Decolonization of BC. This is perhaps the most important election issue and, interestingly, its not being talked about. By "decolonization" I mean the various measures taken by the NDP to transfer land, money and power from the Province to indigenous groups. The Haida Agreement is an excellent example of this: - transfer of all provincial public lands in Haida Gwaii to the Haida; - transfer of provincial powers to the Haida in Haida Gwaii including the recognition of "Haida Law"; - continuation of provincial obligations in Haida Gwaii such as provision of schools and hospitals; and, - Haida claims for damages against BC including loss of fee simple lands continue unextinguished; Mr. Eby described the Haida Agreement as a template for the rest of BC: indiginews.com/features/land… The Haida Agreement covers about 1% of BC but the Haida are but one band of just over 200. Thus, the 'template' in fact covers about 200% of BC, ie. more land than BC has proportionally. Many say that the private lands in Haida Gwaii are protected by the Haida Agreement. But they are covered by aboriginal title and the Agreement has a mechanism whereby the private lands are gradually absorbed into the Haida territory. And, again, the taxpayer will have to pay for them to remain (for now) in private hands. Then add in DRIPA with its clear and clearly unworkable aboriginal veto: Article 19 of UNDRIP. This basically requires the Province to co-govern with all of BC's indigenous groups. Thus, you have Mr. Eby's vision for BC: decolonized, dismantled, diminished. It is a BC whereby the vast majority of public lands are controlled by indigenous groups, where private lands are slowly absorbed into indigenous lands, where non-indigenous people have less access to public lands (see Joffre Lakes) and receive no royalties from resource development on same but shoulder the burden of the province's taxes and social programs, and where indigenous legal systems spring up to regulate interactions in most of the province but where non-indigenous people have no say in those laws or their administration. It is a BC where the Province loses its say in how to govern, regulate, or administer its public lands and can't even pass zoning regulations on condo buildings on aboriginal land in BC cities or prevent industrial uses on BC lakes, rivers or forests. It is a BC where the Province must pass laws and administrative measures with the free, prior and informed consent of any band affected by such a law or measure. That is the Eby vision for BC and it is shared by both his caucus and the Green party. The seeds of this future lie in the obvious outcomes of the Haida Agreement and DRIPA. Many if not most British Columbians perhaps do not see it and, indeed, there is much progressive misinformation spun to prevent them from seeing it. But, if one looks, it is there to be seen. I suspect most British Columbians, if they understood this future, would not want this future. The only way to avoid this future is to not vote NDP or Green.

Respectfully he’s not. Section 35 rights and DRIPA are different things. Section 35 rights predated DRIPA and will continue even if DRIPA is repealed. DRIPA is absurd legislation that should never have been passed. It needs to be repealed. The government that is defending it needs to go. A separate discussion should occur in relation to section 35 rights and the Constitution generally but that is a different issue for a different day.

Secrets revealed by the NDP #1 Secret Bridge to the North Shore The NDP have shown great skill in discovering secrets like the now famous Secret No Fault letter. Recently they also discovered a secret bridge to the North Shore. “We honestly didn’t know about it. Why have the Conservatives concealed this!”

They told voters about this as early as 2024. And during the leadership race, all five final candidates publicly ran on the same policy.

So secret that the BCC literally ran on this secret platform in 2024 and KLF restated these secret policies 3 months ago. Such secrecy! Worst kept secret ever! Mo, it was all there for anyone who cared to look.

Yeah well don’t call snap elections eh? Give reasonable time frames for parties to recalibrate policies. Or call a snap election and be fair in one’s criticisms? Talking about hiding things during elections: vancouversun.com/opinion/col…

Yup. Cheaper. And injured folk get less protection and restoration of shattered lives. There are always trade offs. I don’t support the old system but I don’t support the current one either. I think we need a better balance ie a properly constructed hybrid system.

What else are you not telling us? Your government literally hides important indigenous agreements until after elections. Wow. vancouversun.com/opinion/col…

In fairness, the NDP called a snap election on a then leaderless party and now complain that certain longstanding policies weren’t reiterated in the chaotic days that followed. Hmmmm

Don’t know. But KLF literally restated these policies 3 months ago. So why are you all pretending that it’s done big secret or a surprise?

I think the NDP gaffed yet again. They are jumping in the No Fault/Independence of the Bar letter like it’s a big deal. It’s not. It’s simply a statement of longstanding and sensible BCC policy. But in so doing, the NDP are making issues of No Fault and independence of the Bar. Both issues are bad ones for the NDP. They are yet more reasons to vote this radical government out of office.

It's the worst kind of projection, i.e. accuse the opponent of secret plots when one's whole tenure as premier is marked by secret plots, bullying, and mismanagement. Next it will be "Cons just like Trump." Untrue, why let truth get in the way?

Maybe. To be fair, there is precedent for democratic peoples to vote away their rights and prosperity: Venezuela, Weimar Germany. So there’s a roadmap for us for this election. We can vote to survive as a democracy or we can vote to fail as one.

Good lord Michael. This has been well established BCC policy since before the 2024 election. What other well established BCC policies are you unaware of and why?

Answers: - content of letter part of well published BCC platform for over two years - BCC have long proposed repeal of No Fault and indeed this was a platform plank in last election. Plan to replace with hybrid system also well publicized - returning independence of bar also well known platform issue. Respectfully none of this is news unless one has not followed the news.

Sigh. The letter outlines well published BC Conservative policy that has been publicly known since before the 2024 election. So big secret. Further he is proposing a hybrid system so not skyrocketing rates. Finally you’ve not mentioned the second part of the letter that deals with returning independence to the Bar: why don’t you mention that? Do you defend state control of the Law Society?

Why not? Respectfully do you have any experience in this area? What is the basis for your comment?

France looks like a relaxing trip this year: baguettes and wine and street entertainment.

Last February, many prominent voices said that Jesse Van Rootselaar’s Tumbler Ridge massacre had nothing to do with his transgender identity. It turns out that he and his co-conspirator actively wanted to connect their violence to transgender politics. We need to talk about how a significant portion of the online trans community is suffused with violent and anti-social tendencies. Yes, there are many normie trans people who are assimilationist and perfectly decent people, but this darker side of the community exists as well and needs to be discussed.

Independence of the Legal Profession The NDP is making much of a letter to certain lawyer associations and other entities about repealing No Fault. But the same letter mentions reinstating the independence of the legal profession. The NDP who took that away have yet to my knowledge say anything about this. Do you want a legal profession that is independent or one that is state controlled? Yet another reason to vote this radical and frankly unhinged government out of office.