B.C. Politics Thread

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

Just now, Duodenum said:

If you are a real estate speculator, vote Conservative.

 

Certain members of this site agree with this sentiment and are actively promoting it.  

[aGENT]

7 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

 

Certain members of this site agree with this sentiment and are actively promoting it.  

 

 

Speaking of real estate...

 

https://anthemproperties.com/kevin-falcon-joins-anthem-capital-corp/

 

Kevin Falcon joins Anthem Capital Corp.

Eric Carlson, founder and CEO of Anthem Capital Corp., a member of the Anthem Group of Companies, including Anthem Properties, is pleased to announce that British Columbia’s former Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance, Kevin Falcon, will be joining the Anthem team as Executive Vice President effective May 16, 2013.

 

 

Rumours are that apparently some very big corporate donors basically sat Kevin Falcon down and told him in no uncertain terms that he had to drop out and support Rustad, which is what led to the whole surprise press conference and him not even informing his party or MLAs that he'd sold them out because the people that held his leash had found a better lapdog in Rustad.

 

So all of a sudden the Cons were able to capitalize on the federal Con wave of support, as well as being the only right wing vote.

 

And he's just good enough at doing the whole populist, blame the current government thing that folks seem to feel like the Cons will actually do something to improve their lives. But you listen to him talk or in this debate and it should be apparent he doesn't have a real plan and is just talking out of both sides of his mouth.

 

These are the people you want running the province @Boudrias.  

Edited October 5 by aGENT

[Warhippy]

5 minutes ago, 6of1_halfdozenofother said:

Also sadly, once a populist steps into power, they'll take credit for the last government's work as their own, even though the policies they introduce won't effectively change things until a couple of years or even an election cycle later.

I have for the decade + I have been on here and the old forum said consistently, unless it is a MAJOR source of government intervention on a massive nd direct level, it takes a minimum of 12-18 months for new policy to seriously trickle down and affect the general populace.

 

The amount of people/entities in government that laud their first year or year + as a success is long.  Harpers first 16 months was touted as somehow great, but the only reason is because he did nothing different.  The BC NDP, not a lot changed initially but after their first 18 months what they did change in fact helped propel the province to a consistent top 3 status in the nation.  

 

On the flip side, the Alberta NDP took power and they were immediately crapped on because they were not an immediate success having to fix over 3 decades of questionable Conservative policies but afterwards their policies in fact helped the general population under a tanking oil economy.

 

New management almost always gets credited for the success of the old management.

[6of1_halfdozenofother]

1 minute ago, Warhippy said:

 

New management almost always gets credited for the success of the old management.

 

It's also why the Benning apologists are finally starting to slink back into the shadows.  But that's a different topic for a different thread, let's not mix our Canucks history with BC politics.  

[Boudrias]

7 minutes ago, aGENT said:

 

 

Speaking of real estate...

 

https://anthemproperties.com/kevin-falcon-joins-anthem-capital-corp/

 

Kevin Falcon joins Anthem Capital Corp.

Eric Carlson, founder and CEO of Anthem Capital Corp., a member of the Anthem Group of Companies, including Anthem Properties, is pleased to announce that British Columbia’s former Deputy Premier and Minister of Finance, Kevin Falcon, will be joining the Anthem team as Executive Vice President effective May 16, 2013.

 

 

Rumours are that apparently some very big corporate donors basically sat Kevin Falcon down and told him in no uncertain terms that he had to drop out and support Rustad, which is what led to the whole surprise press conference and him not even informing his party or MLAs that he'd sold them out because the people that held his leash had found a better lapdog in Rustad.

 

So all of a sudden the Cons were able to capitalize on the federal Con wave of support, as well as being the only right wing vote.

 

And he's just good enough at doing the whole populist, blame the current government thing that folks seem to feel like the Cons will actually do something to improve their lives. But you listen to him talk or in this debate and it should be apparent he doesn't have a real plan and is just talking out of both sides of his mouth.

 

These are the people you want running the province @Boudrias.  

When the status quo isn't working then there has to be changes or otherwise where is the accountability. IMHO people should look at the candidates that have put themselves forward and vote the person they think will do the best job. Part of that will be their willingness to support the party platform or their own values. I cannot support the NDP who are running a $9B deficit or a Green Party who lives in lala land. Does Rustad have the answer? I don't know. The risk is that his bench strength is not good enough. I'll read his platform and decide. Maybe I don't vote.  

[aGENT]

1 hour ago, Boudrias said:

When the status quo isn't working then there has to be changes or otherwise where is the accountability. IMHO people should look at the candidates that have put themselves forward and vote the person they think will do the best job. Part of that will be their willingness to support the party platform or their own values. I cannot support the NDP who are running a $9B deficit or a Green Party who lives in lala land. Does Rustad have the answer? I don't know. The risk is that his bench strength is not good enough. I'll read his platform and decide. Maybe I don't vote.  

Isn't working... Hmmm health care is improving, rental costs are coming down, they're improving the means of dealing with the mental health/addiction/homeless problem, workers rights have improved, one of the healthiest provincial economies in the country... There's a pretty long list of things working/starting to work. Even if there's still plenty to work on.

 

Look, I don't like debt either but we're like a tradesperson who waited too long to replace his work van. There's only two guys selling a suitable replacement... One of them has a really nice, new one that will let us work smarter but has an uncomfortable markup and will require a not small loan. The other guy has a used one that's a bit beat up but he's willing to pay for half, for a stake in your business, but only if you'll buy $3000 of some of his ground up rhino horn and tiger penis that he's selling.

[Coconuts]

3 hours ago, bishopshodan said:

So when they close down the 'drug dens'... is everyone in the cities ready for drug use to be even more spread out?

 

It is disgusting now  but the Cons will make it worse.

 

I was listening to about 10 inmates talk as they were waiting on their meds. They referenced one of these places up island...

" they call them drug dens.."

"haha, they kinda are dude, its wild"

" yeah, but the cops like them, up were I'm from the cops sit watching a block perimeter outside. If you try to pull bullshit outside they nab ya"

" makes sense, keep us all in one place haha" 

 

The safe supply didnt bring the drug problem but the decriminalisation didnt work  (needed way more support).

What we are looking at in the future could be worse with the Cons. We dont have the police resources to arrest all the people that now will be commiting crimes when using, and while they are trying to keep up they wont be available for other calls. We dont have the prison system to support what will be an influx addicts, the revolving door could be set to be worse. 

 

I dont see the Cons doing us any favours here. The NDP are taking steps to support mental health/ addicts...

 

choose wisely BC.

 

They may not even spread out, more than likely a lot of folks will simply relocate, and keep moving. The Cons coming into power isn't likely to suddenly drive these folks out of communities, the same can be said of the NDP. 

 

There's a community aspect to homelessness and street entrenched individuals that is often overlooked imo, even if these communities are likely dysfunctional to some degree. I saw it while working as a support worker, there was a lot of drama amongst individuals and certainly a degree of backstabbing and whatnot, but the folks who are living that experience are also the folks who best understand others who are also living it imo. I also saw genuine care, concern, friendship, and so on. I saw folks taking care of each other (better safe than OD'ing), and looking out for each other.

 

There's a lot of negative stigma attached to homeless individuals, or even folks who simply live in poverty (a lot of people really seem to hate poor people), let alone bits like addiction and mental health challenges. These factors often, but not always, intersect, leaving this demographic marginalized on multiple fronts. There's a degree of security and safety in living with others, or around others, and there's that human element that most people crave. Why wouldn't folks clump together when so many people act or behave as if they're somehow subhuman? 

 

If the Cons come in and approach homelessness, addiction, and so on as a criminal justice problem instead of a social health problem that'd be a mistake. There is no "solving" homelessness, addiction, and so on, there is no completely getting folks off the streets and permanently fixing "dead zones" so to speak imo. But things can get better with proper funding, services, and infrastructure. It's not just Victoria, Vancouver, or the lower mainland, it's all over the province and it ain't unique to Canada either.

 

2 hours ago, Duodenum said:

I see it this way.

 

If you want strong public healthcare, more GPs and NPs, vote NDP.

If you want public/private healthcare with players like Telus controlling your health, vote Conservative.

If you want an increase in housing supply, vote NDP.

If you are a real estate speculator, vote Conservative.

If you want major projects started (skytrain, bridges, etc) but at the cost of deficit spending, vote NDP.

If you want plastic straws, vote Conservative 

If you want the drug issues dealt with, then you don't really have a choice as no party has shown the ability to deal with it. 

 

Folks believing that the Cons will somehow "solve" the homelessness and addictions bits around the province may as well believe in the tooth fairy. The same can be said of the NDP, but at least it looks like they've been pivoting when they realize something isn't working. 

 

More than likely neither government is going to be able to ever adequately "solve" homelessness or addiction, particularly in regions with milder climates.

Edited October 5 by Coconuts

[Oysterbean]

21 minutes ago, Coconuts said:

 

They may not even spread out, more than likely a lot of folks will simply relocate, and keep moving. The Cons coming into power isn't likely to suddenly drive these folks out of communities, the same can be said of the NDP. 

 

There's a community aspect to homelessness and street entrenched individuals that is often overlooked imo, even if these communities are likely dysfunctional to some degree. I saw it while working as a support worker, there was a lot of drama amongst individuals and certainly a degree of backstabbing and whatnot, but the folks who are living that experience are also the folks who best understand others who are also living it imo. I also saw genuine care, concern, friendship, and so on. I saw folks taking care of each other (better safe than OD'ing), and looking out for each other.

 

There's a lot of negative stigma attached to homeless individuals, or even folks who simply live in poverty (a lot of people really seem to hate poor people), let alone bits like addiction and mental health challenges. These factors often, but not always, intersect, leaving this demographic marginalized on multiple fronts. There's a degree of security and safety in living with others, or around others, and there's that human element that most people crave. Why wouldn't folks clump together when so many people act or behave as if they're somehow subhuman? 

 

If the Cons come in and approach homelessness, addiction, and so on as a criminal justice problem instead of a social health problem that'd be a mistake. There is no "solving" homelessness, addiction, and so on, there is no completely getting folks off the streets and permanently fixing "dead zones" so to speak imo. But things can get better with proper funding, services, and infrastructure. It's not just Victoria, Vancouver, or the lower mainland, it's all over the province and it ain't unique to Canada either.

 

 

Folks believing that the Cons will somehow "solve" the homelessness and addictions bits around the province may as well believe in the tooth fairy. The same can be said of the NDP, but at least it looks like they've been pivoting when they realize something isn't working. 

 

More than likely neither government is going to be able to ever adequately "solve" homelessness or addiction, particularly in regions with milder climates.

Even though the following article is from 2020, it’s very interesting and provides a some more context on such a hot topic. 
 

https://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/opinion/not-the-left-that-brought-closure-of-riverview-811211

[Coconuts]

17 minutes ago, Oysterbean said:

Even though the following article is from 2020, it’s very interesting and provides a some more context on such a hot topic. 
 

https://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/opinion/not-the-left-that-brought-closure-of-riverview-811211

 

Four years later and this still often rings true

 

"They support conservatism without understanding the impacts beyond their own self interest. They want cheap goods and do not want to pay taxes, but they hate what happens when the inevitable consequences and funding cuts impact their quality of life. They do not seem to like living in a society that does not adequately care for its sick and vulnerable members and yet do not want to pay for the privilege of living in a society that does."

[Johngould21]

1 hour ago, Oysterbean said:

Even though the following article is from 2020, it’s very interesting and provides a some more context on such a hot topic. 
 

https://www.cowichanvalleycitizen.com/opinion/not-the-left-that-brought-closure-of-riverview-811211

I've always been confused as to who or when the closure took place. This all coincides with the privatization of Care homes in this Province. We noticed a huge drop in care when that took place around 2008/09. There was one RN in the ward where my inlaws were living, and she was being 'retired' out. This after having one on each floor in the home.

Edited October 5 by Johngould21

[Johngould21]

3 hours ago, Boudrias said:

When the status quo isn't working then there has to be changes or otherwise where is the accountability. IMHO people should look at the candidates that have put themselves forward and vote the person they think will do the best job. Part of that will be their willingness to support the party platform or their own values. I cannot support the NDP who are running a $9B deficit or a Green Party who lives in lala land. Does Rustad have the answer? I don't know. The risk is that his bench strength is not good enough. I'll read his platform and decide. Maybe I don't vote.  

Don't complain then!

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

Ravi Kahlon (NDP) was the only candidate to show up for the all candidates meeting for North Delta last Saturday. Perhaps if the other candidates lived in North Delta they could have made it?

 

https://www.delta-optimist.com/local-news/kahlon-talks-delta-ocp-at-election-forum-9587641

 

It turned out to be a Ravi Kahlon town hall Saturday afternoon (Sept. 28) at what should have been an all-candidates' meeting for the North Delta candidates in the upcoming provincial election.

The incumbent NDP MLA was the lone candidate to appear at the meeting organized by the Delta Residents' Association at the Northside Community Church, as Manqoosh Khan with the Freedom Party of BC, Raj Veauli with the Conservatives and Green candidate Nick Dickinson-Wilde indicated they were unable to attend.

[Gurn]

15 minutes ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Ravi Kahlon (NDP) was the only candidate to show up for the all candidates meeting for North Delta last Saturday. Perhaps if the other candidates lived in North Delta they could have made it?

 

https://www.delta-optimist.com/local-news/kahlon-talks-delta-ocp-at-election-forum-9587641

 

It turned out to be a Ravi Kahlon town hall Saturday afternoon (Sept. 28) at what should have been an all-candidates' meeting for the North Delta candidates in the upcoming provincial election.

The incumbent NDP MLA was the lone candidate to appear at the meeting organized by the Delta Residents' Association at the Northside Community Church, as Manqoosh Khan with the Freedom Party of BC, Raj Veauli with the Conservatives and Green candidate Nick Dickinson-Wilde indicated they were unable to attend.

I'd like to know where the others were at that time.

did any of those that missed, have to meet a major 'sponsor/donator'?

At an major fund raising dinner/speech?

Maybe a family emergency?

 

Just what was more important than meeting the people whose votes you want/need?

[Oysterbean]

5 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

Four years later and this still often rings true

 

"They support conservatism without understanding the impacts beyond their own self interest. They want cheap goods and do not want to pay taxes, but they hate what happens when the inevitable consequences and funding cuts impact their quality of life. They do not seem to like living in a society that does not adequately care for its sick and vulnerable members and yet do not want to pay for the privilege of living in a society that does."

Totally. That quote resonated with me. 
 

I have some friends and a lot of acquaintances that have voted conservative over the years. I don’t talk politics with them unless they ask me about something. 
 

Usually I just ask back if they’ve read each of the party platforms and  then ask them what’s most important to them. 
 

To me it all boils down to what one’s principles are. 
 

Most conservatives I’ve spoken with haven’t read much about their party’s platform and don’t really understand conservative principles vs progressive principles and how each affects their daily lives. 
 

The reality is that most people that vote are not very wealthy so having something like good public healthcare would seem to be a top priority. 

[aGENT]

5 hours ago, Coconuts said:

 

Four years later and this still often rings true

 

"They support conservatism without understanding the impacts beyond their own self interest. They want cheap goods and do not want to pay taxes, but they hate what happens when the inevitable consequences and funding cuts impact their quality of life. They do not seem to like living in a society that does not adequately care for its sick and vulnerable members and yet do not want to pay for the privilege of living in a society that does."

 

[Satchmo]

A hot topic election promise made with very scant details.  No mention of logistics, no talk of costs...

 

BC Conservative leader John Rustad said Saturday he would end 'tent cities' in B.C. if elected

“Under a Conservative government, no tent city will be allowed to stand. Illegal encampments will be cleared, and those living in them will be provided with safe, supportive housing,” the Conservative Party of BC said in a press release.

When asked where the current residents of Kelowna's encampment will go, Rustad said “obviously there are more facilities that need to be built out in terms of this.”

He added that under his government, there will be “zero tolerance” for drug use at supportive housing developments.

Rustad did not provide any details about how many new supportive housing developments will need to be built to “end tent cities” or what that will cost.

“It's going to take some time to be able to do that, but it's a major step to be able to say, we are going to bring this to an end and we're going to treat it like the crisis it is and deal with it,” he said.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/510324/BC-Conservative-leader-John-Rustad-said-Saturday-he-would-end-tent-cities-in-B-C-if-elected

[King Heffy]

1 minute ago, Satchmo said:

A hot topic election promise made with very scant details.  No mention of logistics, no talk of costs...

 

BC Conservative leader John Rustad said Saturday he would end 'tent cities' in B.C. if elected

“Under a Conservative government, no tent city will be allowed to stand. Illegal encampments will be cleared, and those living in them will be provided with safe, supportive housing,” the Conservative Party of BC said in a press release.

When asked where the current residents of Kelowna's encampment will go, Rustad said “obviously there are more facilities that need to be built out in terms of this.”

He added that under his government, there will be “zero tolerance” for drug use at supportive housing developments.

Rustad did not provide any details about how many new supportive housing developments will need to be built to “end tent cities” or what that will cost.

“It's going to take some time to be able to do that, but it's a major step to be able to say, we are going to bring this to an end and we're going to treat it like the crisis it is and deal with it,” he said.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/510324/BC-Conservative-leader-John-Rustad-said-Saturday-he-would-end-tent-cities-in-B-C-if-elected

So where's this piece of shit planning on putting people who do drugs in the supported housing?

[Satchmo]

2 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

So where's this piece of shit planning on putting people who do drugs in the supported housing?

Well, that's just another unanswered question.   But we know he's not going to allow them in so I guess they'll just have to be outside again.

[Coconuts]

1 hour ago, Oysterbean said:

Totally. That quote resonated with me. 
 

I have some friends and a lot of acquaintances that have voted conservative over the years. I don’t talk politics with them unless they ask me about something. 
 

Usually I just ask back if they’ve read each of the party platforms and  then ask them what’s most important to them. 
 

To me it all boils down to what one’s principles are. 
 

Most conservatives I’ve spoken with haven’t read much about their party’s platform and don’t really understand conservative principles vs progressive principles and how each affects their daily lives. 
 

The reality is that most people that vote are not very wealthy so having something like good public healthcare would seem to be a top priority. 

 

Unfortunately it's not uncommon for folks to vote against platforms that are probably in their bests interests, this could be argued multiple ways obviously, but voting against social programs generally doesn't work in favour of lower and middle earning Canadians. 

 

Going through the platforms is important, but I reckon a lot of folks don't even look. 

 

Principles and values are important, being informed allows one to actually make a measured decision regarding one's vote. 

 

Personally, I lean left of liberal so my values are informed by a social justice lens to a degree, and the belief that a society should be judged by how it cares for it's most vulnerable. I lean towards favouring people over businesses, corporations, and so on, and I generally favour the "have not's" over the "haves" when it boils down to it. 

 

Unfortunately neither neoliberalism or neoconservatism are appealing, and neither favour typically favour the working class, but those are the only likely options at a federal level unless other parties find ways to leverage more progressive approaches. 

 

1 hour ago, Satchmo said:

A hot topic election promise made with very scant details.  No mention of logistics, no talk of costs...

 

BC Conservative leader John Rustad said Saturday he would end 'tent cities' in B.C. if elected

“Under a Conservative government, no tent city will be allowed to stand. Illegal encampments will be cleared, and those living in them will be provided with safe, supportive housing,” the Conservative Party of BC said in a press release.

When asked where the current residents of Kelowna's encampment will go, Rustad said “obviously there are more facilities that need to be built out in terms of this.”

He added that under his government, there will be “zero tolerance” for drug use at supportive housing developments.

Rustad did not provide any details about how many new supportive housing developments will need to be built to “end tent cities” or what that will cost.

“It's going to take some time to be able to do that, but it's a major step to be able to say, we are going to bring this to an end and we're going to treat it like the crisis it is and deal with it,” he said.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/510324/BC-Conservative-leader-John-Rustad-said-Saturday-he-would-end-tent-cities-in-B-C-if-elected

 

That's just failure waiting to happen. Low barrier supportive housing is so important, I view it as the first rung up from being street entrenched homeless. A strict no drug policy is just going to push people back onto the streets. 

 

There need to be various forms of supportive housing, housing that doesn't allow drug use is important too, particularly for those who aren't using or for those who are in recovery, but a lot of people can't just jump from A to Z so to speak. A one size fit's all model will not work. Sounds like he doesn't know what the hell he's talking about, it sounds like a we'll make this promise and figure out the details later sort of approach that is  meant to harvest votes. 

 

We need more of this.

 

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/nanaimo-navigation-centre-lease-approved-1.7259941

 

And this.

 

https://www.islandcrisiscaresociety.ca/programs-old/newcastleplace/

 

And this.

 

https://nanaimonewsnow.com/2022/03/18/video-first-in-a-series-of-permanent-supportive-housing-projects-opening-in-nanaimo/

 

And this.

 

https://nanaimonewsnow.com/2024/04/26/major-supportive-housing-complex-set-to-open-in-nanaimo/

 

I worked at Newcastle and Samaritan and can personally speak to the importance of such sites. 

Edited October 6 by Coconuts

[4petesake]

5 hours ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Ravi Kahlon (NDP) was the only candidate to show up for the all candidates meeting for North Delta last Saturday. Perhaps if the other candidates lived in North Delta they could have made it?

 

https://www.delta-optimist.com/local-news/kahlon-talks-delta-ocp-at-election-forum-9587641

 

It turned out to be a Ravi Kahlon town hall Saturday afternoon (Sept. 28) at what should have been an all-candidates' meeting for the North Delta candidates in the upcoming provincial election.

The incumbent NDP MLA was the lone candidate to appear at the meeting organized by the Delta Residents' Association at the Northside Community Church, as Manqoosh Khan with the Freedom Party of BC, Raj Veauli with the Conservatives and Green candidate Nick Dickinson-Wilde indicated they were unable to attend.

 

This is disappointing on so many levels. It sounds like there were only about 50 in the audience and mostly older folk. This comment particularly resonated “The state of our politics has devolved purely into online sound bites and chaos.”

 

There was an all candidates meeting held I Burnaby a few days ago in which 2 NDP and 2 Green candidates showed up while 2 Conservatives bailed at the last minute. Makes you wonder if Conservatives are being instructed to avoid these events.

[Duodenum]

5 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

This is disappointing on so many levels. It sounds like there were only about 50 in the audience and mostly older folk. This comment particularly resonated “The state of our politics has devolved purely into online sound bites and chaos.”

 

There was an all candidates meeting held I Burnaby a few days ago in which 2 NDP and 2 Green candidates showed up while 2 Conservatives bailed at the last minute. Makes you wonder if Conservatives are being instructed to avoid these events.

Exposure hurts the Conservatives because their candidates and platform suck. They're going to hide and run a smear and fear campaign from the shadows and rely on voter ignorance and "vote for change" to win.

[Warhippy]

2 hours ago, Satchmo said:

A hot topic election promise made with very scant details.  No mention of logistics, no talk of costs...

 

BC Conservative leader John Rustad said Saturday he would end 'tent cities' in B.C. if elected

“Under a Conservative government, no tent city will be allowed to stand. Illegal encampments will be cleared, and those living in them will be provided with safe, supportive housing,” the Conservative Party of BC said in a press release.

When asked where the current residents of Kelowna's encampment will go, Rustad said “obviously there are more facilities that need to be built out in terms of this.”

He added that under his government, there will be “zero tolerance” for drug use at supportive housing developments.

Rustad did not provide any details about how many new supportive housing developments will need to be built to “end tent cities” or what that will cost.

“It's going to take some time to be able to do that, but it's a major step to be able to say, we are going to bring this to an end and we're going to treat it like the crisis it is and deal with it,” he said.

https://www.castanet.net/news/Kelowna/510324/BC-Conservative-leader-John-Rustad-said-Saturday-he-would-end-tent-cities-in-B-C-if-elected

He can promise everything and he has.

 

But much like his other comments.  it would end up in courts.  They would then be deemed human rights violations.  Then nothing would change except the amount of time and $ wasted while the numbers of people affected continued to grow

[Johngould21]

17 hours ago, JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo said:

Ravi Kahlon (NDP) was the only candidate to show up for the all candidates meeting for North Delta last Saturday. Perhaps if the other candidates lived in North Delta they could have made it?

 

https://www.delta-optimist.com/local-news/kahlon-talks-delta-ocp-at-election-forum-9587641

 

It turned out to be a Ravi Kahlon town hall Saturday afternoon (Sept. 28) at what should have been an all-candidates' meeting for the North Delta candidates in the upcoming provincial election.

The incumbent NDP MLA was the lone candidate to appear at the meeting organized by the Delta Residents' Association at the Northside Community Church, as Manqoosh Khan with the Freedom Party of BC, Raj Veauli with the Conservatives and Green candidate Nick Dickinson-Wilde indicated they were unable to attend.

If those Cons had a good and reasonable excuse, then OK, but this sounds like the Stephen Harper's playbook is being used by the BCC's.

[4petesake]

1 hour ago, Johngould21 said:

If those Cons had a good and reasonable excuse, then OK, but this sounds like the Stephen Harper's playbook is being used by the BCC's.

 

Well if this list is accurate…

 

 

[Boudrias]

5 minutes ago, 4petesake said:

 

Well if this list is accurate…

 

 

They know they are winning and don't want to risk it. If there was a televised debate I missed it and did not hear the radio debate. I agree that candidates should debate. As it is now Eby will have to stand on the NDP record and Rustad will get a bit of a free ride. People will consider their present circumstances and wonder where they will be if they re-elect Eby. Rustad will collect the votes of people who have had enough of the NDP. The polls suggest a tie but I would not be surprised if Rustad wins.