Saturday, May 20, 2017

The Man Who Would be King (Maker)


Andrew J. Weaver – the leader of the B.C. Green party is poised to be the person in control of at least part of the next B.C. government’s agenda. He or other members of his party were not elected by a significant percentage of the B.C. electorate for that job, nor do they represent a cross section of B.C. voters – in fact all three of their newly won seats come from Vancouver Island. However, because of some perhaps unusual voting patterns, the Green Party may now hold the balance of power in a Liberal minority government. That makes him and his two fellow Green party members a powerful force for shaping a government that has, at least in part, a clear vision of how to run a province from an environmental perspective. The real questions are : is there really a clear vision of how to do that and td they have a mandate to do it?
 
One has to believe that never in their wildest dreams did the Green Party think that in 2017 they would be in such a position. I have to assume that they would have been excited if they had just gained two extra seats. Their primary goal was in all likelihood to get enough seats so that they could become a party as defined by the legislature and therefor get government funding for its operations within the Legislature. They, unlike the two other parties, spent very little, if any time thinking about what policies they would want to be presented in the Throne Speech. It is a giant step to go from a small – perhaps one could say insignificant opposition force within the Legislature - to a party that holds the balance of power.
 
It is interesting to note that their first priority is to be given the status of an official party (a party needs to have four elected members in the legislature before they are awarded that status). Their second stated priority is to have the rules as to who can and cannot contribute to political parties. If the Greens have their way, neither unions nor large corporations will be allowed to donate. While this change is frequently seen as a way of leveling the playing field especially as the Green Party does not accept such donations, one cannot assume that this guarantees that the Green’s coffers will fill at the same rate as the Liberals. In fact I would argue that in other jurisdictions where this policy has become law, dominate parties continue to raise the most money from individuals.  I think that it is worth noting that the first two demands that Weaver made public had to do with how, in his mind, the Green Party could be made stronger. I don’t think his position is unusual or even inappropriate, but they feel more than slightly self-serving.
 
Weaver in more recent days has started to discuss the Green Party’s general opposition to both the building of the Site C dam and the expansion of the Kinder-Morton pipeline.  I suspect that the first item will get a fair amount of support from the general public. Unless someone does a much better job than in the past in selling the concept, there does not appear to be a lot of support for it to be built – at least in the short term. It is an issue internal to B.C. that affects no other province.
 
The Kinder-Morton pipeline is another issue. While it is true that a significant part of the expansion will occur in B.C. and that the highest places of risk in transporting the partially processed oil, including the loading it on to ships, is in B.C., a decision to not allow the pipeline’s construction generally affects people outside of the province. There are thousands of people in Alberta and elsewhere who depend upon the income they earn from oil production. If the pipeline is not built, there will be fewer jobs – jobs that Albertans need to maintain their economy. If Alberta cannot, at least in the short term, earn the money it does from oil revenues, then they will not be able to sustain their economy. Families will be forced to re-locate, small business will not thrive, house prices will continue their downward trend and Alberta as a province will stop paying into the Canadian Equalization Plan. Alberta will not be able to transition to another type of economy if the economy is not vibrant.
 
Whether we like it not, there is a demand for the oil. If it is not shipped through a pipeline, it will be shipped by train – something that is far more dangerous and less well controlled. CN and CP do not need any permission to transport as much oil as they wish through whatever territory they want. Rail transport is not a viable alternative. The only viable alternative to the pipeline is to shut down oil production. And I don’t have a problem with them but...
 
It seems to me that the people who are advocating for less (or no) oil to be shipped from Alberta are the people who will suffer the least from such an embargo. The people who voted for Andrew Weaver will not suffer one little bit if jobs are lost in Alberta or if there is a major train derailment in the Rockies. They will continue to live on their nice island (as I do), driving their generally overly large vehicles and enjoying what traditionally has been the warmest climate in Canada. There will be no cost to them. They will continue to enjoy their pleasant life style AND get the chance to pontificate upon how wonderful they are because they stopped the pipeline. It seems to me that if people like me are opposed to oil productions (and fracking for natural gas), then we should pay some sort of price. Are we prepared to significantly reduce (or stop) our use of gas; are we prepared to invest the millions and millions of dollars in developing affordable alternatives; are we prepared, at least in the short term, to financially support the people of Alberta as they go through a transitional process from oil production to....? Of course, for the majority of people, the answer to those questions is no.
 
The Greens have this rather scary opportunity to demand implementation of their election platform– in spite of the fact that only a small percentage of people voted for them. While that might be great for the planet – and for that reason I support them – it is not democracy.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Blog Archive

Followers