of line' with "global banksters and their global agenda".

In the case of WAC Bennett's government it was betrayed, over time, from within. BC Social Credit was indeed able to accomplish many great things under WAC's leadership. But it NEVER attempted to implement genuine "social credit" in BC, (though it did back, unsuccessfully), Quebecer Real Caouette's bid for leadership of the federal Social Credit Party of Canada, and Caouette continually pushed for genuine "social credit" ~ unlike the Albertan who became the leader of that Party, and was backed by Alberta's Premier Manning, who wanted a 'conservative' government instead.)

Although Bill Bennett, Bill Vander Zalm, and Rita Johnston presided over the BC Social Credit Party, by that time it was no more than the most politically marketable label-of-convenience for those who opposed the NDP to coalesce under. Same as the BC Liberal Party later became, and is now.

The only two things I recall which had some semblence to "social credit" under Bill Bennett were the badly-botched BCRIC share scheme, and a very brief use of Provincial revenues to fund low-interest home mortgages.