Pete's Viewpoint

Note the BC Liberal link to their "no" mini-campaign site Today, BC Liberal leader Andrew Wilkinson challenged Premier John Horgan to a debate on electoral reform. In an instant, I thought to myself, what a stunningly foolish thing to do. Already, Andrew has been on the wrong side of history on several issues. He's opposed the popular speculation tax. He's opposed the elimination of the MSP. He's opposed ICBC reform. He's opposed the minimum wage increase. He's opposed to electoral reform. But lets talk about electoral reform for a moment. The NDP pledged a referendum to ask voters on an option for a proportional representation based system. Facing defeat, so did the BC Liberals in their ill-fated throne speech . Presumably, Andrew Wilkinson voted for it too. But, here is the crux of my thinking on this: Andrew Wilkinson has effectively made himself the leader of the anti-reform movement in BC. This is problematic in several ways (for h

So here we are with a discussion around Section 33 of the Charter of Rights, known as the Notwithstanding Clause . Not a gripping debate in many circles, except that it should be. Its usage could have a profound impact on Canadians. In a nutshell, it permits a government to set aside a court ruling on the constitutionality for up to 5 years (pending legislation to repair/fix what was judged, or an election). So if a court rules an act is unconstitutional, a government may invoke section 33 and disregard the court ruling - so that the offending law remain in effect. What?! Further, Section 33 applies (when invoked) on Section 2, and section 7-15 of the Charter. Meaning, section 2's fundamental rights could be swept aside by a bully Premier. If you're keeping track, Section 2 is where your right of everything you hold dear is nicely housed. A union's right to strike, bargain in good faith, even "exist" are threatened by S. 33. But wait! That's not all

Again, I don't want to minimize the struggle by middle and modest income earners who already struggle to pay rents in BC, but this call for a 'rent freeze' by some civic political candidates I believe is misguided and fraught with risks. A Rent Freeze by definition is a price control mechanism. BC already has a rent control device, which apparently is inadequate for it to allow a 4.5% annual maximum increase for 2019. Its true that the regulatory framework that the Residential Tenancy Branch uses to establish such rate controls could use some reform. But to arbitrarily freeze rates would open a can of worms that I believe are unintended consequences of their intended goal. In real world experiences where this has been done, its triggered an ironical result of higher rent increases and a drop in rental supply; almost the same result as general price controls in the early 70's in the OPEC Oil embargo, fuel shortages were triggered. I haven't signed up to the neo-

Let this be a lesson to those looking to those looking to emulate the populism, reactionary philosophy of Trumpism elsewhere; your movement is a fraud and your God is a false prophet. Donald Trump endeared himself to the racist fringe with his parroting of conspiracy theories about former President Obama's birthplace (" birtherism "). Because media and pundits would have eviscerated anyone for doing so, no one used the 'N' word in dismissing Obama's candidacy as far back as 2008, why not nullify him by professing that he's not a natural born citizen - and given the real world antipathy towards Muslim folks since 2001, accuse the guy of being Islamic too. All of these patently racist, debunked theories were repeated by far-right hate-pimps, and it didn't matter that they were false. As a certain German cabinet minister in the 1930's proved, the bigger the lie, the more often its repeated, the more folks will believe it. That tactic, if nothing

Firstly, I completely commiserate with folks facing potential rental rate hikes of up to 4.5%. That's no small sum of cash, and unless you're in the CEO income bracket (which is almost none of you), you're going to feel this one. So in light of this approved maximum rate hike, I've learned that the Residential Tenancy Branch made this approval based on a set of provincially established criteria. Rental advocates are demanding that the NDP government act immediately to either suspend the increase or lower the increase. This is problematic because advocates here are demanding that there be political interference in an otherwise independent government agency. I'm sure it could be done, but it runs opposite to those angry at the previous government for political interference with ICBC where insurance rate increases were held artificially low because elections. The result of that interference is the dumpster fire that the NDP is now charged with cleaning up. One of

As if planned this way, Conservative cry-babies react to the Trans-Mountain decision by appropriating the pipeline setback as "western alienation". Spare me for a moment while I try not to throw up. Albertans and pro-pipelines folks are no doubt upset by the Appeals Court to overturn Cabinet approval for the pipeline project, but not because the Ottawa Liberals suddenly turned anti-West.  To be sure, I have never seen such a pro-pipeline party as Justin Trudeau's Liberal Party; so much so that the Natural Resources Minister had to apologize for threatening to call in the military on pipeline protesters. Even Stephen Harper didn't go that far. What Trudeau is guilty of is betraying a central campaign promise. He said that his new government would reboot the approval process as the 'current model' was flawed. He was right. The process was flawed - it is still flawed. That is why the court acted as it did. The problem is that Trudeau didn