The Issues

Transcript: Bare Facts September 22, 2011

Leave a comment

Welcome to the inaugural E-cast of the Breckenridge Zone’s Bare Facts.  I am your host, T. R. Ursidae.

We ask your indulgence for any lack of smoothness as we learn and build experience in E-casting.

Our goal is to peel away the spin, the doublespeak, the gobbledygook, to ask the obvious unasked questions and to remind people of the reality they so often live in willful denial of.

We seek to bring critical thinking and logic to bear on public policy by generating open debate based on the bear facts that are exposed by peeling away the layers of machination and subterfuge.

Because as it says in the Tao of James: Reality does not care what you want to be fact, reality does not care what you believe to be fact, Reality simply is what IS.

********************************************************************************************

At the bare facts we very much enjoyed the Freudian slip contained in the BC Liberal’s attack ad aimed at BC Conservative leader John Cummins.

“Just what we need, another unprincipled politician.” The context another is contained in seems to imply that it is not just one other BC politician that is unprincipled but that all, or nearly all, BC politicians are unprincipled.

A conjecture supported by the unprincipled duplicity demonstrated by the BC NDP since their successful support of extinguishing the HST. Since then the air waves have been full of NDP mla’s crying crocodile tears and condemning the BC Liberal government for the budget tightening, leading to program cuts, that is the consequence of ripping Billions of Dollars  out of the BC budget by extinguishing the HST.

Except for Mr Dix who seems to be avoiding visibility in order to avoid reminding voters of the sight of \ Mr Dix going around thanking people for helping the NDP extinguish the HST; seeking no doubt to avoid attracting voter anger at the budget cutting (program cuts)  needed to reduce expenditures as a result of the financial fallout from extinguishing the HST

If the NDP was all that worried about program cuts they should not have been playing politics by supporting extinguishing the HST.

Rather Unprincipled behaviour that continues as they blast the government for the consequences of the NDP’s successful support of extinguishing the HST.

*************************************************************************************************

Speaking of the outcome of the extinguish the HST referendum and the painful financial fallout of extinguishing the HST it would appear the voters of BC are seriously in need of being told to ‘Get Real”.

After voting to rip billions of dollars out of the budget and return $1.6 billion to Ottawa the voters of BC are demanding – at an increasing rate – that the provincial government spend, spend, spend, ignoring or in wilful denial of the fact voters have reduced government revenue by billions of dollars – a reality which requires belt tightening and thus program cuts.

Just what did the voters think was going to happen after they ripped billions of dollars out of the provincial budget.

Is it that they DID NOT THINK or that they live in a fantasy land where there is a grove of money trees growing out behind the legislature?

**************************************************************************************

Of course the Media is as guilty or perhaps are the most guilty – given the major part media played in successfully extinguishing the HST – of  ignoring the financial reality the province must deal with as a consequence of extinguishing of the HST.

The fallout, budget cuts and program closures, makes it easy for media to find lots of budget cuts and program closures to report on in order to increase their bottom lines.

I suppose, when you thinks about it,  we shouldn’t be surprised that media is not reminding those demanding more services or the continued funding of programs that the citizens of BC voted to substantially reduce the funds the province has to provide services any more than it was not  surprising that Media avoided reminding voters of the very significant consequences of extinguishing the HST.

Reminding people of the reality – either of extinguishing the HST or of the state of BC’s finances as a result of having extinguishing the HST – would only serve to cut into the ease of getting bottom line improving theatrical ‘stories’. Not to forget running the potential risk of having voters suffering the consequences of the belt tightening necessary – of the important role Media played in extinguishing the HST by playing up the street theatre aspects of the extinguish the HST campaign while effectively ignoring the financial consequences.

*************************************************************************************************

The current media street theatre circus compounds the difficulty of dealing with the financial realities BC faces because the BC Liberal caucus clearly lacks backbones. This lack of backbone and the overriding desire to get re-elected and continue feeding so handsomely from the public trough   – at any cost – has led to policy and decision making based on the theatrics of the presentation made by media rather than basing the hard decisions involved in living within the new means imposed by extinguishing the HST  on priorities and careful thought

the Reality of the dire state of the provinces finances and the fact BC is in a financial straightjacket means there is no extra funding to reinstate programs. The funding that keeps the recycling program in Maple Ridge or the program at Douglas college going into next year comes from other programs and/or areas of the budget.

Rather than vigorously patting themselves on the back for the reinstatement of funding – Media and voters – might want to consider who it is that is going to suffer paying the price for reinstating that funding and what that price is.

The potential for Irony is mindboggling. How – poetically justice ironic – if the practice of robbing peter to pay paul ( in this case appeasing the media and the public) leads in a few months to the Maple Ridge recycling program etc being back in the spotlight – having lost their funding to reinstate some other program that lost its funding to reinstate the funding and so on and so and so on….. *******************************************************************************************

If we don’t stop and at all levels of government (municipal, provincial and federal) take a hard look at what the financial realities are, then make plans that reflect that financial reality. Plans based on priorities, hard thought and ethics – letting go of greed and ‘me first’ we are going to find ourselves going around in circles and ending up where we started having accomplished nothing but wasting resources.

****************************************************************************

Finally, might we suggest to Vancouver’s Rock 101 and the firm advertising their electrical services on Rock 101 that we at the Bare Facts (and I suspect most consumers) have no interest in what someone is ‘not afraid to tackle’ . when we are looking for an electrical contractor what we are interested in is what they are competent to tackle. You can live with whatever fear someone competent might have given the fact that with electricity – incompetence can kill you.

***********************************************************************************

That’s the Bare Facts for Thursday September 22, 2011.

Remember your best defence against Politicians, Media, Big Business and others seeking to bamboozle you and manipulate you – is thinking.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJgxH0h0JBI

Caveat emptor, Provincial

BC Liberal Attack Ad a Revealing Freudian Slip?

Leave a comment

 

Listening to the BC Liberal’s radio attack ad on BC Conservative leader John Cummins what struck me was the use of the phrase  “Just what we need,another unprincipled politician.”

According to Freud, slips of the tongue reveal a ‘source outside the speech’; a manifestation of the unconscious, guided by the super-ego and the rules of correct behaviour.

The use of the word ‘another’ is a rather damning Freudian slip of the tongue. The definition of Another: being one more or more of the same; further; additional.

The Liberal statement does not just say, or stop at saying, that Conservative leader John Cummins is unprincipled.

In the use of ‘another’ the Liberals are stating that BC politics already contains at least one unprincipled politician. Indeed the context and usage of ‘another’ in “Just what we need, another unprincipled politician.” suggests that BC politics is infested with ‘unprincipled politicians’.

In fact “Just what we need, another unprincipled politician.” can be read as a statement that all or nearly all of BC’s politicians are ‘unprincipled’.

Is the statement “Just what we need, another unprincipled politician.” a manifestation of an unconscious acknowledgement by the BC Liberals that the behaviour of the BC Liberals and the BC NDP has been, is and will continue to be ‘unprincipled’?

Is “Just what we need, another unprincipled politician.” an honest (being subconscious) statement that the only way out of the increasing quagmire BC is in is to turn out our current politicians with their unprincipled behaviour and to seek out new principled leadership and representation?

Municipal, Snafu

Taxpayer Terror

Leave a comment

Experience has made ” making profits” and ” saving taxpayers money” words and concepts that strike terror into the hearts of Abbotsford’s taxpayers when spoken by members of Abbotsford City Council.

Paying to cover the losses of Council’s ‘profitable’ get rich quick schemes or the costs of repairing, completing, redoing or living with the consequences of Council’s ‘saving taxpayers money’ has (and continues to) impoverish the taxpayers and citizens of Abbotsford, not just monetarily but also in terms of City services, infrastructure, amenities, the cost to use facilities etc.

One would have Hoped (Prayed) Council would have learned, after all their costly squandering of taxpayer dollars, to consider possible consequences of their actions instead of simply doing the math to arrive at the dollars that would be earned or saved IF and ONLY IF everything went absolutely perfectly.

What makes council’s recent announcement of their latest plan to reap big profits from electronic billboards notably worrisome is not the fact that once again council has, behind closed doors, created a fantasy world of imagined big profits that has little or nothing to do with the real world that rules existence outside the confines of City Hall. Nor is it that council still refuses to hear or consider any questions or objections raised by those who don’t share council’s fantasies.

No, what raises dread about council’s latest get rich quick ‘sit back and let the $millions$ roll in’ scheme is that, apparently unable to find any new financial disaster to pursue, council has RETURNED to the electronic billboards business.

Remember, council had to have a big, multicoloured, all the bells and whistles billboard for ARC because council could then simply ‘sit back and let the $dollars$ roll into city coffers’?

Since its installation no advertising dollars have materialized – none, zero, zip, nada. The ARC billboard has only been used, until recently at least, to deliver information about ARC’s programs and events that a smaller, simpler, far less expensive billboard would have sufficed to deliver at a substantial savings to taxpayers pocketbooks.

Yet in spite of the fact that none, zero, zip, nada of the advertising revenue promised by council ever materialized, council has returned to electronic billboards as a source of ‘profits’.

[Recently the billboard has been used to increase the dollar value/cost of council’s hidden subsidies for the Abbotsford Entertainment and Sports complex by advertising upcoming events at the AESC.]

In light of Mayor Peary’s statements concerning the City’s agreement with the Pattison Sign Group one has to wonder if it is the ability to use the billboards to provide new, major advertising subsidization for the AESC and the Heat that led to the agreement?

The black hole that AESC is for taxpayer’s dollars – multi-million dollar subsidies to the Heat ownership group, multi-million dollar operating subsidies so the Heat have an arena to play in and the growing cost of council’s hidden (from taxpayer’s) subsidies – would seem about to consume millions more taxpayer dollars thanks to city council’s agreement with the Pattison Sign Group.

What makes me say that? Two things.

First is that councils big fancy digital billboard at ARC failed to attract advertising; that the only non-event  advertising on the Tradex electronic billboard is City advertising; that the display on the Automall’s very large, easily seen from Highway 1 electronic billboard is……..the time and temperature.

If there is no market for your product, in this case advertising on large electronic billboards, you are going to find yourself stuck holding said unsellable product.

Second, whatever else people have to say about Jimmy Pattison, they acknowledge that he is a sharp businessman.

The Pattison Sign Group is about to spend millions of dollars erecting 3 large electronic billboards in Abbotsford, were the lack of advertising dollars being spent on existing electronic billboards suggests there is a strong possibility that the Pattison Sign Group’s billboards will fail to generate sufficient revenue to break even on the billboards and their multi-million dollar cost.

Given council’s demonstrated willingness to provide revenue guaranties (a la the Heat) and the sharpness of Jimmy Pattison as a businessman – I want to know just how much Abbotsford’s taxpayers are potentially on the hook for when the billboards, which will operate in the real world and not council’s fantasy worlds, fail to generate enough revenue to cover their costs?

Unfortunately, what this agreement can cost Abbotsford’s taxpayers to pay for council’s latest get rich quick scheme’s ‘profits’ is undoubtedly something council considers taxpayers ‘don’t need to know’ and since it involves a private business they can (and will undoubtedly) refuse to disclose this information to taxpayers (as they do with the Heat).

Sigh.

I wonder how long it will be before council decides the problem with the AESC, as it would appear they did with ARC’s billboard, is that it is too small and that building a three or four times larger complex will have umpteen tens of $millions$ rolling in?

It is well past time that, if council wants to gamble on get rich quick schemes, they use their own money.

And if they cannot, as the BC lottery ads put it, learn their limits and play within them……

Because councillors are elected to take care of the City’s business and taxpayer’s best interests, not to be impoverishing taxpayers pursuing nonexistent business ‘profits’.

Consider, Federal, Municipal, Provincial

Do as I say……

Leave a comment

Just a few days ago Richmond BC resident Selina She Yin Tsui, who had held herself out as a “holistic healer”, lost two properties she owned after both were “declared instruments and proceeds of unlawful activity” under the province’s civil forfeiture laws.

What was unusual was not that someone collected money, sometimes tens of thousands of dollars for something they didn’t, couldn’t (Tsui had no actual medical training) deliver; rather it was that her ‘marks’ got some restitution.

Most often the reports are about how the con men (or women) made promises or claims, took people’s money, delivered nothing and kept the money or there were no assets or funds to repay the ‘marks’..

Citizens are always complaining that politicians lied or that they did not keep their promises.

The new television season of Holmes on Homes begins tonight, where Mike Holmes rescues homeowners from builders or contractors who made promises about what they would do, took the money to do what they promised, didn’t deliver what they promised and kept the homeowners money.

And on the news last night, there was Christie Clark coyly smirking about getting out of repaying Ottawa the $1.6 billion BC took to implement the HST.  Undoubtedly most British Columbians are cheering for Clark to be 100% successful in reneging on British Colombia’s written agreement with the federal government on implementing the HST.

As a society we like to talk the talk about integrity, morals, ethics, and principles as long as it isn’t costing us, as individuals or a society, anything or any inconvenience.  But as soon as it becomes inconvenient or is going to cost us effort, or worse money, we walk away – ignoring integrity, morals, ethics and principles.

We had an agreement with the federal government on the HST whereby the province of British Columbia would receive payments totalling $1.6 billion dollars in exchange for implementing the HST.

In that agreement it was clearly set out that we had the right to change our minds and extinguish the HST. It was also clearly set out that if we chose to change our minds and not participate in the HST, the $1.6 billion would have to be repaid to Ottawa.

The fact the $1.6 billion would have to be repaid to the federal government if we voted to extinguish the HST was oft cited in the discussion leading up to the referendum on keeping or extinguishing the HST. Prime Minister Harper clearly and definitely stated that if British Columbia chose to extinguish the HST the province would have to repay the $1.6 billion dollars to the federal government.

Knowing that a major consequence of choosing to extinguish the HST would be repaying Ottawa that $1.6 billion dollars, British Columbians voted to extinguish the HST – we voted to return the $1.6 billion to Ottawa.

That may be an inconvenient truth, but for a people or a society of integrity, morals, ethics and principles there would be no option other than returning the money.

***********************************************************************************************

The news has recently been full of the fact none of the rioters from the Game 7 debacle has been charged, much less meted out any punishment or consequences. About how the rioters needed to pay the penalty for their decisions and actions; and on the same broadcast we have Christie Clark sitting there acknowledging her efforts to get British Columbia out of the consequences of voting to extinguish HST.

Harper may well decide to forgive all or part of the $1.6 billion repayment due the federal government from British Columbia. Not because it’s a good idea, but as a matter of politics – an opportunity to buy votes in British Columbia. If Harper were a leader instead of a politician, he would clearly be saying “No, we had an agreement.  You made a promise, a commitment, to the federal government. We, the federal government, made the promised payments to British Columbia. But the province of British Columbia chose to change its mind and not participate in the HST. In the agreement it was clearly set out that if British Columbia chose not to participate it was required to repay the$1.6 billion.”

“It would be unfair to the other provinces and territories not to require British Columbia to repay these funds.  More importantly, it is necessary to require the repayment of these funds in order to protect the integrity of agreements made between the federal government, the provinces and territories, as well as agreements between the provinces and territories themselves.”

Consider the effect upon healthcare should the agreements between provinces, territories and the federal government become ‘flexible’ (not worth the paper they’re written on). Definitely a path we don’t want to start down, a can of worms we don’t want to open.

If Christie Clark was a leader instead of a politician, or if Stephen Harper was a leader and not a politician, there would be no question about the agreement between Ottawa and Victoria being kept as this is the best course for Canada and ultimately for British Columbia. It is in the fact they are politicians and not leaders that the possibility of a portion, or the entire $1.6 billion, not being repaid per the agreement lies. Because the question for politicians is not what is good for the country or province but what political gain is available to be had.

The reason we have politicians who lie to us rather than leaders, is that we are not a People or a Society, not a province or a country, of integrity, morals, ethics and principles as we like to lie to ourselves we are.

True integrity, morals, ethics and principle are not things one puts on when it is convenient and sets aside when they are inconvenient or uncomfortable or require sacrifice or the paying of a price.

As Martin Luther King Jr. stated “the ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy”.

Municipal, Snafu

Aesthetically Pleasing?

Leave a comment

Just how does one make a 10 X 20 foot electronic sign that is designed to be obtrusive and get your attention ‘aesthetically pleasing’?

And given that electronic signs have two sides would it not be more accurate to say Abbotsford is getting six signs? Or at least getting the visual pollution of six signs?

“stems the proliferation”?

To stem is ‘to stop, check or restrain’. I am not aware of the city being inundated with this type of visual pollution or of any proposals to visually pollute our cityscape with eye assaulting electronic billboards?

Council’s actions would seem to encourage others to consider the money to be made from this visual pollution; encouraging, not stemming the proliferation of visual pollution around our cityscape.

The attempt to use Amber alert as a justification is facetious since there are already signs on Highway One and around Abbotsford capable of giving an Amber alert.

No, what this is about is Council’s desperate search for sources of revenue so they can continue their spendthrift ways.

Business as usual for Council were it is all about Council’s wants and needs and ‘who cares about’ the wants or needs of Abbotsford’s citizens.

Council is suppose to focus on managing Abbotsford in the best interests of citizens, not on commercial business ventures.

The question that should have been asked is not how much money the city can make, but whether we want this type of visual pollution sprouting up like weeds around  Abbotsford.

While other cities in BC fight to protect their citizens from this type of visual pollution Abbotsford council, with dollar signs glowing in their eyes, happily sell Abbotsford’s citizens out; opening the door to visual pollution the extent of which only time will reveal.

Abbotsford, where the cityscape is littered with brightly glaring Signs of Council’s mismanagement and blatant disregard for the needs and best interests of Abbotsford citizens.