Category Archives: Provincial

Finances, Life, Politics, Provincial

BLEEP Deniability

Leave a comment

Deniability: noun; 1. the ability to deny something, especially on the basis of being officially uninformed; 2. the ability to deny something, as knowledge of or connection with a repugnant activity

Politicians and politics have always been long on promises and short on delivery, but over recent decades the promises have become longer and delivery extremely short.

As if that was not bad enough, over recent years politicians and politics have become long on deniability, while responsibility has headed towards non-existence.

The federal government downloads as much cost and ‘stick it to the provinces’ as it can; the provinces point fingers at the federal government and distance themselves from responsibility by downloading and sticking ministries and crown corporations with responsibility for problems; municipal governments point fingers at ministries and the provincial government insisting it is all the responsibility of the provincial government and they bear no responsibility for acting; the voters stick the politicians and politics with all the responsibility for problems by insisting politicians not tell voters anything they do not want to hear and punishing anyone who dares to speak of reality on an issue.

And so it does not matter how despicable, unconscionable or inhuman an action or action is because………nobody bears any responsibility for what occurred or occurs. And so the despicable, unconscionable and inhuman move from being the results of an error to being rare to being uncommon to not that unusual to ‘that is the way it goes’.

It is how the despicable, unconscionable and inhuman become no big deal; where the question becomes “what is wrong with that?”

Where it is business as usual for Vancouver Costal Health to have an employee take a frail, elderly woman from Squamish and drive her into Fraser Health and dump her in Abbotsford – a city she has no knowledge of or connection to – not at a Fraser Health facility, but at the emergency shelter.

Apparently there are no resources or facilities in all of Vancouver Coastal Health healthier or more appropriate for a senior citizen than an emergency shelter in Abbotsford.

Where a non-Vancouver Coastal Health medical professional notices the blood stains on the elbows of the sleeves of the maltreated senior’s shirt and after looking at her elbows gently helps her to the nursing station so the wounds on her elbows can be treated and bandaged.

While the Vancouver Coastal Health employee states that acute had said her elbows were cared for; before scurrying back to Vancouver Coastal Health.

While the senior explained she had hurt her elbows when she fell and had to crawl for help.

Nursing and shelter staff are well aware that an emergency shelter is no place for any senior citizen…….but what choice do they have? Toss her on the street?

As inappropriate as the emergency shelter is for this frail elderly woman, she is at least somewhere were the staff [people, her fellow human beings] are compassionate and caring.

Federal, Finances, Provincial

The Government Acting Stupid……

Leave a comment

…..is neither an excuse nor permission for citizens to act Stupid.

A fortunate happenstance for Canada and BC, given the levels of Stupid the Federal and Provincial governments have achieved.

In point of fact – governments, politicians, corporations, bankers, people etcetera committing a Stupid never provides an excuse or permission for responding with the commission of a Stupid.

“I/we had to after he/she/it/they did X.” No you didn’t, you could have chosen to act like an adult rather than a sulky two year old.

“I/we had to after he/she/it/they did X.” So, if there was a line of people jumping off the Lions Gate Bridge you would join the line and jump off the bridge because X, Y and Z jumped off the bridge?

What had me thinking about the assertion, “I had to commit a Stupid because Mr. X or Ms. Y committed a Stupid”, was listening to someone asserting that because the government was committing Stupid that negatively affected him, it gave him the right to go out and commit a Stupid and that creating a Stupid was the way to resolve the matter.

Take a look at the world around you. If raising the level of Stupid solved or resolved anything we should be living in paradise given the mind boggling levels of Stupid we have set loose in the world today..

I am not saying that he did not have a right to be P’d at the government’s behaviour; I am not saying he should not act to resolve the problem; I am saying that adding more Stupid to the world is……..well, Stupid.

So our victim, let us call him ‘Larry’………….hmmm – do we need to give him a last name as well?…….Yes? No? Maybe?………argh!……’Nedelkoff’………so Mr. ‘Nedelkoff’, ‘Larry’, had found himself in arrears with child support early in the previous decade. Now ‘Larry’ wasn’t denying or trying to avoid paying what he owed and once he had determined the amount owed he paid it in 2005.

Over the intervening years, even though ‘Larry’ had paid the amount owed in 2005, this matter continued to pop up and cause problems for ‘Larry’. It wasn’t until last year – 2013 – that someone was able to help ‘Larry’ find a telephone number for an employee of the federal government who could determine why this ghost continued to haunt ‘Larry’.

It turned out that after ‘Larry’ had been told that he owed X dollars and had paid the X dollars the government told him he owed, some bureaucrat decided there should have been an interest charge and, without ever communicating the assessment of this interest charge to ‘Larry, added a $9.xx charge to ‘Larry’s’ account..

When ‘Larry’ finally was able to determine what the problem was, and was fortunate enough to be speaking with someone helpful, as opposed to someone playing “abuse the taxpayer”, the $9.xx had been written off so as to resolve the matter in a straightforward manner and time..

Leaving ‘Larry’ believing the matter was finally resolved.

Unfortunately, ‘Larry’ was dealing the federal Conservative government.

So of course ‘Larry’s’ pension is being garnisheed, leaving him scrambling to manage to pay rent every month and avoid homelessness.

Let us leave aside for the moment the question of just how tremendously ethically challenged a government, a country and its citizens are when pensions that are the only source of revenue a pensioner has are garnisheed, causing the pensioner to join the growing ranks of the homeless population.

‘Larry’ has the documentation to support his statements that he paid the amount he owed in 2005; that it was not until 2013 that ‘Larry’ was able to determine that the cause of his continuing problems was a $9.xx charge some bureaucrat imposed without ever notifying ‘Larry and that the $9.xx was written off to close the matter.

Meaning the federal government is garnisheeing his pension, making him un-housed – homeless – without justification, that is to say: illegally.

Adding insult to injury there is no information as to where the funds garnisheed from ‘Larry’ are disappearing to. Well, no information that the federal government is willing to share with ‘Larry’. Apparently as far as the government is concerned all ‘Larry’ needs to know is that he isn’t getting the funds not why or where the funds are going.

Worse, it seems that ‘Larry’ is not unique. Or so ‘Larry’ was informed by the Abbotsford News when he took his plight to the News thinking this was a story they would be interested in. Only to be informed that – Yawn – it was no big deal, it happened all the time and so was not newsworthy to anyone – except one supposes: those who it is happening to.

The recent acquisition and killing off of the Times leaves no need for the News to publish items of interest or relevance to the citizens of Abbotsford.

Aa well, given the Abbotsford News’s rabid pro Abbotsford Council editorial policy, the News would not want to be publishing any story that might suggest that the homeless on the streets of Abbotsford are not all people who have chosen to be homeless but include those who are homeless because of events beyond their control such as being Victimized by their government.

You would think that with a government where people regularly end up in financial distress as a result of government actions such as the garnishee of pensions for a nonexistent reason or pensions cancelled because the person is declared dead by the government even though clearly they are still among the living, that the government would have built in a……failsafe where people in these situations could easily find and contact someone capable of resolving the matter before the victims end up homeless or dead at the hands of a government that is suppose to protect, not victimize, them.

Failing that you would think that having a member of the federal Conservative government as your MP would be beneficial in getting this matter resolved before one found oneself driven into homelessness – in winter.

However when ‘Larry’ went to seek the help of Conservative MP Ed Fast, ‘Larry’s’ situation resulting from an action of the federal government, ‘Larry’s’ situation was either beyond Mr. Fast’s ability to deal with or to unimportant for Mr. Fast to deal with and ‘Larry’ was directed to his provincial MLA.

Pointlessly directed since, in order to protect itself from the federal government downloading financial responsibility for ‘Larry’ from a federal pension to provincial welfare the income assistance system in BC considers ‘Larry’s’ income to be the full amount due him from the federal government. Meaning ‘Larry’ has sufficient income that he does not qualify for income assistance.

Aside:

‘Larry’ is not unique in being caught in the ‘avoid financial responsibility’ war being waged between the federal and provincial governments. A growing number of individuals, who have the misfortune to be dependent on government to survive, have been caught up in and become victims of this war.

The two levels of government are so focused on their financial conflict they either don’t see or don’t care about those who become casualties in their conflict, casualties who sometimes end up homeless senior citizens.

Given the fervour with which both levels of government are pursuing this war, the fervour with which the federal government is pursuing a course of action that seems more about bringing the citizen into a state – dead – that matches the governments records, rather than correcting the governments error and return the person to life…………

…..one cannot help but wonder whether these misappropriated funds are being used to fund the gold, diamond encrusted pensions and unconscionably exorbitant salaries of federal MPs and provincial MLAs or the extravagant salaries and pensions of government employees.

Now there is a concept: government that acts with competence and in the best interests of all citizens, not just the privileged few.

Another addition to the list of excellent reasons for citizens to stop accepting the ‘lesser of evils’ choices the politicians and political parties offer and to replace them with individual citizens with demonstrated trustworthiness, interest and thought about the issues – and who are willing to lose re-election if that is what is required to do a good job.

Because if the replacements are not willing to risk not being re-elected they are not going to be telling the public unpalatable truths or pushing public discussions and decisions – uncomfortable decisions – that are necessary but that citizens want to remain in wilful denial of.

*********

Back to our tale:

When we left ‘Larry’ he was up the proverbial s**t creek without a paddle, short of the $$$ needed to pay his rent in full.

With no idea of how to get the federal government to acknowledge their error and stop garnisheeing his pension, it is understandable that ‘Larry’ is worried and incredibly frustrated with the government’s insisting on keeping their Stupid in place.

Which is, as noted at the outset, neither an excuse nor a justification for ‘Larry’ responding with  a Stupid of his own. Such as breaking a window at the Service Canada building and when the police show up, insisting that the police provide him shelter inside.

When I commented that this seemed a rather pyrrhic approach and that just because the government was increasing their level of Stupid, was not an excuse or permission for ‘Larry’ to add his own Stupid to the ambient level of Stupid,……‘Larry’, unsurprisingly given his mood, pointed out he had not asked for my opinion on his plan to add to the amount of Stupid involved in this matter..

“Larry’ was correct, he hadn’t asked for my opinion, but this it is a mater of concern to ‘Larry’s’ fellow Canadians because:

a)    If we let the government do this to ‘Larry’, how long before they are doing some such thing to the rest of us?

b)    Vandalism comes out of taxpayers pockets.

c)    Police are a municipal expense, letting the federal government be successful in downloading the cost of housing ‘Larry’ to a lower level of government.

Instead of vandalism, ‘Larry’ needs to gather bedding, clothing, toiletries and entertainment/work materials together and arrive at MP Ed Fast’s office just before closing. After he has notified the broadcast media of his need to take up residence in Abbotsford’s MP’s constituency office as a consequence of the federal government choosing to make ‘Larry’ homeless by refusing to correct the government’s error [Adjusting his move in time to accommodate the media’s deadlines should that be necessary].

If the federal Conservative government is responsible for ‘Larry’ becoming homeless, the federal Conservative government should be providing ‘Larry’ with housing.

Hopefully this will motivate our federal government representative, Conservative MP Ed Fast, to have the wrongful garnishee of ‘Larry’s’ pension corrected.

If not there is Plan B – pitching a tent on Mr. Fast’s front lawn.

Sadly:  politicians, political parties and governments have made it clear that citizens need to find ways, often creatively maladjusted ways, to force them to do their job – looking out for the best interests of citizens.

If Canadians want a government that is concerned about the welfare of all Canadians, not just Corporations, the Well To Do and politicians, then Canada needs a Revolution.

A Revolution not of guns and bullets but of Thought; a Revolution where voters no longer meekly accept the ‘lesser of evil’ choices offered by the political parties and instead take action and assert their Right to chose and elect someone interested in their welfare and their future.

Finances, Politics, Provincial

Re-post: Balanced Budget Realities

Leave a comment

Originally published November 2012

If Christie Clark is actually serious about balancing the budget next year, come hell or high water, it is time to consider voting green or to run for the legislature as an independent.

The right always likes to trot out the bogyman of irresponsible NDP spending to scare voters as is currently happening in Ottawa.

And while Adrian Dix has demonstrated a worrisome lack of understanding of, or connection to, the financial realities of the province and its citizens Premier Clark’s promise to balance the budget next year borders on the insane.

Insane: utterly senseless: an insane plan.

Consider these givens: the 2012/13 budget called for expenditures of $43,869,000; the deficit for 2012/13 has been revised upwards to $1,470,000 which is 3.4% of the budget; the rise in the deficit is mainly a result of falling provincial revenues, revenues that are realistically not going to recover for the 2013/14 budget year; the promises Finance Minister Mike de Jong has made concerning the return to the PST means provincial sales tax revenues will suffer a significant reduction next year (on top of the $300 million HST repayment to Ottawa); the cost to provide the same services next year as were provided this year will be higher – particularly health costs which are rising faster than costs in other areas; the rationing of mental health services has already resulted in the deaths of British Columbians as a result of the lack of sufficient services; the increases in Justice costs (police, incarceration etc) will necessitate cutting more funds from the rest of the budget.     

Balancing the budget for 2013/14 will require cutting 3.4% (+) from next year’s budget.

Given the realities of the way the province spends its money most, if not all, of the cuts will have to come from healthcare and education.

Yes you could make cuts to social services, family services and related programs…..but the hard facts are that cuts in those areas do not result in any savings. Rather they result in higher costs to the government in other areas of the budget such as Justice.

Trying to avoid cuts to health and education by making cuts in other areas, areas that tempt politicians and the public because they seem ‘easier’ than cuts to healthcare and education, will inevitably force even deeper cuts to be made to education and health.

Given the level of wilful denial, of self imposed blindness, embraced by both voters and politicians in British Columbia –  Pray that Clark is Lying.

Consider, Media, Mental Health, Politics, Provincial

FINALLY – Something to Vote FOR.

Leave a comment

FINALLY – Something to Vote FOR.

Hearing that Abbotsford city Councillor Moe Gill was going to run as an independent in Abbotsford West was a Yabadabadoo moment for me.

Finally an opportunity to look forward to election day and casting my ballot for something (or someone), instead of needing to hold my nose and vote in a manner I judged would cause the least damage to the province, the economy, and to society.

When people ask who I am voting for I get to tell them straight out “I am voting FOR Moe Gill”, instead of having to say something like “I am voting for a minority government”’ or “I am trying to decide who is the lesser evil”.

Upon hearing I am voting for Moe Gill, many feel it necessary to state that, without being a member of a political party that can form the government, Mr. Gill cannot accomplish anything.

I like to begin my reply by pointing out they were just complaining that MLAs do what the party tells them and ignore the concerns and opinions of the people who elected them.

Moving on to remind them of their complaint about having to decide which party is the least objectionable. I opine that when you are forced to vote for the lesser of two evils, you are being forced to vote for an evil.

I then note the reality that there are many topics that political parties will not talk about and if forced to address, respond with platitudes; the reality that political parties are avoiding even talking about, much less addressing, important issues because the public does not want to hear about these issues – leaving these problems to grow until they reach a size where they ‘self correct’ with painful negative consequences; that political parties, mired in their ideologies, have no real understanding of the economic reality in BC or the financial situation most British Columbians are faced with as evidenced by the current election campaign; and, as evidenced by the current election campaign, none of the political parties has any new ideas about how to steer the ship of state through these turbulent times – without wrecking on one of the issues they pretend (BLEEP! I hope they are pretending) doesn’t exist or whose existence they ignore.

I remind my audience that for several years I have been writing about how we cannot afford the consequences that our current politicians and parties, with their ‘politics as usual’ behaviour, are bringing about and allowing to grow. That in order to avoid the painful consequences that ‘politics as usual’ is building up, we need to dislodge the entrenched political interests and get MLA’s who will tackle the important issues, even if the public does not want to hear about these issues – before the issues and consequences blow up in our faces.

I remind people that, although politicians have evolved a system that forces many Canadians to vote for the lesser of evils instead of for or on issues, we still have the right to vote for anyone we choose to. Calling on people to encourage independents to run for office – and for people to get out, support and vote for any suitable independents. Having written for several years about the need for independent candidates to run for office……when Moe Gill tosses his hat in the ring as an independent, I will be following my own call to action and voting for the independent candidate running in my riding – Mr. Moe Gill.

Independent candidates need issues to address but are not muzzled by a party, permitting them to address issues important to the future of the province and citizens, as well as issues important to their constituents.

Independent candidates can give a voice to those persons and issues the political parties do not wish to hear about or address.

I have watched the deterioration of Mental Health services in our health region, watched as the lack of resources and services have resulted in the death of people and the growing number of citizens who are turned away – until their mental health deteriorates to a point they are dangerous to themselves and the public.

I have watched a system that keeps doing the same thing over and over for those struggling with substance use problems, even though the outcome has an unacceptably abysmal ‘success’ (less than 5%) rate and we know that best practices elsewhere have significantly higher (90%) positive outcomes, in the apparent belief that if you do the same thing over often enough at some point you will get a different outcome.

I have watched things continue to worsen because of the lack of a voice that can effectively raise the issue.

I attended Moe Gill’s press conference and statement about the need to address mental health issues and later heard from people who had heard media reports about Moe Gill calling upon government to address mental health issues and failures.

Yes an Independent does not belong to a party that can form the government.

But Independents can effectively raise issues; raise issues the government and its MLAs want to avoid for political reasons; need to represent their constituents and are not hampered in this be party decisions or interests of the party deemed more important than the interests of citizens; one Independent can change the conversation, the election of several Independents can change the agenda.

We can no longer afford ‘politics as usual’ and the painful negative consequences ‘politics as usual’ leads to.

We need, we must, change. We need to take back our government in order to get good governance.

Which is why I will be voting FOR Moe Gill, encouraging other residents of West Abbotsford to vote for Moe Gill, and encouraging those with independents (OK, non-wacko independents) to support the independent in their riding

Love the sound of that – voting FOR something.

I am voting FOR something, I am casting my vote For our independent candidate in Abbotsford West, voting FOR Moe Gill.

Media, Politics, Provincial

Calling it ‘The News”, doesn’t make it ‘The News”.

Leave a comment

Anymore than calling a jackass a thoroughbred and naming it Secretariat makes it a Triple Crown winner.

Although, the jackass is closer to a Triple Crown winner than the Media’s coverage is to being ‘The News’.

To borrow from the CBC’s Journalistic Standards and Practices ‘The News’ requires:

“Our mission is to inform, to reveal, to contribute to the understanding of issues…..”

To illustrate how what Media delivers to the public as ‘The News’, fails to qualify as ‘The News’, let us examine an important issue from the current BC election and the questions media has failed to ask on behalf of the public.

The NDP, in their current “low nastiness” (as Adrian Dix labels the behaviour) anti-Liberal advertisement, have raised the ghost of the HST.

While the failure of the media to ask Adrian Dix and the NDP to substantiate their claims of the HST harming the economy and of jobs lost due to the HST is aggravating, voters are use to politicians throwing around imaginary numbers during election campaigns.

The Liberal’s ‘balanced’ budget allowing the Liberals to claim to be financially prudent; the NDP’s budget raising an ‘extra’ $1.5 Billion allowing Mr. Dix to make campaign promises spending that $1.5 Billion while claiming the NDP are not about wild spending that substantially increases the deficit and the debt.

But in ignoring the harsh reality of the hard, real numbers associated with the HST, the media has not only failed to contribute to the public’s understanding of the matter, but have served to misinform the public.

Since Mr. Dix and the NDP raised the matter of the HST why has the media failed (yet again) to ask Mr. Dix to explain to voters why he feels that it was better to return the $1.6 billion dollars Ottawa paid BC to bring in the HST, rather than use that $1.6 billion to build hospitals and meet other needs BC has?

Why, when campaigning to convince voters to extinguish the HST were Mr. Dix and the NDP so careful to avoid speaking about the necessity to repay Ottawa $1.6 Billion if the HST was extinguished? Given the financial pain and problems associated with repaying Ottawa its $1.6 Billion why did Mr. Dix and the NDP fail to ensure the public clearly understood that extinguishing the HST meant repaying Ottawa the $1.6 Billion and then make their case to the public as to why it was a good idea to extinguish the HST and repay Ottawa its $1.6 Billion? Especially in light of the federal governments statement that if BC extinguished the HST BC would HAVE to repay Ottawa its $1.6 Billion?

Taking into consideration that Mr. Dix and the NDP are seeking to form the next BC government and the poor state of the BC provincial governments finances why has the media never asked Mr. Dix:

Given: The federal government has just finished its long negotiation with the Ontario government to bring in the HST and has offered (take it or leave it) the governments of Quebec and BC $1.6 Billion (each) to bring in the HST. The post winter Olympics economy is no longer booming and BC government faces the need for hundreds of millions of dollars to pay for needed capital expenditures. Quebec said yes to bringing in the HST in exchange for $1.6 Billion.

Facing those circumstances would it not have been irresponsible for Gordon Campbell (any premier) to have said no to Ottawa’s $1.6 billion.

Is Mr. Dix saying that under those circumstances he would have said no to Ottawa’s $1.6 Billion? Would that not have been an irresponsible action? If Mr. Dix is saying it would not have been irresponsible to say NO to that badly needed $1.6 Billion, what is the reasoning behind that claim?

Mr. Dix and the NDP are running around the province blaming the Liberals for the government’s failure to invest hundreds of millions of dollars, a billion + dollars, in new hospital facilities; when it was the actions of the NDP, in convincing the public to extinguish the HST, that are responsible for $1.6 Billion going to Ottawa, rather than going to fund new hospital facilities.

A reality the media apparently feels it unnecessary to question Mr. Dix about in order to provide the public with information necessary to understand and evaluate the issue.

Which is why a jackass is closer to being a Triple Crown winner, than the media’s coverage is to being ‘The News.’