BC Election - May 9th, 2017

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Parallex

... What additional pressure (beyond words)? She has no authority or levers of pressure outside Alberta besides words.

Not that it matters, the BC government doesn't have the ability to stop the project... they can make it a pain in the ass to complete but I don't think they can sign something and make it go kaput. Ultimately, I think there are too many folk with interests in making it happen for it not to. They'll rattle their sabres but ultimately they'll get a bone to throw their voters and a fall guy to blame it on for their base and it'll happen.

They'll use the courts and tie it up for years.

They'll argue that the new Federal government approval process doesn't do enough consultations with the native groups for example.

Then they'll argue about where every square inch of the pipeline crosses.

They'll egg on protestors. The native groups and environmental groups will get massive checks from the Tides groups and other US groups and protest and sabotage.

This thing will be a fricken mess.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

If she can get an agreement from BC that doesn't involve a revenue rape of Alberta then she has something that she can go to the podium with and a wave of good will, her chances are better.

No, this would still be a colossal failure. BC has no standing to negotiate any agreement. None. Holding another province hostage for a project over which they have no jurisdiction is a disaster.

The only acceptable result is for BC to impose whatever environmental and other requirements as are held by the Courts not to constitute regulation of the pipeline that exceeds provincial jurisdiction.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

They'll use the courts and tie it up for years.

This is abuse of process.

They'll egg on protestors. The native groups and environmental groups will get massive checks from the Tides groups and other US groups and protest and sabotage.

This thing will be a fricken mess.

This is misfeasance in public office.

[OMG!WTF!]

They can also not issue local permits like to cut down trees for example.

[Frank MetaMusil]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

So you're happy and you'll go along with the pot industry which is legalized by the feds? But the pipelines which are federally mandated your province is going to argue against.

The drug problem and real estate issues, that's all something at a provincial level. Your government should be working on that instead of muddying the waters on something that they don't have control over.

If the BC government wants to basically start a trade war with Alberta, and that's what this is, then don't be surprised if Alberta finds a way to constrict the flow of goods across Alberta or makes your goods noncompetitive in Alberta.

Ceci tried this already. The courts will just grant an injunction and move along.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by Frank MetaMusil

Ceci tried this already. The courts will just grant an injunction and move along.

I know, however you would think then that any attempt by the BC government to block or fight this pipeline thing should simply be killed by an injunction, but will it?

[Parallex]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

They'll use the courts and tie it up for years.

They'll argue that the new Federal government approval process doesn't do enough consultations with the native groups for example.

Then they'll argue about where every square inch of the pipeline crosses.

They'll egg on protestors. The native groups and environmental groups will get massive checks from the Tides groups and other US groups and protest and sabotage.

Like I said they could make it a pain in the ass but they can't outright stop it. Rigorous enforcement of the conditions/regulations is basically the only lever they have. It's not a nothing lever but it's a fairly opaque one. They'll rattle their sabres and froth about nonsense, then they'll get something thrown their way, do what all provincial governments do when something upsets the locals (blame the Feds), wish the non-governmental actors good luck and say "nuthin' we can do about it".

Certain Aboriginal & Environmental Advocacy Groups were going to do that stuff (Court action, protests, etc. etc.) anyways, regardless of whomever held office, so it has nothing to do the BC government.

They'll probably be another election before any of that comes to a head anyways.

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by Regorium

If only there was an industry pays extremely high wages to young millennials that would allow them to afford that cost of living...

This is incredibly disingenuous.

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

You're talking about provincial issues, and you totally have my sympathies. However your new government is sticking their noses into something that they really don't have a say in under the constitution.

I completely agree with you on this.

Frankly we have similar issues in Alberta, we have Fentyl deaths and housing cost issues, and on top of it, unemployment issues and other economic issues, and frankly BC's actions are directly impacting the later two.

The cost of living problems and the overdose crisis between BC and Alberta aren't remotely comparable. Like I said, we're averaging almost 100 overdose deaths per month here, and contrary to popular belief, it's not just a problem for drug addicts and the DTES. It's affecting recreational drug users on a regular basis.

The Liberals have had nearly two decades to anticipate and advocate solutions to these problems. Yes the fentanyl issue has really only popped up in the last 2-3 years but they completely ignored mental health and the issues in the DTES prior to that.

If you're a BC voter, like me, who is in favour of KM, you have the option of re-electing a government that is friendly to the proposal but is corrupt as hell, and will continue to sit on its hands as people die at an alarming rate and housing becomes more and more unaffordable, or you can vote for the parties that have promised to take serious approaches to these other issues and hope that the feds do their jobs in getting KM through.

I get that for people who don't live here or know anyone who has died or is at risk from the fentanyl epidemic and who stand to gain economically from the BC Liberals retaining power that it looks like those who voted NDP or Green did so to intentionally to screw them over but that's really not the case. For most voters here, especially on the island and lower mainland, the pipelines were way down on their list of priorities even if they were in favour of them.

[peter12]

This coalition won't last. New Dems will have to appoint a speaker which will make any vote a dead tie that will have to be broken by the speaker. Meanwhile, the BC Libs will be doing everything that they can to get someone - anyone - to cross that floor and switch sides.

Not to say that the Lt. Governor may not call an election tomorrow.

Or there could be another election in 3 months.

[username]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

So you're happy and you'll go along with the pot industry which is legalized by the feds? But the pipelines which are federally mandated your province is going to argue against.

The drug problem and real estate issues, that's all something at a provincial level. Your government should be working on that instead of muddying the waters on something that they don't have control over.

If the BC government wants to basically start a trade war with Alberta, and that's what this is, then don't be surprised if Alberta finds a way to constrict the flow of goods across Alberta or makes your goods noncompetitive in Alberta.

LOL I'm suggesting that the energy industry could/would provide additional tax dollars to the BC government to help fund their social programs. I was being sarcastic but it obviously didn't go off very well.

I'm Albertan as well.....

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

This is abuse of process.

This is misfeasance in public office.

Of course it is. And it will happen in spite of that.

[Mr.Coffee]

Here's a good video (a bit long) that addresses various issues brought up in this thread over the last day since my post.

According to this guy, who seems credible....... yes the province can do things to make life difficult. Also note the commentary about costing the economy $10 billion / yr over last 5 years.

http://www.bnn.ca/former-transcanada...array-1.766468

[Tinordi]

Albertans are from engineering faculties while British Columbians are not. This explains the lack of understanding between the politics of both provinces.

[afc wimbledon]

Originally Posted by peter12

This coalition won't last. New Dems will have to appoint a speaker which will make any vote a dead tie that will have to be broken by the speaker. Meanwhile, the BC Libs will be doing everything that they can to get someone - anyone - to cross that floor and switch sides.

Not to say that the Lt. Governor may not call an election tomorrow.

Or there could be another election in 3 months.

I think you will find the NDP will be doing exactly the same, but they have cabinet posts to bargain with.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by rubecube

^^Dude, people in Vancouver and Victoria can't afford houses and the costs of living continues to skyrocket while wages have stagnated. Meanwhile, the current corrupt government is doing nothing about this because they've basically been paid off to look the other way.

The bigger obstacle to lower home prices is from municipal governments, not provincial. It takes almost a year for a permit in the city of Vancouver for a regular, single family home. I was on a highrise project that took 8 years for zoning from the time the company bought the land to the time the permit was received. Add in 3 years of build time, and that's 11 years that over 250 units weren't available. During that time prices of everything went up.

Some people on here don't like my view that more supply will lower prices. Both the Green and NDP platforms call for more supply in order to lower prices. The Greens want to deliver 4,000 units of affordable housing per year. The NDPs want 114,000 over the next 10 years. Most of these would be in the lower mainland and Victoria. All developers combined here are already doing about 15,000 units per year. So now the government is going to pump out 76% of all combined developers units? That sounds like a fail proof plan. And yet, people blame Christy Clark for making the homes unaffordable.

The Greens and NDP are also wanting to introduce a 12% PTT on homes over $3M and taxes on capital gains over $750,000 on principal residences. Neither of these are going to reduce housing prices.

My other big issue with the NDP/Green coalition is removing the tolls on the bridges. By removing tolls your are giving people a bigger incentive to drive instead of car pooling, taking transit, and/or cycling. By removing the tolls on the Port Mann bridge, the bridge then comes back onto the province's books. By placing large debt back on the books, as they are being serviced off the books, the AAA credit rating is in jeopardy. If BC slips to a AA credit rating, similar to Ontario's, that could cost the BC government about $2B in interest payments annually. If taxes go up to cover these interest payments, then it will cost even more to live in BC. Removing MSP premiums, but just rolling them into payroll or income taxes, doesn't achieve much.

[Dan02]

Originally Posted by afc wimbledon

I think you will find the NDP will be doing exactly the same, but they have cabinet posts to bargain with.

Won't the liberals too if they get that 1 person to cross???

[rubecube]

Originally Posted by squiggs96

The bigger obstacle to lower home prices is from municipal governments, not provincial. It takes almost a year for a permit in the city of Vancouver for a regular, single family home. I was on a highrise project that took 8 years for zoning from the time the company bought the land to the time the permit was received. Add in 3 years of build time, and that's 11 years that over 250 units weren't available. During that time prices of everything went up.

Some people on here don't like my view that more supply will lower prices. Both the Green and NDP platforms call for more supply in order to lower prices. The Greens want to deliver 4,000 units of affordable housing per year. The NDPs want 114,000 over the next 10 years. Most of these would be in the lower mainland and Victoria. All developers combined here are already doing about 15,000 units per year. So now the government is going to pump out 76% of all combined developers units? That sounds like a fail proof plan. And yet, people blame Christy Clark for making the homes unaffordable.

The Greens and NDP are also wanting to introduce a 12% PTT on homes over $3M and taxes on capital gains over $750,000 on principal residences. Neither of these are going to reduce housing prices.

I agree with you that a lot of this needs to be addressed by the municipalities, but any discussion about housing also needs to look at rentals and improvements to the Tenancy Act. That said, do you think the Liberals did or were planning on doing enough to address the issues pertaining to fraud and speculation?

My other big issue with the NDP/Green coalition is removing the tolls on the bridges. By removing tolls your are giving people a bigger incentive to drive instead of car pooling, taking transit, and/or cycling. By removing the tolls on the Port Mann bridge, the bridge then comes back onto the province's books. By placing large debt back on the books, as they are being serviced off the books, the AAA credit rating is in jeopardy. If BC slips to a AA credit rating, similar to Ontario's, that could cost the BC government about $2B in interest payments annually. If taxes go up to cover these interest payments, then it will cost even more to live in BC. Removing MSP premiums, but just rolling them into payroll or income taxes, doesn't achieve much.

Completely agree with you here. Weren't the Green Party against removing the tolls on the bridge for exactly those reasons? If the NDP were smart (and that's a big if), they'd consider putting that motion forward separate from their budget so that it can fail when the Liberals and Greens vote against it.

[squiggs96]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I agree with you that a lot of this needs to be addressed by the municipalities, but any discussion about housing also needs to look at rentals and improvements to the Tenancy Act. That said, do you think the Liberals did or were planning on doing enough to address the issues pertaining to fraud and speculation?

I think the Liberals did well to bring in the foreign buyer's tax. I don't think it was rolled out well, but I do think it was necessary. I don't think it's the BC government's job to police funds from foreign countries. I'm aware it can be a problem, but it isn't our job to enforce other countries' laws. As for speculation, if you gave more supply, lowered the permit time, and increased density, the speculation investors would decrease dramatically, IMO.

As for the tenancy act improvements, I wasn't even aware that there were problems with it until you brought it up. From the green party's website the only thing they talk about is rent control. I thought rent increases were already fair in BC. They can only be increased once per 12 months and is based on inflation. They must give 3 months' notice. Are there other issues with the Tenancy Act the Greens wanted changed? I read where landlords do a fixed term lease and then raise rent by an amount over the maximum to sign a new lease. I thought that was illegal if it was the same tenant. If the Greens are trying to combat this, I fully support it.

On a side note, I had a tenant that I didn't raise the rent for the 5 years they were there. My newest tenant hasn't seen an increase either. A good tenant is worth way more than the $25 per month I could make. I also make all of my leases fixed term for the first year, so it's easier to evict if I don't want them there. Luckily, my tenants have been excellent.

Originally Posted by rubecube

Completely agree with you here. Weren't the Green Party against removing the tolls on the bridge for exactly those reasons? If the NDP were smart (and that's a big if), they'd consider putting that motion forward separate from their budget so that it can fail when the Liberals and Greens vote against it.

Selfishly, I wanted the Greens to form a coalition with the Liberals. This would allow the Liberals to keep power, and the Greens could show they were a viable option if they worked well in government. I felt their fiscal platform more closely aligned with the Liberals, and Weaver attacked Horgan quite viciously in the debate. I'm not sure aligning with the NDP was a smart move. Any good things that happen will be attributed to the NDP, and anything bad will be the Greens' fault. The Greens were against the toll removal. NDPs were for it, and have voted against every capital improvement in the last umpteen years. You are right, that that motion should be separate if they want the budget to pass.

[Flamenspiel]

I don't think this its a done deal. The Liberals only have to sway one vote, and then there is the issue of the speaker. They put a couple of honey pots in the budget and everything changes.

[Ducay]

People talk about Alberta seceding from Canada, but has anyone broached the possiblity of evicting BC? We could then have deep water port access at our doorstep, and no mountains to cross either in exporting to Asia.

Worth a thought

[Resolute 14]

Originally Posted by Dan02

Won't the liberals too if they get that 1 person to cross???

Honestly, no. Unless the Liberals convince someone to cross in the next few days, they will lose a confidence vote. If they convince someone to cross after that, then they can bring down the NDP on another confidence vote, but there's no way the Lieutenant Governor can - even if legally able to - allow that Legislature to stand. They would have to call an election.