BC Election 2009

The race for Victoria

 
 

    Home  
  • About
  • Candidates
  • Platforms
  • Polls
  • Referendum
  • Results
  • Ridings
  • Target Seats
  •   

  • Electoral Districts

  • Recent Comments

    • gragor on Comox Valley
    • Mike Summers on BC Conservative infighting continues
    • yuppers on BC Conservative infighting continues
    • Taylor Verrall on Bill Tieleman on NDP strategic error on carbon tax
    • Taylor Verrall on BC Conservative infighting continues
    • True Conservative on BC Conservative infighting continues
    • Glass on Bill Tieleman on NDP strategic error on carbon tax
    • Dietz on Bill Tieleman on NDP strategic error on carbon tax
    • Splendor Sine Occasu on Bill Tieleman on NDP strategic error on carbon tax
    • brg on Bill Tieleman on NDP strategic error on carbon tax
    • shepsil on Absentee ballot performance
    • Nick J Boragina on Vicki Huntington – Elected – Analysis
  • Parties

    • BC Liberal Party (85)
    • BC NDP (85)
    • BC Greens (85)
    • BC Conservatives (24)
    • BC Refederation Party (22)
    • BC Libertarian (6)
    • People’s Front (4)
    • Reform Party of BC (4)
    • The Sex Party (3)
    • Communist Party of BC (3)
    • Work Less Party of BC (2)
    • Your Political Party of BC (2)
    • Nation Alliance Party (2)
    • BC Marijuana (1)
    • Western Canada Concept (1)
  • Independents

    • How to be added to this list
    • Tim Felger (Abbotsford South)
    • Vicki Huntington (Delta South)
    • John Shavluk (Delta South)
    • Alan Clarke (Kelowna-Lake Country)
    • Arthur Hadland (Peace River North)
    • Graham Clark (Vancouver-Fairview)
    • Menard Caissy (Vancouver-West End)
    • Saul Andersen (Victoria-Beacon Hill)
    • David Marley (West Vancouver-Capilano)
  • Resources

    • Elections BC – 2005 Results
    • Elections BC – Boundaries
    • Elections BC – Financing
    • Electoral Boundaries Commission
    • Milton Chan’s Election Prediction
    • Wikipedia 2005 – Election Results
    • Wikipedia 2005 – Referendum
    • Wikipedia 2009 – Election Results
    • Wikipedia 2009 – Referendum
  • Referendum

    • BC Government – Referendum
    • Citizens’ Assembly on Electoral Reform
    • Pro-STV: Fair Voting BC
    • Pro-FPTP: NO STV
  • Archives

    • September 2009 (1)
    • July 2009 (1)
    • June 2009 (6)
    • May 2009 (61)
    • April 2009 (93)
    • March 2009 (47)
    • February 2009 (41)
    • January 2009 (29)
    • December 2008 (11)
    • November 2008 (16)
    • October 2008 (17)
    • September 2008 (18)
    • August 2008 (22)
    • July 2008 (14)
    • June 2008 (15)
    • May 2008 (10)
    • April 2008 (5)
    • March 2008 (7)
    • February 2008 (7)
    • January 2008 (3)
  • Categories

    • Analysis (96)
    • By-Election (31)
    • Irrelevant and Irreverent (18)
    • Issues (53)
      • Economy (17)
      • Environment (7)
      • First Nations (1)
      • Healthcare (1)
      • Justice (5)
      • Olympics (5)
      • Scandal (12)
      • Transportation (8)
    • Legislature (33)
    • Links (8)
    • News (85)
    • Parties (93)
      • BC Greens (15)
      • BC Liberals (36)
      • NDP (31)
      • Other Parties (12)
    • Polls (43)
    • Predictions (6)
    • Referendum (15)
  • Admin

    • Log in
    • Entries RSS
    • Comments RSS
    • WordPress.org

Raising the carbon tax

Posted April 21, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens, Economy, Environment

The Green Party sent out a press releasing calling for an increase to the carbon tax (Media Release).

Victoria, BC –– The Green Party of BC is calling on British Columbians to support an increased tax shift on green house gas emissions from $10/tonne to $50/tonne.

The $10/tonne (now $15) shift by the BC Liberals is a start, but BC Greens would shift more sooner — starting with $50/tonne,” said Jane Sterk, Leader of the Green Party of BC.

“Since revenues from the tax will be used to reduce payroll and income taxes, most British Columbians who have choosen alternates to burning hydrocarbons have already increased their overall revenues. Along with the GST rebate and lowered personal taxes, some low income, northern and rural dwellers have also seen reduced expenses.”

The press release looks rushed and not researched properly.

The second paragraph states that the carbon tax is levied at $10 per tonne, but then states it is now $15 – it is not. It will be $15 as of July 1, 2009, and $20 as of July 1, 2010, and $25 as of July 1, 2011, and then the last legislated increase is $30 as of July 1, 2012. Presumably this legislation will be extended if the BC Liberals are re-elected.

The third paragraph is badly worded and is plainly incorrect. Revenues from the carbon tax cannot be used to decrease payroll taxes (CPP and EI) mainly because these are federal jurisdiction items. The provincial government cannot directly reduce these payroll taxes. Saying that the carbon tax, from an individual perspective “increases overall revenues” is also incorrect phrasing; “reducing expenses” is proper. Finally, the GST rebate (another federal jurisdiction matter) has nothing to do with the provincial carbon tax.

This isn’t the first time the provincial Green party has mixed provincial and federal jurisdiction matters; in their original platform document, they stated they would accelerate capital cost allowance rates for “green” capital expenditures; and also permanently put in place the oil drilling moratorium – both of which are federal matters.

Politically, calling for a carbon tax increase is not going to win mainstream voters for the Green party; especially since this release does not explain in a concrete fashion (i.e. dollars that are planning on being spent for various initiatives) on how the revenues from such a tax increase would be utilized – there is reference to “Initially money would be directed toward programs in rural and northern communities”, but somehow I doubt those communities will be thrilled about this. The press release also implies that the “revenue neutral” aspect of the carbon tax (i.e. every dollar collected from carbon taxation will no longer be applied to tax reductions elsewhere) will no longer be adhered to.

The impact of a $50/tonne carbon tax, assuming a 10% reduction in consumption of fossil fuels over projected 2009-2010 levels, would be a $1.42 billion dollar per year tax increase over and above the 2009-2010 budgeted amount (of $546 million). A $50/tonne carbon tax would represent a 11.7 cent tax per litre of unleaded gasoline.

Finally, keep in mind the title of the press release was “Green Tax Shifting Reduces Emissions Without Increasing Taxes”, which is completely inconsistent with what the rest of the press release stated since the tax increase would be approximately $1.42 billion, assuming fossil fuel consumption is reduced by 10%.

2 Comments

Corrected – BC Liberal and NDP 2007 vs. 2008 financing

Posted April 11, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens, BC Liberals

Because of previous issues of the legibility of the numbers viewing financing reports from Elections BC, there were difficulties transcribing numbers which lead to balancing errors.

Kenn Faris at Elections BC has been of great assistance in getting a copy of some more legible numbers for the 2008 financing reports of the BC Liberal and NDP. The changes were not significant from the original post I made on the issue (including the subsequent analysis) but note that the 2008 numbers are 100% accurate:

Elections Financing
2007 Figures are approximate (as transcribed), 2008 figures are accurate
Political Party BC NDP BC NDP BC Liberal BC Liberal
Year 2008 2007 2008 2007
Amendment Original Amd. 1 Original Amd. 1
Balance Sheet
Assets
Current Assets
Cash on Hand - - - 1,191
Cash on Deposit 328,338 385,567 826,594 1,540,489
Accounts Receivable 57,008 10,896 35,046 124,650
Bonds, stocks, other Investments - - - -
Prepaid Expenses 19,000 14,000 - -
Other Current Assets 128,479 98,251 158,177 61,311
Total Current Assets 532,825 508,714 1,019,817 1,727,641
Fixed Assets
Investments - - - -
Furniture and fixtures, net 7,211 9,014 9,520 10,551
Office equipment, net 57,586 71,983 328,561 231,221
Land and buildings, net 1,446,505 1,498,969 - -
Other, net - - 227,241 85,600
Total Fixed Assets 1,511,302 1,579,965 565,322 327,372
Total Assets 2,044,127 2,088,679 1,585,139 2,055,013
Liabilities
Current Liabilities
Accounts Payable 243,383 241,288 1,264,548 255,581
Wages, Salaries Payable 15,627 41,509 24,171 19,568
Loans Payable - - - 830,000
Other Liabilities - - 18,995 18,015
Total Current Liabilities 259,009 282,797 1,307,714 1,123,164
Long-Term Liabilities
Loans Payable 624,468 640,895 - -
Other Long-Term Liabilities 150,675 - 21,130 40,124
Total Long-Term Liabilities 775,143 640,895 21,130 40,124
Total Liabilities 1,034,153 923,691 1,328,844 1,163,288
Accumulated Surplus (Deficit) 1,009,975 1,164,988 256,295 891,725
Income Statement
Revenues
Total political contributions 2,865,974 3,108,409 7,880,200 5,891,323
Gross fundraising 114,490 120,462 334,889 348,885
Total transfers received 22,147 30,745 5,590 16,408
Interest Income 1,512 4,728 12,547 26,145
Product Sales 2,016 2,404 419 2,862
Advertising Income 19,918 28,852 - -
Rental Income - - - -
Other Income 106,032 191,354 (7,040) (18,575)
Total Revenues 3,132,089 3,486,954 8,226,605 6,267,048
Expenses
Accounting and Audit 55,984 41,083 43,318 23,638
Amortization 68,663 70,952 191,300 135,362
Bad Debt - 1,445 - -
Bank Charges 23,885 20,871 103,805 78,126
Contributions to other organizations - 4,900 - -
Convention, workshop, etc. 173,260 338,119 634,771 96,381
Data Processing / IT - 29,175 86,129 24,074
Furniture and Equipment 2,403 - 4,680 28,300
Gifts - - - -
Insurance 6,210 5,789 10,051 6,147
Interest Expense 32,442 32,204 31,637 100,866
Media Advertising 56,208 12,358 866,508 191,830
Newsletters / Promotional (Signs, etc.) 13,776 - 68,782 -
Office Rent, Utilities, Maintenance - - 193,819 149,051
Office Supplies, Stationary 75,360 52,208 71,999 1,994
Postage and Courier 89,002 84,933 34,270 20,377
Printing 92,116 112,678 - 80,803
Professional Services 76,371 63,891 242,103 18,118
Research and Polling 182,676 11,821 617,692 123,703
Salaries and Benefits 1,396,601 1,197,278 1,778,206 1,504,298
Social Functions / Thank-You Parties 4,606 - 27,995 1,077
Subscriptions and Dues - - 6,357 2,047
Telecommunications 44,673 86,768 231,317 111,147
Travel 85,098 85,240 466,270 280,754
Total cost of Fundraising 184,408 181,392 1,227,541 1,182,636
Total Transfers Given 495,448 506,939 218,184 500
Utilities & Maintenance 60,819 55,401 - 27,735
Other Expenses 67,121 - 1,320,813 871,098
Total Expenses 3,287,128 3,044,627 8,477,547 5,060,062
Period Surplus (155,039) 442,327 (250,942) 1,206,986

Comments Off

Green Party improving media relations

Posted April 7, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens

There was a press release delivered to my inbox saying that the Greens nominated four candidates, and that they are up to 62 confirmed candidates.

What’s more impressive is that they’ve taken a cue from the BC Liberals’ candidate page and are putting high-resolution photographs of their candidates online for easy access.

This may seem like a trivial step, but it enables newspapers and magazines, if they so desire, to put a picture of the candidate up in an article, at a resolution that won’t blur on the printed product.

This is something the NDP has not done yet.

The Green Party has made a dramatic turnaround in their online presence – they have cleaned up their website (which was a complete disaster half a year ago), got their leader on the front page, drastically improved the picture of Jane Sterk, got rid of those horrible Youtube videos of her from the Green site, clearly announcing candidates and putting up their contact information, etc. Somebody did a good job with their site.

One Comment

Greens, Conservatives, Refed 2008 vs. 2007 financing

Posted April 7, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: Analysis, BC Greens, Other Parties

Here is the financing reports for the BC Green Party, the BC Conservatives and the BC Refed party of 2008 vs. 2007.

The Green Party did some significant belt-tightening (observe the decrease in salaries within the party), but also has managed to increase their donor base. The party will be a continuing factor in future elections, as they will have enough money to support some physical infrastructure and some part time staff. Their numbers in 2008 look considerably better than in 2007, and it makes one wonder how much influence Jane Sterk had on these decisions – if she did, a 39% year-over-year increase in contributions coupled with finding 17% in expenses to cut is surprisingly “conservative” in nature!

The Greens have $28,000 in the bank at the end of 2008 which will not be enough to run a mass advertising campaign, but they will be able to pick a few spots to concentrate. In addition, what they will make up for in cash will be made up for in ’sweat equity’.

The Conservatives and Refed BC’s financial returns are fairly routine – the numbers are still small enough that one or two individual contributors would skew the numbers, but in the Conservatives’ case, they have a 29% increase in political contributions.

Please note the following numbers are approximate due to the transcription errors that occur during reading the filings.  The numbers for the most part are accurate but there will be balancing errors.

Elections Financing
Figures are approximate (as transcribed)
Political Party BC Cons. BC Cons. BC Refed BC Refed BC Green BC Green
Year 2008 2007 2008 2007 2008 2007
Amendment Original 1 Original 1 Original 1
Balance Sheet
Assets
Current Assets
Cash on Hand 5,115 5,263 359
Cash on Deposit 4,838 9,378 9,064 27,398 19,413
Accounts Receivable 204 150
Bonds, stocks, other Investments 25 25 156
Prepaid Expenses
Other Current Assets 438
Total Current Assets 9,978 5,288 9,940 9,064 28,141 19,413
Fixed Assets
Investments
Furniture and fixtures, net
Office equipment, net 985 1,971
Land and buildings, net
Other, net
Total Fixed Assets - - - - 985 1,971
Total Assets 9,978 5,288 9,940 9,064 29,127 21,383
Liabilities
Current Liabilities
Accounts Payable 5,324 2,022 25,611
Wages, Salaries Payable 5,000
Loans Payable 20,000
Other Liabilities 3,495 1,550
Total Current Liabilities 8,819 - - - 3,572 50,611
Long-Term Liabilities
Loans Payable
Other Long-Term Liabilities
Total Long-Term Liabilities - - - - - -
Total Liabilities 8,819 - - - 3,572 50,611
Accumulated Surplus (Deficit) 1,167 5,288 9,940 9,064 25,555 (29,227)
Income Statement
Revenues
Total political contributions 20,187 15,665 3,165 3,710 145,928 105,222
Gross fundraising 3,950 1,052 1,330 2,736
Total transfers received 10,033 430 18,671
Interest Income 1 6 4 16 41
Product Sales 23
Advertising Income
Rental Income
Other Income 1 14 1,003
Total Revenues 34,171 17,148 3,184 3,714 166,971 107,998
Expenses
Accounting and Audit 5,125 100 12,716
Amortization 484
Bad Debt 573
Bank Charges 584 395 1 747 2,306
Donations and Gifts 90 1,054 100 85
Convention, workshop, etc. 3,549 366 8,727 18,531
Data Processing / IT 745 3,268
Furniture and Equipment 1,885
Insurance 1,400 2,500
Interest Expense 315 1,122
Media Advertising 503 69 737 370 3,202
Newsletters / Promotional (Signs, etc.) 867 135 531 132 1,878
Office Rent, Utilities, Maintenance 11,389 3,720
Office Supplies, Stationary 1,845 890 229 43 8,548 24,790
Postage and Courier 1,271 775 314 236 5,354
Printing 1,226
Professional Services 11,988 1,327 428 28,556 22,141
Research and Polling 20
Salaries and Benefits 923 21,194 64,937
Social Functions / Thank-You Parties 465
Subscriptions and Dues 205
Telecommunications 151 235 11,614 6,212
Travel 376 1,314 30 5,508 1,229
Total cost of Fundraising 8,135 614 3,828
Total Transfers Given 11,995 305
Utilities & Maintenance
Other Expenses 4,866
Total Expenses 38,303 15,845 2,308 1,764 129,641 156,801
Period Surplus (4,135) 1,302 877 1,950 37,333 (48,802)

Comments Off

Greens revise platform, government announcements, third-party ads

Posted April 6, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens, News

Just three random notes for the day:

1. I noticed the Green Party has revised their platform somewhat – I have put the new version online, and left the old version on the site as well for viewing. The changes are as follows:

- Cleaned up the reference to “Bill C-30″ to a proper reference.
- They have softened their line on power production – for example, on page 13, apparently now river-based power generation projects will be halted “pending stricter environmental assessment”.
- They removed the reference to “(no more large-scale hydro)”.
- A new policy of “Cancel all Gateway projects, including new bridge construction, highway widening in the lower mainland and the pipeline project in the north and the energy corridor through central BC”.

As this seems to be a living document, it will be interesting to see how it evolves.

2. The provincial government sent out 30 press releases so far today, most of them dealing with infrastructure funding announcements in conjunction with the federal budget stimulus package.

3. Listening to CKNW, it seems like every other ad is a third-party election ad. The pro-BC Liberal ad is two women chatting about how terrible Carole James is, while the pro-NDP ad is about how terrible Gordon Campbell is. Does this swing voters, or just push the voter turnout lower? It is tough to measure the effect of these ads so early in the game, if there is an effect at all other than keeping Corus Entertainment afloat.

Comments Off

Green Party first out the gate with their platform

Posted March 19, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens

The BC Green Party released their full platform (41 pages on PDF) today.

Going through the document, it contains the policies (dealing with the environment and sustainability) that one may expect from the Green Party. Coming up with a platform document is not an easy process and being first out of the gate shows some organizational skill.

I had a few thoughts when glancing through the platform:

1. There were a few instances of confusion between provincial and federal policy. For example, there are multiple instances calling for repealing Bill C-30 – which is an ambiguous reference, but presumably relates to the 39th Parliament (first Harper government) act to amend the Canada Environment Protection Act, Energy Efficiency Act and the Motor Vehicle Fuel Consumption Standards Act. The only problem is that Bill C-30 never reached royal assent (or even passing second reading) – it is not law.

Another confusion between provincial and federal matters is the proposal to implement accelerated capital cost allowances for energy-saving purchases. Capital cost allowance rate setting is purely a federal government power (via regulation). Yet another one is dealing with offshore oil and gas drilling – oceans are a federal government jurisdiction.

Such errors show that the party does not have a good understanding of how government works – it would have taken a basic check to determine that C-30 never passed, and that the provincial government does not set capital cost allowance rates. One would wonder what would happen if the Greens actually formed government.

2. The year 2100 vision of getting rid of large-scale hydro out of British Columbia is laughable – large scale hydro is the most greenest ways of producing (and more importantly storing) large quantities of energy. Even if you took every wind-capable site in the province you would still have to figure out how to wire them up to the grid and still not come close to achieving what large-scale hydro provides to the province. In terms of scale, there is nothing that can compete with hydro if you exclude fossil fuels, except nuclear energy – but both the existing government and the Greens refuse to talk about nuclear energy.

Getting rid of large-scale hydro is unrealistic to the point of being absurd, especially if using fossil-fuel based generation is out of the question.

The existing government isn’t helping matters any as well – promoting run-of-river projects across the province is causing scale issues regarding transmission (e.g. if BC Hydro’s Site C was built, you would be able to generate 900MW of power and you would need one set of transmission lines to connect to the power grid, but most run-of-river projects in BC are significantly less than this – most are targeted to 49MW to avoid the environmental assessment that a 50MW project requires).

While the obvious negative of large-scale hydro is that you have to flood land in order to create a properly sized reservoir, run-of-river projects have a relatively unadvertised negative of requiring transmission lines from generating source to the existing electric grid, on a per-project basis. To make this explicitly clear, if you had 1 large-scale hydro project, you have to clearcut one route to the grid, while for run-of-river, if you had 30 equivalent projects, you would need to clearcut 30 transmission lines to the nearest point on the grid. There is a lot of land usage concerns with transmission lines which will become imminently clear as more run-of-river projects get approved.

Of course, the Green platform is to get rid of both methods (large-scale hydro and run-of-river) of generation (page 13 on their document, PDF page 9) – they won’t be demolishing the existing projects, but they won’t allow new ones to be built. I guess the plan is to continue importing electricity elsewhere because wind and solar is not going to come close to meeting demand.

The Green party needs to solve these “credibility” problems before enough of the public will trust them to the point of electing members to the legislature.

3. Politically, it does not appear that this platform will attract those that are outside the “typical” fold of the Green party to begin with – mainly left-of-centre political participants with an environmental bend.

4. A most pleasant surprise was that they have taken the effort to putting in a comprehensive 3-page index at the end of the document, something that they should be commended for since I don’t recall seeing any other political platforms doing the same. Whoever thought of the index should be commended.

I am writing this, bracing for a flood of comments about point 2. The ability to generate energy through large-scale hydro largely depends on snowpacks melting and it is not reasonable to make assumptions that global warming will increase or decrease the viability of hydro. Historically, the last 50 years would suggest that it has made no difference, although of course year-to-year there have been good (wet, snowy) years and bad (dry, no snow) years, depending where you are in the province.

20 Comments

Green candidates in Vancouver

Posted February 18, 2009 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens

On Thursday, the Green Party will announce their Vancouver candidates. I will just post the list here:

Vancouver Fairview – Vanessa Violini
Vancouver False Creek – Damian Kettlewell
Vancouver Fraserview – Jody Emery
Vancouver Hastings – Ryan Conroy
Vancouver Kensington – Doug Warkentin
Vancouver Kingsway – Revel Warkentin
Vancouver Mount Pleasant – Jamie Lee Hamilton
Vancouver Quilchena – Laura-Leah Shaw
Vancouver West End – Drina Read

A few observations:

1. Jody Emery is Marc Emery’s (leader of the Marijuana Party) wife.

2. Nice to have brothers husband and wife running – two Warkentins this election, they can campaign for each other. (thanks DG for the fact update! On another note – does this mean Marc Emery and Jodie Emery will be campaigning against each other?)

3. Notably missing is Vancouver-Point Grey, which is Premier Gordon Campbell’s riding. Do the Greens have somebody in store here? Or are they going to sit out in this riding in the hopes that NDP Mel Lehan will be able to take him out without splitting the vote? Also notable is that Damian Kettlewell, who previously ran in Vancouver-Point Grey in 2005, is running in Vancouver-False Creek.

If the Greens do choose to field a candidate, a logical name would be Dan Grice, who ran in Vancouver Quadra for the by-election and general election. My guess is that Gordon Campbell would breath a heavy sigh of relief if the Greens did nominate a candidate.

(Subsequent update: Dan Grice is not running in the upcoming provincial election).

6 Comments

Green Party fixes their website

Posted December 2, 2008 by Sacha Peter
Category: BC Greens

This isn’t terribly spicy news, but for the last week, the Green Party’s website has been displaying error messages from their web application, but they have finally fixed this. I noticed at one point, they used really tiny font to display the error message so it was nearly invisible (I must admit this was a very creative and ‘cheap’ solution), but they finally got rid of this as well.

Doing some web design myself, I know what a pain it is when your software breaks on you for no specific reason, so the best of luck to their technical efforts in the future.

Comments Off

« Previous Entries

About BC2009.COM - Comments Policy