Poor policy
Kim Darwin’s response to Mathew Wilson’s questioning of BC Green Party’s commitment to a free vote [“Viewpoint: Residents want solutions, not games,” June 21] suggests she is either naive or simply unwilling to acknowledge her party leader Andrew Weaver sold her out.
Darwin said “results of this election set the table for politics to be done in a different, more democratic manner with more cooperation across party lines” and “the voters of BC made it abundantly clear that this (43 Liberal, 41 NDP and three Greens) is what they desire of their elected officials.”
On that point, I agree with Darwin.
Clearly Weaver did not agree. Instead of honouring his promise to the voters, he engaged in old-style, back-room politics by cutting a deal with the NDP. Far from being democratic and seeking cooperation across party lines, the deal he signed completely disenfranchises the 43 elected Liberal MLAs.
The 2017 Confidence and Supply Agreement between the Green and NDP caucuses requires agreement only between the NDP and Greens on virtually every matter, from changing the way we elect our government, to terminating 5,600 BC union-wage jobs and dramatically increasing our taxes. The agreement completely ignores the majority party of 43 Liberals. This is certainly doing politics “differently,” but it has nothing to do with democracy.
In putting “things into perspective,” Darwin tries to assure us the Green Party agreement to support the NDP in supply and confidence motions “generally amounts to two votes per year,” as if this is no big deal. These two votes are at the heart of a party’s mandate to govern. The Greens agreed to prop up the NDP, the party that failed to win the election on their own merit, before they had even seen a written NDP legislative program or budget.
Perhaps Darwin, who has no experience in government, can be forgiven for being a bit naive, but Weaver knows a supply vote sets the entire government agenda. It mandates government to tax and spend, and it is very poor public policy to commit to support a budget you have not read.
Gordon Wilson
Verkerk Road
Brief respite
Thank you for the compassionate editorial [“Editorial: Senseless tragedy,” June 21] about the Lund tragedy. It was a sensitive piece and explained your kind rationale for not releasing the names of those involved until they came from official sources. Perhaps that reticence gave the affected families some brief respite from notoriety.
It is such a painful time for the whole community, as we are all interwoven in connections and relationships, and few of us are unaffected.
Margaret Behr
Highway 101
