Wednesday, June 14, 2017

TDDIC...The Waiting Is The Hardest Part.


Why is the good Ms. Clark making us wait so long?


I like Union Will's take on the Twittmachine:

And, right on cue, Bob Mackin provides a little evidence to back up the above:

Imagine that!

Header/SubHeader got your earworm wrigglin'?.....This!
TDDIC?....As always, 'This Doomed Day In Clarkland'...Earlier versions can be found....Here.



North Van's Grumps said...

Hey Pantazopoulos Dimitri, or is it Clark Dimitri ... Who is Andrew Horgan?

Anonymous said...

SH: Question is: will Small Town BC take it where it hurts? Again?

When the pay-off, doesn't:

April 18, 2017, Eagle Valley News: LETTER: 'The mayors of Salmon Arm, Sicamous, Enderby, Armstrong and Spallumcheen are wrong to support Greg Kyllo’s re-election bid for the Shuswap riding in the upcoming May 9 election...The Handbook for Municipal Councillors and Mayors states: “Individual members of council, including the mayor, have no decision making powers; decisions are made democratically by a majority of council...

Mr. Kyllo ought to know better than to entice the mayors to act inappropriately. What lengths will he go to in an effort to get re-elected? The mayors are obviously feeling beholden and magnanimous towards Mr. Kyllo because of the funding that has been directed towards this area recently. The wealth he is so happy to share has accumulated over the past 15 years by (illegally) underfunding the public education system.

A whole generation of students was cheated out of a good quality education. Are these five mayors also endorsing these actions?" Randy Wagner

Well, well, well…in other news, the town that evacuated 7,000 people, and watched a fearsome wildfire burn right down to Silver Creek a few minutes from downtown, is getting nickelled and dimed by the 'Club'….

CBC: Salmon Arm Mayor, Nancy Cooper "...was reacting to details in documents provided by the Ministry of Forests, Lands and Natural Resource Operations in a freedom of information request that revealed the provincial government was eliminating food and board benefits for Rapattack firefighters, not for purposes of standardization and saving money, as it had previously claimed publicly, but to eliminate a "culture of elitism."

Penticton Western News: "...Cooper noted that the forests in this region are some of the best anywhere, yet the plan to close the base might save a mere $119,000 versus millions of dollars for the forests that could be jeopardized by wildfire.
She said council will keep pushing to keep the base operational.

“We’re not going to give up on it, it’s too important for Salmon Arm to have this here.”

Shuswap MLA Greg Kyllo said he’s going to check with the ministry to see if the decision is going to be reversed.

He said he knows Minister Steve Thomson had said he was willing to review it, after receiving information from Salmon Arm council about vacancy rates in the community…"

Scotty on Denman said...

The war's not over as long's there's a slim chance the BC Liberals can avoid forensic investigation of their time in power; they'll have to invest every existential fibre of their dark beings into the effort. The alternative is: if voters find out how bad it's really been, no BC Liberal will be elected again.

Since the Greens sided with the NDP, I'll go with that partnership as long as it lasts. However, the terrain has changed by this, even before the GDP has gotten a chance to govern: putting partisanship aside for the sake of the province is a major turning point to both parties' longterm advantages.

Voters have complained about excessive partisanship for as long as they've been calling for electoral reform, voting for "protest" or "conscience-of-parliament" parties, or not voting at all. Some, maddened by frustration, gravitate to ultra-partisan parties that only have to promise relief, the futility of which resulting in disappointment and irony, precipitating anger, the most versatile and nutritious subject of partisan manipulation. Yet even the rawest nerve becomes numb.

If the BC Liberals want an election---and they've taken advantage of this lull to accept money from crony favourites, adding to the left-overs from before the election--- it'll still mean they're stuck with Christy.

I get nervous when I hear qualifiers like "unique" and "unprecedented" BC Liberals apply to the near-tie : is that a preamble to calling for an election without letting the GDP test confidence themselves? The trouble with this gamble (if the LG acquiesces) is they'd still be stuck with Christy.

Better, from a BC Liberal point-of-view, to allow the GDP to govern, hoping to find or fabulate some kind of controversy that, combined with loud, jeering smears in allied news-media and a substantially superior war chest, will tip power back toward them in an expected sooner-than-later election. The trouble is concurrent forensic revelations the new government will quickly seek to expose in the BC Liberal record. OTOH, the benefit of letting the GDP govern is opportunity for the BC Liberals to find a new leader, a distraction that might revert electoral chances back to near-even odds in the melee.

The potential for BC Liberal bloodletting is probably rising, especially when damning revelations start getting publicized by the new government and blame-shifting proves the honour of thieves. But it's hardy the concern of corporate masters, just so long's their neo-right proxies return to power. They can wait, whereas the BC Liberals---and especially Christy Clark---are on the bubble.

The same tradition of allowing the single party ( such as each party campaigned) with the most seats to have the first crack at proving confidence should be the same as the one that says the government supplies a Speaker from its own caucus. IMHO, that same Speaker would be good for at least as long as the Assembly is in session, regardless which group of MLAs is recognized as government. The notion that the Speaker need be changed because a new configuration of MLAs in the parliament extant is recognized contradicts two basic facts: both the Speaker and the government are agents of the Crown in service to all subjects regardless partisanship (indeed, only official opposition is required to oppose but, since the government isn't necessarily a single party, official opposition needn't be more than perfunctory challenge to bills in the interest of fact-checking and advocacy of dissenting citizens regardless of partisanship); a Speaker from the BC Liberal party is as good as one from any other; notions to the contrary are partisan clap-trap propagated by the BC Liberals in their own self-interest.

They still think government represents only the people who voted for it. The war's not over.

Anonymous said...

Wouldn't and don't trust Christy and co as far as I could throw them. IMO, they are up to no good. Awaiting an election soon. They'll do anything to win.
To Horgan and Weaver, cancel Site C, open up the books, call for a forensic audit as soon as you pass the donation Bill.

Anonymous said...

On this blog and many others, people are calling for a forensic audit, and throwing the more unscrupulous Liberal MLA's into jail. I would like to see this happen more than anything else in BC politics. However, do people really think the Liberals will leave incriminating evidence laying around? After all, surely the Liberal MLA's don't think that they will be in power forever adn that sooner or later, the NDP will be looking at the books. Also, the books are probably fairly clean. The MLA's don't do the accounting...that is done by the civil service using computer software, and it's unlikely that they will be doing anything untoward. Most of the unscrupulous activities are around making decisions and not documenting those decisions. Without a whistleblower, I can't see anybody going to jail.

Scotty on Denman said...

Forensics frequently deals with attempts to cover up wrongdoing. As Anon above says, the BC Liberals will have scrubbed what they can. It is unlikely---but not out of the question---that individuals be indicted if evidence allows. And there is so much more than just the books to look at.

The importance of so-called whistleblowers is noted. So is "honour among thieves," especially applicable in such a highly pervasive infection of the public apparatus as the BC Liberals have arranged for their friends: one discovery leads subjects of interest to resort to such "honour" by way of copping a plea or 'rolling over' on one's accomplices in order to get some kind of immunity. These links needn't be criminal to yield meaningful insight into a highly organized neo-right attempt to sabotage democratic sovereignty.

As I've said, revenge politics is counterproductive. Nevertheless, massive breaches of public trust which are apparent, despite every effort to hide them from forensic investigation, no doubt, need to be addressed. The purpose is not necessarily to convict individuals, but rather to protect, for one thing, the public weal from retaliatory litigation enabled by complex contractual and bureaucratic measures, replete with poison pills, wild goose feathers and booby-traps to not only frustrate forensics, but to make neo-right sabotage practically irreversible, the tactic designed to provide protection from the law during certain periods when out of office.

Neither does forensics need to preoccupy the a new government. New events continually require legislative and executive attention, but a new government can initiate what might become formal inquiry into its predecessors' administration by acting in the public interest right now. It could, for example (and I'm not suggesting it should), expropriate what used to be called BC Rail, and let the forensics be done before a court of law if the expropriated party (CN Rail) cares to defend further what has already been proven---even in a highly questionable trial process with many irregularities---to be corrupt.

The goal is admittedly political: to reveal the depth of neo-right perfidy so its proponents---here the BC Liberals---are too discredited to be electable again. While forensic salaciousness might most easily hold notoriously short public attention spans, only constant reminders of the cost to the public weal will sink into voters' distracted minds that breaches of public trust, no matter how complexly disguised, are simply not in their interests. In the federal realm, the willful sabotage of public enterprises is tantamount to treason. Here in BC, we're not looking for capital convictions so much as trying to reveal the extent of damage the neo-right agenda has caused and what it will cost citizens over the coming decades. The price is constant invigilation, and triple-deleting emails and stymying freedom-of-information requests should be among the first forensic clues.

RossK said...

Let's just take one example...

IPP contracts...

We don't know what can and/or should be done until they are opened up, fully, to the light.


Anonymous said...

Good answer, Scotty. I suspect you have thought this through much further than most people. I certainly hope that at least some of the misdeeds perpetrated by the Liberals over the years are brought out into the open.

Scotty on Denman said...

The prerequisite demands the BC Liberals are disconnected from the power to prevent investigation into their administration. It does not do to have them govern as a minority for that very reason.