Jay Chalke Reports on the Health Firings

It’s not enough, in terms of asking why Rod MacIsaac (or any of the health researchers) was bullied and fired. But it’s enough to turf a government.

Jay Chalke’s report on the 4.5 year health firings scandal is out : read.. https://t.co/vIbJ5PrfPI .

Last summer I did a couple of spots on CanadianGlen’s radio podcast. The theme I tried to get across in regards to the Clark government is that no one is ever accountable. The theme I tried to get across with regard to ProMedia’s treatment of Clark government scandals is that the Minister is never responsible. Nobody ever resigns.  The Chalke report is a case in point in the former case…We will see as regards media coverage. Stay tuned.

Let’s accept for the purpose of argument that Chalke is right. Alanna James original complaint re contracting practices in government was overblown, and a botched investigation is the start and end of the health firings case. Let’s discard conspiracy theories about Big Pharma and Champix and researchers damaging the government agenda with uncomfortable findings re same.

There’s still plenty left to illustrate my point. Nobody in the Clark government pays the price when things go wrong, or if they do it’s only under extreme public pressure. None of the investigators who bullied the researchers and put them through kangaroo court has been fired. No Minister has taken the fall for misleading the Legislature, the public or the RCMP with regards to evidence being forwarded to the RCMP for potential charges vs the accused. These are serious wrongs which destroyed lives and careers and caused a suicide.

Everyone responsible is still standing, though the bus has driven decisively over Graham Whitmarsh… According to Chalke, Graham Whitmarsh is the bureaucrat who blew it (in consulation with John Dyble, Mike DeJong, Margaret MacDiarmid and the Premier’s Office, but no matter).

Vaughn Palmer is first out of the gate with a column outlining the political maneuvering after the fact as it all went wrong… http://vancouversun.com/opinion/columnists/vaughn-palmer-airing-facts-of-health-firings-scandal-uncovers-smell-as-well The last line says it all…But let’s be very clear that if Christy Clark had her way back in the fall of 2014, this airing of the facts never would have happened.”

If the purpose of the McNeill review was to “get to the bottom of it” as Clark stated at the time, that review was designed to fail. There was no testimony under oath.. From the beginning, those who bullied and obfuscated through all this have been protected. We still don’t know their names. Many are still employed in government, with promotions and lifelong benefits, because, you know.. mistakes happen.

Bullshit. Please also read Bob Mackin’s piece from the Breaker News https://t.co/VusKze7Z3p “Innocent workers had nightmares police would raid their homes in the middle of the night. MacIsaac couldn’t take the shame of losing his job and died of suicide. Evidence shows that, when his performance was reappraised, nobody called to tell him so. In hindsight, it could have kept him alive.”

Chalke recommends financial compensation to those victims who are still with us.  Linda Kayfish and other researchers are demanding something better. They want Christy Clark to hold people who did wrong accountable. They want Christy Clark to look them in the eye and apologize face to face.

It’s the least they deserve.

And the least we deserve as a public is to see the politicians who went along with this four year coverup to resign, but we won’t get that. We need instead to see them soundly defeated on May 9th. That’s Mike deJong, who was Health Minister at the genesis, and every BCLiberal MLA who sat like sheep while Terry Lake maintained the RCMP investigation fiction. Shame on all of them.

It’s time for a new government for many reasons. Don’t forget this case. Vote.

Updated – Rich Coleman – Strange Behaviour from Minister of Housing.


Update April 5, 2017

I haven’t had as much time for blogging as circumstances warrant lately, but I’d be truly remiss if I didn’t add links to this post from Bob Mackin and the Breaker News, as well as new information that at least one of these real estate deals involving BCHousing is the subject of an RCMP investigation…Click the following:




Thanks to the work of Glen Chernen and the SouthVan Parks Society, we learn (only now) from the Vancouver Sun that the RCMP has been looking at this file since October 2016. http://vancouversun.com/news/local-news/rcmp-federal-unit-investigating-controversial-vancouver-land-swap

While an implication is safe from the fact no Special Prosecutor has been requested… (Coleman would seem to be in the clear)…the Minister of Housing’s Strange Behaviour when questioned makes more sense now..

The opposition NDP has been questioning land deals connected to the agency meant to support expansion of low income housing in BC, and whether high flying developer donors have been allowed to use BCHousing as a loan slush fund (my term).  Much more investigation is needed. I’ll link at the end of this post to three articles from Jen St. Denis and  MetroNews Vancouver. I urge you to read them.

This matters because Rich Coleman has behaved very strangely.. When questions arose in the Legislature, he blustered and bragged about the government record in expanding affordable housing. He said David Eby had his facts wrong. He promised documentation proving the deals involving Wall Financial Corp, Brenhill developments and market condo pre-sale specialist Bob Rennie actually enhanced the stock of low income housing…

$80 million loaned to these companies.  $80 million not reported in response to an opposition Freedom of Information Request. And as far as I can tell, there’s been no demonstrated increase in low income housing stock beyond what would have occurred if the developers had proceeded under existing Vancouver zoning laws without provincial help.

Coleman promised documents within a week…it actually took nearly two weeks, during which the Legislature shut down early without passing a number of priority bills. When documents came, they were provided to “some reporters” at a “not for attribution technical briefing” by BCHousing. Nobody at BC Housing would go on record…Coleman did not attend.

Coleman has been Minister of Housing for 15 odd years, carrying the file with him wherever he goes.

Add up what we know…Add the BC Auditor General’s report (find it in the linked articles) which says value for money has not been adequately guaranteed when BCH gets involved in low income housing financing and sales..And this stinks

It stinks enough for many more questions to be asked to find all the facts. We don’t have enough information on the table to be sure how dirty or clean these deals are, and for $80 million public dollars, we should have it all laid out , in court if necessary.

Read and share: I say share because I think people overestimate the reach of both small bloggers asking questions and a small news outlet like MetroNews. This should be an election issue.. Coleman should be asked to back up his statements at every debate and presser. And all the documents (not a selection) should be released to the NDP rather than “a few journalists” at a very strange meeting.




Disclaimer: This post is not meant to imply specific wrongdoing by any individual or entity. It’s meant to further the ends of public accountability regarding public dollars in large amounts. If anyone has facts to add, send links and I will update or provide a new post to include those.


On Conflict, Corruption, and the Diva of Deflection

Alternate title: At least four more reasons the BCLiberals ran from the legislature two weeks early….

The big question of the election campaign so far is not who is best to run the economy…It is how much conflict of interest , cronyism, and flat out illegal activity is going on from those who lobby government to the highest levels of the BCLiberal government? And how much will the electorate stand for?

My last two posts touched on an “affordable housing” deals in which Bob Rennie, presale market condo speculator somehow received a $39M loan which helped him do what he does best.. Minister Coleman, despite a promise to release documents this week proving that this actually helped acquire or build a larger number of affordable units at a separate location, has not done so.

RossK over at the Gazetteer has been poking into a story about a man named Steve Carr, the Premier’s special advisor… He retired from the civil service in 2015, then was rehired at a high salary in 2016…. In 2015 it appears, his consulting company was renamed from Steve Carr Consultants to the numbered company 1048216. That company may have received no bid contracts from the Premier’s office while Steve Carr maintained a position as one of the most powerful people in that office…Read the post here http://pacificgazette.blogspot.ca/2017/03/two-advisors-in-clarkland-with-exactly.html .

Issues arising from this if it all proves to be true involve how much information Steve Carr would be able to protect from scrutiny wearing the consultant hat as opposed to the employee of government hat.. (think Health Firings investigation, LNG deals etc.) . Further, as an advisor, legally if he performs the functions of a government hire , supervising staff, using government resources and  a government office on a full time basis, the law may see him as an employee of government in fact, rather than a retiree on contract or some sort of independent.

There are no issues proven in court around Steve Carr, nor any indication a court may be where it lands if there’s fire under the smoke. But the question of why the company name was changed to a numbered company (if the two Steve Carrs are in fact one person) surely rings alarm bells around consciously hiding questionable activity. Surely.

The “Lobbyist donation scandal” is now in the hands of the federal RCMP, rather than Elections BC, and the rats have started to come out of the woodwork. The NDP has taken action to return a couple of illegally made donations totalling about $4000 . The BCLiberals have identified $93000 (so far) and is spinning some of them as clerical errors. Integrity BC has pegged an estimate well over $1million in donations on record with Elections BC worth questioning. Ouch.. gotta hurt if all that has to be paid back , tax receipts received and re-issued.

BCLP candidate Kim Chan Logan came forward to request $18000 in donations made on behalf of Telus (who she worked for) be ‘corrected’. Sorry Kim. That’s not the way it works…. illegally made donations (third party) are illegal whether or not you can credibly claim ignorance of the law. The RCMP will presumably be talking to you and a host of others as well. Why? Because we know the practice was widespread and can’t have been entirely someone’s guilty little secret. Who received the tax receipts for Telus donations made in Kim Chan Logan’s name? Was it Kim or Telus?  Who claimed the tax credits if they were claimed?

Not just a matter of correcting some paperwork. The interesting question isn’t whether some charges will be laid under the Elections Act eventually…It’s whether Party operatives will be proven to have colluded in this “don’t ask, don’t tell” scam. I think Kim Chan Logan should resign her campaign, provide information about how this happened and concentrate on getting the best deal she can.

A brouhaha erupted on Twitter last night, with complaints forwarded to the Conflict Commissioner because Brad Bennett will be on Christy Clark’s campaign bus for the duration of the election. The problem? He is the chair of BCHydro (think SiteC) …. I used to have this innocent idea that BCLiberals wanted Crown Corps separated from politics.. that was the line about BCFerries after the Fastcats in 2001. I used to have this idea that Crown Corps operated in the public , not the partisan interest, and would soldier on whoever won electoral power..  Brad Bennett does carry the baggage of a perceived conflict here. To say the least.

All that brings us to the Diva of Deflection, Christy Clark, so named by the estimable Vicki Huntington..and the fiasco that was the last legislative sitting….

Fires aplenty to put out, but Christy managed to fan them with half measures…

To much interest, she called a news conference to announce commuter rail for Langford/Victoria. It turns out she announced that it would be studied after the election.

We were led to believe there were campaign finance reforms on the agenda one Monday at the Legislature..Donation reform!  Would the Premier finally listen and ban corp and union donations? Present a bill to limit individual donations? Sigh, that was a no. She would form a panel to study the issue after the election, if she wins. Thud.

Mike deJong was going to move on the much sought after “duty to document”. Advocated for by several Info and Privacy Commissioners as well as the opposition, this measure would ensure no triple deleting of how decisions are made in government and why. There would always be a record…..Did deJong live up to the hype?  No…he proposed that a new officer be appointed within government to make recommendations on the issue…..Another thud.

It must be hard being a press reporter and stifling your frustrations when the Premier’s press operatives raise expectations and disappoint so thoroughly.

I’ll ask again, and I know I’ve answered my own question… Why was the legislative session cut two weeks short? Why , Christy, didn’t you take the time to pass many of your own bills?  Because the way you’re behaving, you’re in trouble….and it leaves me wondering…Will the Ombudsman Jay Chalke’s review of the Health Firings scandal actually be produced and released before April 9th?? Maybe it will…



Clark Needs to Back Up Her Words – Part II

In my last post I took issue with Rob Shaw and the Vancouver Sun printing a front page hit piece full of unsubstantiated, ad hominem attacks by the pink shirted Premier Clark. For another take, a little calmer but better I think, head over to Norm’s Place… https://in-sights.ca/2017/03/17/hit-piece-journalism/ .

Now I want to address what should fill the page devoted to the efforts of a Press Gallery member. How about what actually happens during legislative debate or question period? As always, to slag the entire membership of the gallery , or even individual members in a blanket manner would be a disservice. But nevertheless, I believe the Press Gallery has become jaded and largely partisan. Tired after 15 or 20 years watching the theatre over and over,  reporters and pundits are mailing it in, convinced that nothing matters except who has the power and who is winning the propaganda war.

As an example, Keith Baldrey tweeted once (paraphrased) “I never cover opposition bills because they never pass!!”.

That’s an astonishing statement about his view of what journalism should be. On the day the great New York columnist Jimmy Breslin’s death was announced, let’s remember his words… “Whatever someone (in power) doesn’t want you to print, is news”. The  role of media should be to hold power to account. Opposition MLA’s in a parliamentary system perform the same function. To fail to report what they propose simply because it will be outvoted is to fail to inform the public on potential improvements to public policy and government behaviour.

So what happened in the Legislature this past several weeks? Why did the government cut short the session by two weeks? It’s my firm view the governing party was getting hammered and needed to escape scrutiny. I’ll quote some exchanges from Hansard and I want you to first judge for yourself, and secondly think about where you heard these issues discussed first. Was it here? On social media? In a newspaper? On the 6 PM news? If the opposition asked questions, was the answer adequate? Scroll through to the last few from David Eby to Rich Coleman on the land swaps and mortgage deals hidden from us by BCHousing if you wish….. That said, all of these questions and non-answers are important.

On the suicide of Alex Gervais, a child abandoned in a hotel while he was supposed to be looked after:

M. Mark: I must say, for the record, it sounds like a broken record in this House, when it comes time for the advocacy for our kids in care. The representative’s report made it clear that Alex would have thrived had he been placed in the care of his extended family. My question is for the Premier……Why did she choose to pay a contractor more than $8,000 a month to ignore Alex rather than have him cared for by his extended family?

Hon. C. Clark: The issue with respect to contracted resources is one that the ministry is taking on, because that was clearly a problem for Alex. Alex was not supposed to be alone, and yet he was. So this issue…. Making sure that contractor resources are appropriately hired and managed, that they have the appropriate background checks, that they are there and that they are supervised properly are changes that the ministry is going to be making — part of the response in learning from the tragedy of Alex Gervais’s death.

M. Mark: Alex had a right to be in a home, not a hotel. It wasn’t just Alex’s stepmother who wanted to care for him. His aunt in Quebec also offered to become his guardian.

[1415] Jump to this time in the webcast

Alex could have been with his family, where he would have experienced love and stability and access to his Métis culture. That was his right, and it would have saved government thousands of dollars — thousands of dollars that could have been used to help other children in government care.

Given that opportunity, why did this government refuse to place Alex with his family?

Hon. C. Clark: The government, the minister, does not make decisions on those kinds of matters, those issues. Those decisions are made by front-line social workers, who are the experts on these issues. They make the decisions. It is very, very hard work.

Ed. Did Clark just throw social workers under the bus? Running from accountability.

The next day, the NDP presented Bills with the following titles which are self-explanatory. Each one offers improvements in government processes and accountability, but remember, there’s no point in paying attention. A majority government will shut down any attempt to improve itself.



AMENDMENT ACT   (important because public accounts aren’t complete in the Spring when we vote – ma)


CALENDAR ACT, 2017  (to prevent government running when it’s in trouble and shutting down two weeks early – ma)



That’s a partial list. Back to Question Period….. On Zero Compliance in Foster Care monitoring. ….

C. James: This government would have put the resources that were requested by the Representative for Children and Youth and the hard-working social workers in this province, who need the resources in the field. That’s what the government would have done if they took this issue seriously. They would have put those resources in place.

Yesterday we raised the fact that this minister has achieved a zero compliance rate for monitoring the safety and well-being of kids’ foster homes in the northwest, in the Kootenays and in the east Fraser Valley. So in three regions of this province, the minister could not or would not ensure that there were enough social workers to make contact with children in care at least once every three months.

My question is to the minister. Can she explain why she is apparently unable to enforce a law that she is directly responsible for?

Hon. S. Cadieux: The member opposite would have you believe that she and the NDP are the only people in this province that care about children. She couldn’t be more wrong.

The system is not perfect, not by a long shot. There is plenty to do. Quality assurance is one of those areas that we have acknowledged needs more resources, and more have been put in. There is no question that it’s unacceptable when we do an audit and our compliance is not in line. It’s not okay. Then our directors go in and they put in place an action plan with supports to fix those problems.

On an IT disaster in Healthcare. Doctors are refusing to use the system…Did you know?

D. Routley:

On Friday afternoon, the minister’s inability to ensure that health care IT systems protect patients was on display yet again. On Friday, the CEO of Island Health told staff at Nanaimo Regional Hospital that they were going to cease using key elements of the minister’s new $50 million IHealth system because physicians said it was putting patients at risk — serious risk.

Can the minister explain why he waited so long to acknowledge that IHealth was putting patients at risk?

Hon. T. Lake: Well, in fact I didn’t wait. I went to Nanaimo. I met with the medical team at Nanaimo. I met with Island Health. We commissioned a report by Dr. Doug Cochrane, a B.C. patient care quality officer, who listed recommendations and a workplan. We set up an oversight committee. But it, despite best efforts…. I will say this, hon. Speaker. The physicians and the medical team at Nanaimo and the people at Island Health in charge of this project all have a common interest in making sure we get a product that delivers a single electronic health record for the people of the Nanaimo Regional General Hospital that keeps patients safe.

[1425] Jump to this time in the webcast

There are a number of physicians at Nanaimo, as the member well knows, that still have some concerns, so we are working with them, with Island Health and with the doctors and other medical staff to ensure that this system remains safe for patients while those improvements are taking place.

On two BCLiberal MLA’s announcing $1M funding for a youth centre in Maple Ridge that shut down two years previously:

C. James: Last week the members for Maple Ridge–Mission and Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows announced $1 million for the Iron Horse youth homeless shelter. The problem? The shelter actually closed two years ago. At that time, the government said no to the mayor’s request for support to keep the doors open.

My question is to the Minister of Children and Families. Where was the minister and where were the two
[ Page 13856 ]
local MLAs two years ago when this homeless shelter shut down?

Hon. R. Coleman: Thanks to the member for her question. She should know, however, that Iron Horse was actually under a federal program when federal walked away from the funding.

We’ve been building a suite of transition housings for youth that were in the market and continue to do. As we came in, they were looking at the issues in and around Maple Ridge–Pitt Meadows. Some of the community people brought this up to us. At that time, we were actually looking for something that might work and thought this particular facility might work. We have the operating dollars for it. So we made the announcement, along with the MLAs.

Can you imagine the ridicule the Press Gallery would shower on an NDP MLA who announced $1 Million real for a centre which didn’t exist ?  Crickets except for one piece in the Maple Ridge News local. – MA

Here is Speaker Linda Reid shutting down the first of many questions about party fundraising and the Wild West gong show. It’s my opinion this is a partisan ruling, because government decides the rules or lack of same that political parties follow, or not….

. Horgan: Last spring media reports exposed the B.C. Liberal practice of fundraising at exclusive dinners in people’s homes and in private locations, with large sums to get access to government decision-makers. Most recently we heard from the New York Times that the practices of fundraising here in British Columbia were considered the Wild West by North American standards — quite something when you look at the super PACs that exist in the United States.

Most recently, even though we could have been sitting in this Legislature, in fact, we were not here for over 200 days. We could have been putting forward legislation to ban big money, to make sure that we’re amending our practices so that big money doesn’t distort our politics. But instead of doing that, the fall session was cancelled and the B.C. Liberals were sent off to raise money — so much so that the Minister of Agriculture cancelled a scheduled debate on agriculture issues sponsored by the B.C. Agriculture Council so he could be in his constituency raising money.

This weekend we learned that Elections B.C. is now investigating the practices of the B.C. Liberals. My question to the minister responsible, the Attorney General: if all of this doesn’t provide enough evidence to the government that they should amend their practices, what will?

Madame Speaker: Hon. Members, I will make a comment. Questions addressed to ministers must relate to matters for which those ministers are currently and officially responsible. This is the only basis upon which ministers can be expected to answer questions. Accordingly, the question is out of order.

Now to questions on Real Estate, Bob Rennie, and the 508 Helmcken $40 Million loans…. This is a scandal that could blow up and get very ugly indeed for Rich Coleman…It was handed on a platter weeks ago to the Vancouver Sun by SouthVanParks Society , but so far, not much press…A notable exception is coverage by Steele and Drex on CKNW…

D. Eby: I know the Premier doesn’t want to talk about her cozy relationship with Mr. Rennie and how that led to two years of the opposition trying to get her attention while home prices in Metro Vancouver spiked over $600,000. But we’re going to talk about that, because the Premier’s relationship and her Housing Minister’s relationship with Mr. Rennie, as chief fundraiser, is very clear.

The Housing Minister exchanged multiple emails with Mr. Rennie in which he and Mr. Rennie discussed budget measures related to real estate and the environmental approval process in relation to a major housing development near Squamish that Mr. Rennie surely hoped to market. They also talked about classic cars.

As for the Premier, Mr. Rennie forwarded a proposal for the Metro Vancouver real estate market to Carole Taylor, the Premier’s special adviser, saying: “We need a very visible approach to curbing speculation and the optics of working towards affordability.” That email was forwarded by the Premier’s special adviser to the Premier’s director of policy. Mr. Rennie apparently forgot that he talks to the highest levels in this government about real estate policy.

Will the Premier now admit that Mr. Rennie — major fundraiser, dinner party host, B.C. Liberal Party insider and friend — had it right the first time when he talked to the reporter and said he had advance notice of the foreign buyers tax?

Hon. C. Clark: I’m sure a lot of developers and people in the development industry had a lot of feelings about the foreign tax. What we discovered after we introduced it is that almost to a person, they don’t like it. Just like the NDP, they oppose the foreign buyers tax.

D. Eby: I know the Premier doesn’t want to talk about her relationship with Mr. Rennie. Again, no answer to the question.

But it wasn’t just email access to the highest levels of this government that Mr. Rennie got for being chief fundraiser for the Premier and dinner host. It got him so much more. Mr. Rennie met with the Premier’s special adviser in April of 2016 and again in June of 2016, just weeks before the foreign buyer tax was announced.

Imagine Mr. Rennie’s joy when the Premier formally announced, a few weeks later, that she’d be bringing in a foreign buyer tax but that she’d be exempting the speculation on presale condos. Now, why would Mr. Rennie be happy about that? Well, selling presale condos is why Mr. Rennie is the Condo King. That’s his core competency.

How can the Premier defend giving her chief fundraiser access to the most senior policy members in her office weeks before the foreign buyer tax was introduced and then exempting his core business from that same foreign buyer tax and then, when he told the media that he never talked to the Premier’s office and never talked to her ministers about real estate policy in B.C., not setting the record straight, because it wasn’t true?

Hon. C. Clark: Just like all the members of this House who, on that day when the legislation was introduced, were shocked because they had no advance notice, nor did anyone in the industry have any advance notice that this was going to happen.

D. Eby: In 2015, the Wall Corp., a massive development company in Vancouver, walked in a proposal to B.C. Housing. They bought some land on Hastings Street in the Downtown Eastside where the zoning required them to build rental housing. Just over half of the units were required to be affordable.

Their proposal? B.C. Housing should provide them with an interest-free construction financing of $39½ million. They also proposed that B.C. Housing pay them a 10 percent developer fee worth $3.3 million for the privilege of giving the Wall Corp. interest-free money to build something they had to anyway under the zoning.

My question for the Minister for Housing is simple. Did he agree to provide interest-free financing and a multi-million-dollar fee to a rich developer to build something they would have had to build anyway under the zoning rules in Vancouver?

Hon. R. Coleman: I don’t have the details of that particular project at my fingertips, but I’ll certainly provide them for him. It would be unusual for us to do what the member described, but it is not unusual for us to enter into an agreement to take affordable rental units that we can subsidize in the marketplace for people that need housing in Vancouver or anywhere else in the province of British Columbia.

D. Eby: It’s interesting that the minister forgot about this unusual project, because B.C. Housing also forgot about this unusual project. When we asked them, under freedom of information, for a list of projects where they’d provided construction financing, they sent us a list of non-profit organizations building housing projects worth an average of $3.2 million, for interest rates between 1 and 1¼ percent.

The project they forgot? They forgot to list the project worth ten times their average construction financing. They forgot to list the project where they didn’t charge interest. They forgot to list the project they were financing that is 62 percent for-profit market housing and commercial space.

[1035] Jump to this time in the webcast

We didn’t find out about the Wall Corp. project through the Freedom of Information Act. We found out about it because someone leaked the proposal.

So why does the minister charge interest to non-profit organizations building 100 percent affordable housing and not charge interest to a for-profit developer building a building with only 38 percent affordable housing?

Hon. R. Coleman: You usually never have any facts to back up what you’re saying with regards to anything that you do.

I will get the information for the member, and I’ll let you know exactly what happened with that particular proposal.

I do know that we do deals, where we go in…. We will do construction financing on portions of projects that are ours that we’re going to have the benefitfor the public, for affordable housing in British Columbia.

D. Eby: B.C. Housing gave a $40 million loan to a private developer to finance the presale marketing of condos that start at $1.6 million each. Who was on the board of B.C. Housing when this loan was approved? Bob Rennie, the Premier’s fundraiser-in-chief, the man who made the Premier’s extra $300,000 in salary possible by raising millions in big money for the B.C. Liberals.

How did Bob Rennie get on the B.C. Housing board? Well, he was put on the board by his friend the Deputy Premier through order-in-council. And who was the lead real estate agent on this condo development “designed for daily luxury”? Why, yes, it was Bob Rennie.

Why did the Premier allow tax dollars intended to build housing for the poorest of the poor go to financing a presale condo marketing campaign by her chief fundraiser?

Hon. R. Coleman: To the member opposite: I notice that you didn’t go out after last week’s question period and repeat what you said in this House, because you knew you’d probably be sued for what you said in here simply because you didn’t have the right information. You accused the government of financing a project where we financed the affordable rental units that we built as part of a mixed-use project.

This one’s a bit more complicated. Not only did we step up and make a deal work, where we actually doubled the amount and number of social housing units in a project on redevelopment; we’ve put more affordable housing in the city of Vancouver. We had no involvement whatsoever in the marketing of the market units in the project.

. Eby: In the minister’s own mortgage for this property, it says: “Give us updates on the presale condo progress. How well are you selling presale condos?” So I’m not sure this minister has any idea what he’s talking about. Not only that, but I was absolutely right about everything that I said about the last project this minister did, where they provided interest-free money to a major donor to build a project that the donor had to build anyway. And not only that, but they provided them with a fat developer fee as well.

The minister says this is such a good deal for taxpayers that B.C. Housing forgot to put it on the FOI list. They forgot to put it on the freedom-of-information list that they sent to us of projects that this government funded. Somehow they forgot the $39 million loan. They also forgot that same project, that Wall development corporation project on Hastings Street. They didn’t disclose that one either.

So my question to the Premier is: how many secret loans are there to B.C. Liberal major donors?

[1415] Jump to this time in the webcast

Hon. R. Coleman: I know there’s one word in this House that we can’t use with regards to whether you’re telling the truth or not. I will say it to the media when I get out of here, because I can’t say it in here.

But you’re wrong. What you are saying isn’t true. There was no interest-free loan, none whatsoever. As a matter of fact, we got a number of units out of this project for affordable rental. A whole bunch of them, 50-ish, were all for core need at $375 a month. We actually went into a partnership to develop a project to make the numbers work so we could create more affordable rental housing in the city of Vancouver.

(Why wasn’t the loan disclosed through FOI Rich? It seem there was roughly 1.5% interest, not zero, but why wasn’t this loan disclosed?- MA)

D. Eby: Thank you, hon. Speaker. I did. I withdraw.

We’ve been asking questions about two major B.C. Housing financing initiatives worth about $80 million in public money for buildings connected closely to two major B.C. Liberal donors, including the Premier’s fundraiser-in-chief, Bob Rennie. To all of our questions, the Housing Minister has repeatedly suggested that we’re just making stuff up. He’s even threatened lawsuits. Yet even though we’ve been asking for these documents for five days, he’s produced not a single document to show that we are, in his more polite moments, as he describes it, wrong.

Now, it’s not unusual that the opposition has to wait for a freedom-of-information request or estimate or someone to leak to get the information on a story. But
[ Page 14314 ]
when even the media can’t get the information they need from the minister, you know there’s trouble. Five days have passed since media asked for details on a public loan to a private luxury condo building marketed by the Premier’s fundraiser-in-chief, and neither B.C. Housing nor this minister has given them the information they’re asking for.

To the Housing Minister: if everybody is wrong, where are the documents; where are the numbers; what happened on this deal?

Hon. R. Coleman: Madame Speaker, through you to the member, I at no time said that I was interested in suing the member. I said he should go take the comments and the accusations he said in this House and gladly take it outside and say the same thing — which I, by the way, have noted has not happened.

Um, not true Rich. Mr. Eby was on CKNW talking about this very thing….ma

D. Eby: Beyond the facts that the mortgage was registered on an entirely different property, that it asked for updates on the sale of presale condos, that it was registered the month after the social housing was built, the minister’s numbers simply don’t add up. The city owned the land. It set it aside for social housing. The city put in $30.6 million in community amenity contributions to build the project. Then B.C. Housing loaned $15.1 million to the society to lease the finished building from the city.

The 162 units were built. That puts the cost per unit at a high but reasonable $288,000 each, on average, where the city provided the land. But if we believe this minister, this deal never would have been done unless B.C. Housing gave a $39 million loan to a luxury housing developer to help that developer market presale condos marketed by the Premier’s fundraiser-in-chief, who was on the B.C. Housing board when this deal got approved. The explanation makes no sense.

Again to the minister: if everybody else is wrong, where are the documents; where are the minutes from B.C. Housing; where are the numbers on the project?

Hon. R. Coleman: Just so you’re clear, B.C. Housing had no involvement in the financing, construction or marketing of the market housing, relative to the land swap that took place on this. Our involvement was to finance the project to get 162 new units of affordable housing in downtown Vancouver, in a partnership with the city and a developer.

It was the city and the developer that worked out the idea of a land swap. We came in as a partner on this because we thought it was a good idea to add additional low-rental housing, affordable to people in Vancouver, by doing a partnership — that this would work. But on the market side, at no time were we involved.

I know that the member likes to make the other accusation with regards to the person that marketed this project. I can tell the member this. When this project came before the board of B.C. Housing, the individual recused themselves.

D. Eby: One piece missing in that answer was whether the minister was going to release the documents, release the numbers, release the minutes from B.C. Housing. And just like with Mr. Rennie’s luxury condo project for
[ Page 14315 ]
the 288 Hastings Street project, the minister also said we were wrong. He said there was no construction financing, no loan, nothing like that for the B.C. Liberal donor, but let’s look at what we know.

We know that B.C. Housing bought land at 288 East Hastings from Wall Financial, a major B.C. Liberal donor. When choosing a developer, we know that B.C. Housing didn’t put the contract out for tender. Instead, Wall Financial, a major B.C. Liberal donor who gave $400,000 to this party just last year, was hired directly to build a $33 million project. Now a public city of Vancouver report makes it clear that B.C. Housing plans to sell the finished market rental housing units on that site directly to the same major B.C. Liberal donor. Again, no bids, no public process, just a direct sale.

We also know that not a single unit beyond the bare requirements of the local city of Vancouver zoning was added through this arrangement. Less than 40 percent of the square footage of this building is affordable rental housing.

If it’s not construction financing, can the minister explain why B.C. Housing issued an untendered contract worth tens of millions of dollars, then agreed to sell completed rental units worth more than $10 million to a major B.C. Liberal donor with no public process?

Hon. R. Coleman: Again, the other day when the member brought this question to the House, he accused the government of giving a zero-percent-interest loan to a developer to build a building in Vancouver, which was not true. The construction financing on a combined project is not unusual — to be financed with cooperation of your partners. You do that. It has takeout mortgages when they’re taken out, and what happens is you end up with a project.

Now, just so the member knows…. I know he lives in Vancouver, but just so he understands, this area of Vancouver has been designated by the city of Vancouver as requiring 60 percent non-market and 40 percent market housing for rental. It makes projects difficult to deliver affordable rental housing in Vancouver, but we were successful in this particular case.

Just so the member knows, the building is going to provide 104 new units of rental affordable housing in Vancouver, which now takes the total up to almost 180 units by two projects, a product that wouldn’t get built in Vancouver if there wasn’t a partnership between B.C. Housing and the city of Vancouver and whoever is developing the project, along with a non-profit. We do not hold financing. We did not finance the market units. We financed the social housing units, 104 units, which are in the market today, are being built in the market so that people have affordable housing in Vancouver.

Of course, there were a range of other issues canvassed:… Seniors Care Homes 97% out of compliance for staffing levels. Seniors with broken hips waiting in hospital hallways for days. Sewage spills into the water supply in Spallumcheen.. Mary Polak’s refusal to acknowledge what a court has said on the Shawnigan Waste dump, namely that Active Earth Engineering lied and covered up its profit sharing deal withCobble Hill Holdings.

But Minister Coleman has carried the housing file with him wherever he goes for over a decade. Why is BCHousing helping rich developers (Brenhill, Wall) and Pre-sale condo marketers (Rennie) with multi-million dollar loans to simply comply with Vancouver bylaws on affordable rental units? Did the public know this was how BCHousing operated? As a mortgage slush fund ?

BCHousing promises to release some documents this week after redacting, er, vetting for privacy. But why did those loans come to the NDP via a leak, rather than through FOI?

If there’s one thing the press should be all over, it’s this story, and I haven’t seen much (with apologies to Steele and Drex, and “MetroVancouver”. Instead, we have the Vancouver Sun wasting space with printing Christy Clark’s ad hominem attacks on John Horgan. It isn’t good enough.

So why did the Legislature shut two weeks early without passing the government’s own “priority” bills?

Clark Needs to Back Up Her Words. Part 1

Premier Clark (via the Vancouver Sun), graced us with “her opinion” of John Horgan’s opposition leadership and Premier potential on the front page this morning. It may be an entertaining read, but it contributes little to actual understanding of our electoral choice May 9th.

What I think is that the Premier has a record of running from accountability at every turn. This now includes closing the legislature two weeks early without passing bills which got quite a bit of press. Those include the Green Private Members Bill to stop employers requiring female workers to wear high heels. The Liberals also ran away before passing Clark’s “real time disclosure bill”..  (A failed attempt to change the conversation on banning big money from distorting the power of donors to warp policy decisions by government.) Hell, they didn’t even pass their own budget, opting for an “interim supply bill”. 

What’s just as bad, the government failed to produce documents to disprove allegations that Minister Coleman and/or BC Housing loaned $40 million of our dollars directly to one of Bob Rennie’s big dollar condo projects with no affordable housing included in that same project….”Land swaps”, “the mortgage was in lieu of security on another project which did include low income homes” …..Prove it Mr. Coleman. Your Ministry didn’t release the details of the loan via FOI. You haven’t released them now.   Running from accountability.

Back to the VanSun front page…..

Spoiler #1, she characterized her opponent negatively. Yes, I know it’s a shock.  Full article here, and yes, it does include quotes from Horgan as well. Fair is fair. http://vancouversun.com/news/politics/premier-clark-dismisses-horgan-as-leader-who-lacks-a-spine

Spoiler #2…. What follows is my opinion. Where it differs from Clark’s is that I’ll offer facts to back it up. Clark should be challenged to do the same at every turn.

We all understand the political art of war enough to know that defining your opponent is a well-worn strategy. It’s up to us to decide if the “definition” has merit. I don’t believe it does have merit and I’m going to do two things here…1) Ask if there’s evidence… 2) If there is evidence, show what it is, pro or con.

Quotes from Rob Shaw’s article in italics, then my comments:

“John, he is not as strong a leader as I thought he would be,” said Clark. “He hasn’t been able to corral his caucus, there’s so much disunity in the group, they are always fighting with each other.”

This is pure negative campaign politics. First it was “John who?”. Then it was “Say anything Horgan” in an ad campaign fully funded by an industry front group.  Now it’s “John Horgan is weak”.

The facts are there has been no visible and quoted division in the NDP caucus. Nothing to back this up at all except an admission I saw Horgan make himself along the lines that internal debates happen and can be vigorous.

Personally I think it would be a damned shame if there were no debates within the BCLiberal caucus on important issues, like ‘getting to yes’ on answering the mystery of who fired the health researchers and consequently cost us who knows how many dollars in legal action and multiple investigations. Why did that happen 4 years ago? What is it that caused a PhD candidate , Rod MacIsaac, to commit suicide?

I think it would be a damned shame if nobody in the BCLiberal caucus advocated for welfare recipients to get a tiny raise from ten years at $610 a month. It’s terrible policy like this that grows petty crime, desperation and homelessness by government’s ideological intransigence.

I think it would be a shame if nobody on the Liberal benches wanted to stop funding Jumbo several 100K a year. That’s the town with no buildings and no citizens, perpetually awaiting being built, for a ski resort that’s been on hold for twenty odd years.

He can’t seem to take a position on any of the important policies, things it’s obvious we are all going to have to take a position on.

Let’s see… I’ve followed John Horgan’s statements pretty closely. Here are some very consistent ones. They almost certainly don’t please everyone but they are consistent.

Horgan on SiteC…. “Send it to BCUC and have somebody who isn’t a BCLiberal tell me it’s a good idea. “ I can trace this back to well before the last election. He’s not held a different position.

But what about the 1000 jobs?… According to Horgan, the plan is to create more jobs saving and producing more energy at a lower cost…. Read the Power BC plan and judge for yourself here:


It’s an approach that needs vigorous discussion during the campaign, and fleshing out so people understand. And that must happen before we spend any more of $10+ billion on a dam which hasn’t had independent oversight.

Horgan on Kinder MorganConsistently Against. JH made one error, in which he said famously “I could be convinced”. It was a mistake because it could be repeated out of context. What is not widely shared is that the paragraph that contained that quote ended with….”I can’t see how Kinder Morgan is in BC’s best interests”. Every statement JH has made since he took over as leader has included…”I can’t see how Kinder Morgan is in BC’s best interests (in its current form and with the hopelessly twisted review process that studied it). Horgan’s position on Kinder Morgan has always been “No”.

Prove me wrong. Send me an unedited link.

LNG- Horgan: Pro building the industry but minus the fantasy trillion. Supports Woodfibre’s project…wants Petronas moved from Lelu Island to Ridley or a less ecologically sensitive salmon salmon rearing area (that’s a no-brainer).

Horgan on Education: Pro.  Often talks of how a pubic school teacher straightened him up in his teen years and helped him become what he is today. Spoke consistently against the violation of teachers bargaining rights that Christy Clark championed until she was laughed out of the Supreme Court of Canada in less than twenty minutes but more than a few million dollars wasted.

Clark on the other hand, has gone from that position to being delighted by the opportunity the SCC graciously handed her to hire more specialist and other teachers and make kids lives better, when otherwise she was kinda hamstrung.

Getting Big Money out of politicsPro. Horgan has said this will be the first act of an NDP government. Consistency? It has been NDP policy since the 2005 election with multiple opposition bills introduced in the house over 10 years…Flip. Flop. Flip. Flop.

Clark may promise to study the issue after the election, but clings to the idea that we aren’t pained by giving contracts at a higher rate to construction firms who donate to the BCLiberals, and at higher dollar values, than to firms which don’t donate to the party. Don’t believe me? Read this Carl Meyer piece : http://www.nationalobserver.com/2017/03/07/news/new-revelations-about-christy-clarks-donors

(Ok let’s move on, because I don’t think there’s an issue that shapes the integrity of our governance and therefore every other issue than that last one.)

Clark again..  “I know how hard this is to do, but I think in John there is kind of a profound, maybe it is fear or weakness I don’t know, but he really hasn’t turned out to have the spine that Adrian Dix had.”

Be serious. Nobody who has actually heard Horgan in the house, or interviewed, or make a speech could agree with the characterization that he is spineless. It’s complete bullshit.

“I’ve got a good record to run on,”

We’ll be the judge of that, Ms. Clark, but let’s review

LNG dollars generated 0

15 years of conflict instead of honest negotiation in education.

Triple delete…

Federal investigation into lobbying scandal in progress

Home prices allowed to skyrocket out of our “affordability zone”. Leading Canada for one year at least in economic growth, but near the bottom of the heap in full-time secure job creation.  All about families..

$170 billion in combined debt, deferrals, and contractual obligations.. all of which have grown faster under the Clark regime than any other.

After Mt Polley, complete failure to rein in the practice of tailing pond lakes, when the Mt. Polley investigation recommended dry stack tailings in mining. Speaking of mining….Is it $5billion in unfunded liabilities for environmental reclamation and cleanup? Because donors.

Health care researcher firings. The single biggest act of bullying in the history of the BC Public Service, and still running from accountability.

Accusing NDP falsely of a criminal act (hacking) then after days running from it, finally admitting error and leaving an apology by voicemail.. Trumpish I have to say.  Even more so while announcing it will be a dirty election campaign because NDP. Really.

Being there when it matters… When the diesel spill happened in Heiltsuk territory, it was the NDP MLA Jennifer Rice, who spent a week there. John Horgan went too… Christy did not.

Relations with First Nations… Christy, you’ve been asked not to appear at Haida Gwaii during the Royal visit. You had Rich Coleman and his LNG booster team drummed out of a meeting with local First Nations in Ft. St. John after attempting to completely exempt LNG projects from any environmental review whatsoever… You had to back off..  See this article and video.. http://commonsensecanadian.ca/first-nations-collision-course-lng/

Okay… This rant is way too long.. It had to be, but I could go all night on the actual record….I’m done and thanks for reading and sharing. It’s clear from comments received on twitter regarding this piece there needs to be a Part II…. Watch for it over the weekend- Merv. (March 17, 17)





Speaker Linda Reid Disgraces the Office and Other Stories

Update: Today, March 14 2017, Linda Reid doubled down on refusing to allow NDP questions on governance of party fundraising.  Also, Minister of Housing and Natural Gas Rich Coleman refused three (or more) times to table documentation to prove his claim there was nothing fishy about a loan to a developer for up market housing in Vancouver. Verbal denials are not enough….

And notice the correction within item 4. Thanks


  1. Right at the core of the Parliamentary system is the notion that the Speaker of the House or the Legislature must be non-partisan and fair. At least, she must try.

Yesterday Richmond MLA and Speaker of the BC Legislature disgraced herself in that regard. Spectacularly.

Moments before attempting to shut the NDP down and ruling John Horgan’s questions to the Attorney General about banning big money in BC politics out of order, the AG Suzanne Anton had introduced a bill requiring political parties to disclose donations in the BCLiberal version of real time.

How is it then that the Minister can introduce a bill making a legal requirement of political parties, and then the Speaker shut down questions on donation limits by size or geographical origin?  Arguing that banning big money is not Ministerial responsibility? With only about five minutes space between? This is ridiculous behaviour from Linda Reid, who is required by her mandate to be much much better than this. Horgan’s second supplemental question, to which he was fully entitled to an answer, was prevented by Reid’s insistence on a new questioner.

Bullshit Ms. Reid…. Bullshit.

2. While the NDP is pressing the advantage of recent coverage of donation reforms we desperately need, two very interesting pieces were published yesterday.

Martyn Brown, former COS to Gordon Campbell, calls Christy Clark out on the idea of an independent panel to recommend electoral (and donation) reforms after the May 9th election. He calls it a love letter to the RCMP. Knowing that lobbyists and possibly party staff in the BCLiberal Offices may face charges, it amounts to an offer to fix the problem after and if she is re-elected. Worth the read: http://www.straight.com/news/880776/martyn-brown-decoding-christy-clarks-love-letter-rcmp ..


We shouldn’t kid ourselves.

It’s not just politics that has forced the government’s hand. It is also the prospect of having the governing party, and/or its unnamed actors, contributors, or agents, being charged with contraventions of the Election Act—perhaps even the Canadian Criminal Code. And by that, I don’t mean to in any way impugn any individual, as such.

Clark’s new directive calling for an independent review of B.C.’s campaign financing system is a metaphorical “love letter” to the RCMP that silently pleads for forgiveness for any unintended wrongdoing by her party that may be unearthed by its investigation.

3. Kai Nagata, of Dogwood BC, opines that the lobbyist donation scandal could be the start of a wide ranging Charbonneau Commission style affair in which all sorts of political corruption gets exposed as player after player gives evidence and  names. Here’s his argument in part, advice to the lobbyists, copied from the Facebook page..

The smartest thing to do right now is get ahead of the story: tally up the illegal donations, turn yourself in to the Mounties and cooperate fully, in the hopes you can get off with a $10,000 fine.

Even better, blow the whistle on this whole filthy system. Give an exclusive interview to a news outlet explaining how the party bagmen shook you down, how you never meant to break the law but hey, all the other kids were doing it!

You’ll look like a regular Boy Scout compared to the holdouts. I’m talking about the cockroaches that have to be dug out of their holes and dragged into RCMP cruisers, feebly trying to cover their faces.

Don’t believe it’ll get that bad? You’ve never witnessed the early stages of a corruption inquiry.

I was a reporter in Montreal in 2009 when the whole dirty puzzle began coming together. Like in B.C., straw donors were one of the first warning signs. Employees at certain firms were making political donations above their pay grade.

Around the same time there were rumors of funny business in the awarding of public works contracts.

It turned out the companies supposedly competing to clear snow, pave roads and build bridges were actually colluding with each other. They would agree ahead of time who would submit the lowest bid – which of course included a little padding.

Why did they charge extra? So company staff could cut thank-you cheques to the governing party, or even pay a cash bribe to whatever bureaucrat signed off on the project.

Don’t act shocked. B.C.’s Wild West system leaves us open to all the same abuses witnessed in Quebec. (Indeed some of the same companies now operate here, and we’re seeing the same suspicious patterns.)

Of course, these inquiries take years to develop, and while I agree there’s lots to investigate for the RCMP, I personally have no confidence the BC RCMP has the stomach for it. I hope I’m wrong because…..

4. David Eby with the help of information partly gleaned from VanParks.ca has been on a story of $40M dollar loans going out to wealthy developer donors from the BCHousing Society.. to build luxury condos….

Rich Coleman is in full bluster, denying it all…. Every deal enhanced the number of affordable housing units built, he says. But there are two fundamental elements to the story which scream for further inquiry. I do need to say at the outset that the full details of what happened are not known. There are allegation and denials, on a story where we need the full truth.

First, the loans in question were not part of an FOI package released to the NDP and Mr. Eby on the question, though it’s clear  the loans occurred. VanParks has the loan numbers on their website.  https://t.co/4dvhDsjURN

The government of Triple Delete and coverup strikes again? Certainly looks like it.

Second, Coleman’s denials so far do not include the tabling of documents which would refute the story. Coleman threatened to call Eby a liar outside the legislature yesterday. As far as I know he didn’t follow through. (I’ll update if I’m wrong).

The key to this is that Vancouver zoning already required the buildings to include a percentage for non-market, affordable housing. I doubt if we believe it should be the Provinces role to monetarily assist wealthy BCLiberal donors and their companies to comply with City zoning bylaws. That’s absurd. And there is even a question about one of two loans going to finance a full market building that contained no down market rental at all.

One of those beneficiaries allegedly is Bob Rennie, until recently the BCLiberals fundraising chair, and until recently enough, the Board Member of  (you guessed it) BCHousing. (mea culpa…I had Rennie down as a Board Chair of BCH. I apologize, but the optics are nonetheless brutal.)

Listen to this interview on CKNW yesterday afternoon and ask yourself how wide ranging the RCMP’s investigations into corruption in this province should be….. https://omny.fm/shows/steele-drex/david-eby-ndp-housing-critic-on-bc-s-affordable-ho

BCHousing is meant to help poor people with affordable rental space, not grease the business bottom line of wealthy corporations. Rich Coleman needs to table a documentary rebuttal STAT.  Don’t bet that he will. So the media will have to follow up.


Blacktop Politics

I was a child, but this is the story of the moment I became aware of politics in BC. My family was driving to a remote resort on the Northern Gulf Islands..We hopped one ferry to another..We landed on the island but had to drive across it to our destination. From the ferry, for about a mile the road was blacktop, which ended at a paved driveway into a gated estate….The summer property (I recall being told) belonged to a Socred highways minister.   The rest of the island was rough gravel.

At the height of the triple-delete scandal, I made the following observation:  “Corruption is not a necessary consequence of secrecy, but secrecy is a necessary condition for corruption”. However that blacktop road got built, I saw it as evidence of “corruption”, in the sense of an unjustifiable distortion of power, money and influence.

About that time, (it may have been the same summer) , with stories like the one above bursting through the news cycle about a tired and cynical Socred government, we threw the bums out and gave Dave Barrett and the NDP a chance. It’s high time we do the same on May 9th , and I believe John Horgan is the man to give us all a rest from the distortions of power foisted on us by the Clark Liberals. Horgan can’t be all things to everyone, but from what I know of him, he’s a normal, honest man with a vision of helping ordinary people in a way that’s only ever a matter of political convenience to the Clark crew.

To make that happen though, we have to have a memory. We have to share memories. Blacktop politics has been a force in BC for a very long time. Money flows to friendly ridings.  As an example, Dermod Travis of Integrity BC has been noting how “affordable housing” announcements since the end of September have focused nearly exclusively on BCLiberal held ridings. Blacktop politics has been proven effective in BC over and over. People are people. They often vote based on narrow short term  interests and the very latest news from an often lazy television media.

The latest from the weekend, via Kathy Tomlinson of the Globe and Mail, is a dramatic confirmation of the “pay to play” culture of the current government. Read this : http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/investigations/wild-west-bc-lobbyists-breaking-one-of-provinces-few-political-donationrules/article34207677/?utm_medium=Referrer:+Social+Network+/+Media&utm_campaign=Shared+Web+Article+Links The money quote for me is here: ““At that point I realized – I have been totally corrupted.” .

It’s about a system of government in which if you don’t pay, you don’t play. Lobbyists break rules, falsify proper disclosure of the sources of funds to the ruling party and probably break tax law in the name of career survival. Companies understand that donations to the BCLiberals are a necessity of getting on with business, but don’t necessarily want the scale or frequency of contributions known.

Rich Coleman shrugs it off, saying if rules have been broken it’s not the party’s fault……. But this has apparently been going for years, common knowledge to insiders and a complete surprise to the Press Gallery. And to be fair, Horgan’s NDP is now reviewing its own records of donations to find out if the same thing has gone on in their own camp.  Although less likely, Mr. Weaver and the Greens should do the same.

Ah well.. It’s today’s news and history shows May 9th is a long way off. I honestly don’t think Rich Coleman or Christy Clark care very much.

Back to secrecy:  When the triple delete scandal broke, the BCLiberals promised not to do it again and an order went out to keep emails and so on in the civil service…. At the same time, they eliminated the application of the Offenses Act to the improper destruction of government records. They weakened the rules. And anyone who follows Bob Mackin knows that FOI requests are coming back “No Records” as much as they ever were.

Once again, it’s not necessary to prove corruption to note that the conditions for it have been created. And then we must wonder why…. And then we must vote.

I won’t tell you who to vote for. I’ve only said who I will vote for.  But like the dying days of the WAC Bennett Socred regime, the stories are legion, and between now and May 9th we have to share them widely. Get active. Get involved.



The Last Word on the Hack that Wasn’t

At the end of my last post I wrote that the “spin and misdirection are so thick it’s impossible to determine if …. anything…. happened. “

That turned out to be prescient (first time ever?).

There was no hack. There were no criminal acts. But I count Independent MLA Vicki Huntington stepping forward and naming her own office as the source of Mike Smyth’s stories in the Province ….. Well that was the ‘revolutionary act of telling the truth.’

There were no dirty deeds by BCNDP HQ targeting the Liberals. There was no dissemination of private information by anyone except the BC Liberals themselves. The BCLiberals yesterday sent out a letter which in it’s first sentence tried to blame Independent MLA Vicki Huntington for the debacle caused by no-one but themselves.

Everything Christy Clark said in the last week on the subject of the hacking story was a falsehood including , I allege, the apology to Horgan. Left on a voicemail. Really? Can your people not talk to his people and arrange a time to talk? Unbelievable, Premier Clark.

But I leave the last word to this 8 minutes of Drex at CKNW who summed up this ridiculous attempt to smear the NDP, deflect from the real issues like dying children in care, and mislead the public again ….and again…  Have a listen. It’s real radio at a time the public deserves it. Click the link .



MCFD and Other Disasters – Update Feb 9, 2017


At 9 am Monday morning February 6th I posted my musings about the coming election campaign which began last August. If that sentence sounds strange it’s because we are behind the looking glass in Wonderland. Within an hour I felt foolish and didn’t “push” the piece on Twitter every four hours or so as I usually do. So much happened by 10 AM. (I won’t be surprised if I feel the same an hour after posting this.)

By Wednesday night Christy Clark and her minions were in a state of disarray I would never have anticipated.

At 10 AM Monday a report (Broken Promises) was made public by the Representative for Children and Youth on the death of an 18 year old in government care named Alex Gervais. That report is linked here. It’s essential reading, and I’ll tell you why shortly .. https://t.co/UbqU1wzSne

At 10 AM Minister of Covering Up the Truth on Health Firings Terry Lake was announcing a $500 million rebuild of Royal Inland Hospital.

About 10 AM, BCLiberal Party spokesman Emile Scheffel alleged attempts to hack the Party website by “opponents”.

Whenever bad news for the government is released, there is some distraction thrown out accidentally on purpose for the media to chew on. Usually it’s a booze policy announcement, but the RCYBC report was very bad news. So those 10 am announcements may not be causally connected, but then again they may. A new hospital. A sympathy play over hacking mixed with dark allegations about the NDP’s dirty politics.

The account of Alex Gervais young life and early death had familiar and tragic themes… He was removed from incapable and abusive parents, thrown into a cycle of foster placements, booted around, behavioral problems, eventually drug use and drug dealing.

The details are shocking.. The agencies shuffling Alex around had the opportunity to place him with stable reliable family members, but they were too demanding of supports. So he was moved around in placements which cost the system far more money but demanded less ‘handling’ (ie. giving a shit).

Alex Gervais last weeks were spent alone in a Super 8 Motel. The person contracted to look out for him was paid  $8000/ month plus the cost of a room next to him, but was rarely with Alex and left it to Motel staff to text him if Alex caused any trouble. Alex reached out to a social worker, but after days on end alone and without money, high, he jumped out a fourth floor window.

The words of the Acting Rep who presented the report will end my discussion of this sad case except to say it’s one in a string of heart-rending cases to which the government always says the same thing. “We accept the recommendations and we are making progress toward making things better” .  The Reps words paraphrased “When government takes a child from its parents, it assumes the responsibility of a parent to care for that child.”  As challenging as that mandate is for MCFD workers, and indeed, for Minister Cadieux (who should resign) , can any of us think government lived up to what we expect? No.

By Tuesday, Christy Clark was in a friendly Facebook Live interview with the Vancouver Sun’s Vaughn Palmer. She chose to finish the interview by directly alleging without evidence that the BCNDP had attempted to hack the BCLiberal website three times. Vaughn Palmer sat there and said nothing. The Premier accused her opponents of a jail-able, criminal offense, and he didn’t even ask “well, really? How do you know? Where is the evidence? And why are you telling me if you’ve not gone to the police?”  I hate to dwell on it, but Vaughn Palmer is supposed to be the Dean… seen it all..cynical…BS detector infallible. Not.

In the meantime, Mike Smyth of the Province had been questioning the whole thing. A page on the BCLiberal website that should have been password protected, listing details about donors on Vancouver Island, had been wide open for weeks. Smyth had had a look in there himself January 19th I believe… He raised it with the party and the link was closed over the weekend. But the question arose, was Emile Scheffel making up the hacking story to cover up a self-inflicted security breach by the Party?

Wednesday all hell broke loose. Clark backed off on her claim the NDP had attempted a hack…sort of not quite…she said they wouldn’t admit it, but people had “heard them talking” as if they did it. When asked where the evidence was for her criminal accusation against an opponent she said “I … Don’t…Know…”

She claimed Mike Smyth of the Province had written it.. Front page… Well, read Mike Smyth on the subject here as he calls bullshit loud and clear: https://t.co/4OUSNijQgQ

Scheffel put out a release saying one of the attempted hacks originated at a computer at the BC Legislature. Stay tuned.

NDP leader John Horgan called a press conference denying any hacking attempts and challenging the Premier to put up or shut up with her evidence, apologize on all platforms where she made the allegation, or risk being sued.

Then it got worse!… Press Secretary Ben Chin was called in to spin for us.. He apparently told Gary Mason of the Globe that the hack came from a Legislature computer (one of hundreds used by BCliberal and NDP caucus employees and government employees ). But the hack couldn’t have come from a BCLiberal connected computer because all those had been scoured.  Think on this:

Workers in the legislature, regardless of whether or not they work for a partisan side, are employees of the government, so who did the scouring and on what authority? If the computers were looked at by BCLiberal Party people, that’s surely illegal, and if they were looked at by the Public Service Agency, who authorized the search and were the employees advised in the proper manner (in three days)?  Don’t worry, we are still in Wonderland.

But wait, it gets worse!! Ben Chin calls Gary Mason back and says he misspoke. The computers weren’t scoured (that would quite likely be the second alleged criminal act this week) , but there was “a way for him to know where each computer had been looking on the interwebz”.  Really? Is that news to the employees and have they signed a release for spyware on their government machines?    So many questions.

Nobody knows where this is going, and I’m extremely sympathetic to those pleading that this nonsense not be allowed to overshadow the Gervais report. I’ve said so myself. A kid dying needlessly and neglected matters.

But I’m thinking that this could be the end of Christy Clark unless she presents full on retraction and apology today.

Christy Clark has made stuff up many times, some of her fabrications are silly and some are serious. She has lied about polling being done in Lax Kw’Alaams supporting PNW LNG. She has lied about a poll supporting the government position on the South Okanagan park. When a cigarette was suspected of starting a wildfire, she invented the notion the culprit might be caught by a traffic camera on the highway and Global ran with it as if it were credible. At least one of her explanations of how $150K got promised in Old Massett and indirectly helped a councillor who favored her brother’s business interests coincidentally… At least one of the things she said about that was a lie.

Clark lied about the NDP position on at least three subjects yesterday in 10 minutes on CFAX yesterday :  https://t.co/sp1WXdtLN1

The trouble has always been that the ProMedia called her out on the lies too infrequently… This time they aren’t letting her get away it. Even Les Leyne drew the Trump comparison this morning.

Blogger and visceral Christy Clark critic Alex Tsakumis was fond of saying Christy Clark is finished. He was wrong every time. So I won’t say that, but I wonder if it’s true this time.

Clark’s once feared and competent communications gurus must be drinking heavily at night this week wondering what the hell to do.

(Editor’s note: In the summary cited of the hacking of BCLiberal HQ, right down to the searching of legislature computers, there may be nothing which is factual. It’s all sourced, but the spin and misdirection are so thick it’s impossible to determine if …. anything…. happened).


Predicting the BC Provincial Election May 9th 2017

A fool’s errand? Of course.. but step by step, just like a real pundit, I’m going to tell you what will happen in the last three days of the campaign today….Okay I lied. I’ll do no such thing… But  I’ll tell you some themes which will develop, some I think will but won’t, and some that definitely should develop to influence the vote. Who will win? I won’t tell you that. You will decide it.

Who will be influencing the vote among media, political parties and activist interest groups (including unions and business groups led by people like John Winter)? How will they try to accomplish the election of a government that favours their interests?

You’ll decide the next government whether you vote or not. Hint: It’s better all round if you vote. And there’s a second thing I hope you’ll do. I hope you will engage in issues that make you feel passion, research responsibly, and engage your friends, family and co-workers.

First of all, walk down the street of your city or town, look at the faces of the commuters and shopkeepers. Realize many of them, almost certainly more than half, have not paid nearly enough attention to the last 4 years of BC governance. These good hearted people are happy to have it all explained to them in late April and early May. I’m not knocking the average Joe here… To obsess, as political junkies do, with things you only get to influence once every four years? It’s madness unless you can make a living and get your son through college on the proceeds.

Think of BC as a gigantic Mariposa, the town Stephen Leacock fictionally portrayed during an early 20th century campaign in Ontario..  The mayor, the judge, the banker, and the barkeeper are “in the know” (to one degree or another). They “know people”. They are “influential”, respected, and perhaps feared. What these few people say, including the newspaper editor, can become incontrovertible public opinion regardless of actual merit.

(I promise I’m getting to the meat of things…Soon)

There’s a cost to disengagement between elections. Governments are keenly aware that they can get away with anything if the electorate either doesn’t notice, forgets by election day, or doesn’t care.

Predictions, then what each party needs to do to achieve its goals:

Narratives have been nurtured by the three main parties over the last four years. Media are vulnerable and/or complicit in aiding those narratives. Easy access to ministers and unfettered access to millions in government and party advertising dollars matter, subtly or explicitly. Equally, advertising dollars from industry matter to the narrative spun by those who depend on that income (realty? New Car Dealers? Kinder Morgan?). To complain about that is futile, but to be blind to it is worse.

Some narratives nurtured by the governing BCLiberals and a portion of the media are:

The NDP can’t get it together. Nobody knows who John Horgan is. Horgan needs to solve the divide between the green and the pro-union factions of his caucus. Horgan can be hot-headed. Horgan is a flipflopper on Kinder Morgan (a complete fabrication.  I say this because there is no record of Horgan ever expressing support for the Kinder Morgan proposal that’s in front of us, or the process that got us here). And of course the big one: “Party of No”.

Still with the Liberals.. “Isn’t Andrew Weaver great? The Greens under his leadership are so constructive as they oppose everything we do at least as forcefully as the NDP.”

Clark proved in the last campaign she was willing to not only vocally support the Greens in the mission to erode the NDP vote, she would commit BCLiberal donation $ to buy advertising for them. I think she will do that again.

The above narratives are manipulations. They are effective because they are neither supported by evidence, nor do they require evidence to filter into public consciousness. They are repeated by members of media and punditry in a lazy and jaded fashion..

The positive narrative the BCLiberals advance will be similar to the one that worked so well last time. The BCLiberals are the party of job creation (nearly last in secure full time jobs, and the growth is outside their interior base in Vancouver and Victoria but never mind). GDP is strong. We have balanced 4 budgets in a row. The operating deficit is nearly eliminated (never mind tens of billions added in long term debt and contractual obligations). Where we promised LNG jobs and none came , this time around we will instead promise tech growth ( and retool education to support it, just as we didn’t quite for trades). Whatever, it works.

There are individuals in media who betray a bias or wish for an NDP win in May but they are few. So it’s up to the NDP to advance its own narratives successfully and province-wide. Those narratives are:

The negatives : The BCLiberals can’t be trusted. They care for their donors, not for ordinary people. Wages have stagnated while tax revenues from industry decline and export volumes and values soar. On real estate and on per pupil funding (see rural school funds) the BCLiberals are great at reacting when polls go south. They deny and deny problems that affect people’s ability to live until the evidence I overwhelming, and the public outcry so loud they can’t stand it.

Only when Vancouver property has driven everyone out of even dreaming of home ownership who isn’t already in the game, do we get a flawed Foreign Buyer’s Tax, which now needs to be revised to include a couple of NDP amendments they rejected at the outset.

Only when the Supreme Court of Canada ends a fifteen year battle in fifteen minutes do the BCLiberal suddenly agree class composition and size need to be priorities in public schools (and hire back 1000+ teachers).

Transparency:  From Triple Delete, to the Rod MacIsaac suicide, to Quickwins, to campaign funding, the BCLiberals are the party of cover-ups and naked political scheming. (Personal note: Until we know who fired the health researchers and why 4 years ago, I would not shake the hand of a single BCLiberal MLA. By this time, every one of them bears responsibility for the bullying, the lies, and the cover up and the suicide by not insisting their own government come clean. )

The positives: The NDP needs to get out a positive message that resonates in a way they didn’t last time. That’s clear. I don’t know if it’s enough, but here’s what I see so far.

Horgan has embraced a number of policies which have wide public support.

The first act of his government, if he wins, will be a ban on union and corporate donations. Public support in the high 80’s.  The impact of this is enormous: we can anticipate an end to wondering if the operators of Mt. Polley got off easy because Murray Edwards gave big to the BCLiberals. We can stop suspecting the fix was in for Kinder Morgan by virtue of some $700,000 in party funding lapped up by Clark from KM (not even a BC Company) and associated contractors.

Horgan embraces a ban on trophy hunting of grizzly bears..

Horgan embraces $10/day childcare.

Add these: Adoption of the UNDRIP recommendations in relation to First Nations and the word and spirit of the Truth and Reconciliation Commission. A move toward a $15 minimum wage. The elimination of regressive MSP premiums over time (rolling this cost back into the general tax system where it belongs).

I think John Horgan has made the case that public education is a priority for his team in a way it never has been for the Campbell Clark crew. Parents of school age children who want their kids to succeed without paying for smaller classes in publicly subsidized private schools should rejoice.

Lastly, an issue that I think should be much more important than it will be to the voter (sadly) … The NDP will get the $45/ year buspass back in the hands of the disabled who need it.

On to the Green narratives, positive and negative:

We are the only party to have actually banned union and corporate donations already, and in real time. How effective this is in the end is related to how many buy the idea that Weaver can form government. I’ll leave that to you. Otherwise you can vote for a ban by voting NDP or vote for the Wild West we have by voting for Clark.

Greens engage on issues. We don’t subscribe to “gotcha” politics. We will work constructively for positive change no matter who is in power. Greens think outside the box.

Neither Clark nor Horgan can be trusted on anything.

The Greens have more credibility than anyone else by leaps and bounds on the environment and climate change. We have actual scientists.

The Greens have a policy against whipped votes.. No longer will your MLA be forced to vote against his/her conscience or be banished from the island.

Greens have great candidates. Expect to see a lot of Sonja Furstenau. Her battle against the Shawnigan waste dump and the fraud perpetrated on the Environmental Appeal Board are now legend, and she deserves every bit of leverage she can get out of her success there. The other candidates will have to convince the voters they are, well, great.

Personal note: I don’t want to dismiss the Greens. I think their mission is 4-5 seats. My belief that it’s a high bar for them shouldn’t diminish their contribution to our discourse.

So last points –  What each party needs to do to achieve what it wants to achieve:

BCLiberals: In policy terms they have been visibly flailing and trying to maneuver the ship to safety. From transgender rights to taxing foreign RE buyers, to public education funding and many of its parts, the BCLiberals have been reversing themselves on long standing strongly held positions.

Their key flaw is arrogance. When you reverse positions you held arrogantly , and then hold the new position just as arrogantly, it’s a problem. I believe the only solution they can put into practice is some public humility… With issues like the health firings scandal, it goes beyond a brief apology and a continued unwillingness to make public the answers they know exist. A good dose of publicly stating “we were horribly horribly wrong and it won’t happen again” would be beneficial

But they’ve won four times by being exactly the overconfident people they are. Don’t hold your breath.

The BCNDP: John Horgan needs to talk past the media directly to people. The challenge is huge to hold Clark accountable forcefully and factually without being nasty, while at the same time making the case that life will be demonstrably better under an NDP regime. The media won’t make the case that the NDP plan for jobs with a renewed commitment to climate change may be more successful than what the Liberals are peddling. Horgan has to make that case himself, convincingly.

Similarly, on some issues which are admittedly huge, like Site C, the NDP must accept that some voters think the promise to send it to BC Utilities Commission review is too weak. Personally I think it’s the right position politically, and here’s why:  There is a large pool of swing voters who don’t know what’s right or wrong about Site C. They are likely to be skeptical of Horgan rejecting it out of hand after all the bafflegab they’ve been fed about future needs for the energy. If Site C is to be shut down, they’ll be far more convinced by arguments from the BCUC than from any politician of any stripe

But the point is, on KM, on Site C, on LNG, at this point in the cycle the NDP must stick to its guns knowing it will lose each argument with some voters on either side.

The Greens: Andrew Weaver, as much as I respect him, needs to stop being petulant and hypercritical and hypersensitive on social media. He needs to admit that on some issues, his natural enemy is Clark and not Horgan. The essays Weaver puts out on issues on the Green website are well worth reading. He does have good people attracted to running for his party,  but in order to get very many of them elected he needs to be careful not to offend those who disagree, or agree but hang naturally under a different party banner.

Thanks for reading.. looking forward to your comments on my sins of commission and omission in this highly individual and utterly unreliable piece of analysis. If you’re wandering the streets of Mariposa looking for someone who is “in the know”, who can tell you what to think, keep looking.

Cheers, Merv