THE DIFFERENCE IS LEADERSHIP
- Details
-
Hits: 1156
VICTORIA -- No matter where your ideological loyalties lie, you've got to admit that British Columbia's politics are a mess.
Even in the context of this province's traditionally turbulent political scene, what's happening right now is stranger than fiction.
Only 18 months ago, a euphoric electorate gave Bill Vander Zalm one of the biggest victories ever scored in this province by a political party. Today, many of those who showered the new premier with expressions of loyalty and devotion, are howling for his head.
Two years ago, Brian Smith and Grace McCarthy stood on the stage of the Whistler convention centre and fondly embraced Bill Vander Zalm who had just shattered their hopes of becoming party leader and premier. Today, both of them stand ready to push the premier over the precipice.
Two years ago, Vander Zalm was enjoying a media honeymoon whose sweetness quotient has not had its equal in recent British Columbia history. Today, the relationship between the premier and the media can be best described as a bloody war.
Two years ago, the money boys couldn't shovel the loot fast enough in the direction of Vander Zalm's election machine. Today, corporate donations to the Social Credit Party have dried up.
If anyone had been crazy enough to publicly predict this scenario two years ago, he would have sealed his fate as a credible political observer. He would have been asked to peddle his wild fantasies elsewhere.
What the hell happened? How can any government slide from a position of uncontested strength to one of utter weakness in less than two years?
W.A.C. Bennett's government crumbled under the ravages of old age, not Bennett's but the government's. There comes a time in any government's life when people want a change. For W.A.C.'s Socreds that time had come in 1972. He could have promised and delivered four gold bars to every British Columbian and still, he would have lost the election.
Since Bill Vander Zalm's government is not creaking with old age, no comparisons can be made with W.A.C.'s downfall, and we must look elsewhere.
The fate of Dave Barrett's NDP government holds some clues to what is happening to Vander Zalm now. Barrett's undoing was haste. Having been in the political wilderness for all its life, the NDP tried to change the province in its image in one term. Barrett ignored people's resistance to sudden change and got turfed out in 1975.
Ironically, the two major initiatives which, more than anything else, contributed to the NDP's defeat, are still with us today, the Agricultural Land Reserve and ICBC.
Two items on this government's agenda fall into the category of sudden change ©© privatization and regionalization. Both are capable of inducing massive voter resistance, because both are alien concepts in British Columbia's social, economic and political fabric.
The premier himself said in a recent interview with me that the privatization of highways maintenance alone could bring down the government in the next election. He said it wouldn't, but admitted that the potential was there.
But even if these two government initiatives -- privatization and regionalization -- were capable of defeating the Socreds in the next election, there's still no explanation for the inner turmoil that's tearing the party asunder right now, two years before an election.
The crucial element is leadership. With strong leadership, the most controversial government action might at worst trigger some uncertainty among supporters, but it will not cause the government to flounder. It will not destroy the government party from within.
It will not cause cabinet ministers to jump ship. A strong leader is able to control his cabinet and caucus. He may lead them down the garden path, but lead them he will. There are no defections under a strong leader. No matter how controversial a piece of legislation, the government forces are behind it all the way.
Not every Socred MLA was in favor of Bill Bennett's restraint program, but none dared speak out against it. When the Barrett government introduced a super royalty on minerals, a number of NDP members were less than enthusiastic, but you didn't hear a peep from them.
Yet it's become common for Socred MLAs to speak out against their leader. The difference, therefore, can only be leadership. Few premiers have probably been more well-meaning than Bill Vander Zalm, but he has one fatal flaw. He's not a strong leader. And that's what will bring him down in the end.
BRIAN SMITH COMES UP SMELLING SKUNK CABBAGES
- Details
-
Hits: 1457
VICTORIA -- In the world of Watergates and Iran-Contra scandals, the infiltration last year of one of B.C.'s largest pro-choice abortion movements by private investigators working for the provincial government may not seem earth-shaking.
But in our little corner, where citizens should have the right to expect the best a parliamentary democracy can offer, it will do very nicely, thank you, as an object lesson of what a government should not do.
Here are the facts, according to former attorney general Brian Smith in the Vancouver Sun last week.
In January 1987, Smith authorized an operation that resulted in Under-cover private eyes infiltrating Concerned Citizens for Choice on Abortions, CCCA for short.
At least four private investigators posed as pro-choice advocates and joined CCCA, which claims a B.C. membership of more than 1,000. The detectives worked for Newcombe and Associates Investigations Inc. of Burnaby. The firm was hired by Farris,
Vaughan, Wills and Murphy, a high-powered Vancouver law firm, which, in turn, was retained for the operation by the provincial government.
The detectives have said they taped private conversations during CCCA meetings and strategy sessions and obtained financial records, membership lists and names and addresses of donors to pro-choice causes.
Smith says he launched the operation to prepare for the possibility of free-standing abortion clinics being established in B.C. He says he didn't want to use the police, but needed information to issue an injunction, in case someone opened an illegal abortion clinic.
Smith also says he authorized the strategy because Premier Vander Zalm had expressed concern over the prospect of free-standing abortion clinics in B.C. He says he reported to the premier on several occasions during the investigation.
In his defence, Smith says he feared that the establishment of abortion clinics would result in violence, as it did in other provinces.
Pardon me for being skeptical. It would take a considerable stretch of the imagination to come up with an excuse for this sordid little scheme. The one given by Smith doesn't hold water.
If Smith was, indeed, afraid that the establishment of abortion clinics would spark violence, the logical candidates for an investigation would have been the pro-life groups. They would have been the only ones to respond with violence to abortion clinics. It doesn't take violence to open an abortion clinic.
At the time, however, the premier and Smith were still on the same side, good buddies, comrades in arms. Investigating pro-life organizations to block potential violence would not have pleased the premier. Harassing pro-choice advocates, on the other hand, was bound to earn Smith some Brownie points. Cynical? Not really, just realistic.
I also have my own thoughts about Smith's eagerness to be so forthcoming and open about his role in the operation. He has nothing to lose. He is no longer attorney general. And since the word about the operation is out anyway, he might as well spill the beans and see what it does to the premier's already tarnished image. That's called political expediency or getting even.
What Smith conveniently ignores is that he has to accept responsibility for his actions as attorney general. His initiation of the undercover operation can only be seen as a desire at the time on his part to please his master. And the premier has to share in the responsibility, even though he says he had no knowledge of the operation. The buck stops at his desk.
CCCA spokesman Norah Hutchinson says she is shocked and upset by the news that the organization had been infiltrated and spied upon on the orders of the former attorney general. So she should be.
If Smith's argument that he was prompted by fear of potential violence is deemed valid, there are an awful lot of groups that would be well-advised to look for government spies under their beds.
There are already indications that the government may have used the same law firm to co-ordinate the infiltration of the Solidarity movement in 1983, and even sent articling students to spy on NDP conventions.
Bud Smith, the new attorney general, compares the covert operation to a bungled Keystone Cop caper, but I think it's more than that. It's shameful and it's embarrassing. The escapade has a bad smell to it, and so does the politician who instigated it.
We not only deserve better, we should demand better from our politicians.
THE NEW CREW OF THE TITANIC
- Details
-
Hits: 1184
VICTORIA -- I don't like raining on anyone's parade, but ...twenty-two seamen, some able, others not quite so, let themselves be sworn in last week as officers of the Titanic, and at least some of them must have known that the ship had already struck an iceberg.
Just as I was getting ready to go to Government House to cover the Swearing-in ceremony of the new cabinet, I had a call from an old Socred friend. I should perhaps say from a free-enterprise-oriented friend whose political refuge has always been the Social Credit Party.
"How the hell do we get rid of Vander Zalm?" he wanted to know. I said "what do mean, we?" I reminded him that while I was at the Whistler leadership convention, I certainly wasn't among those who cast ballots. And since I don't live in Richmond, I can't even be accused of having voted for the premier as an MLA in that riding.
There are times when it feels good to be on the outside, looking in. My friend who, by the way, has wondered on previous occasions whether I wasn't just a wee bit too hard on the premier, said the resignation of Grace McCarthy had done it, as far as he was concerned. If McCarthy felt she couldn't be party to the direction in which Vander Zalm was dragging the party, the government and the province, he, for one was reviewing his allegiance to the leader.
Those sentiments will be expressed by a lot of people in the weeks and months to come. Grace is the last person anyone would want to make an enemy of.
When she said she couldn't remain in cabinet without being a team player, she really said she couldn't possibly work against Vander Zalm, while being a cabinet member.
With her resignation from cabinet, McCarthy is free to pursue her own interests, and it is safe to say that they are on a collision course with those of the premier. She can, and probably will, wreak havoc with Vander Zalm's political career.
Grace is also not the only cloud on the premier's horizon. Several powerful businessmen, including Herb Capozzi, Peter Brown, Edgar Kaiser and Herb Doman, have allegedly made it their business to unseat the premier. They are said to be advised in their endeavors by none other than Bill Bennett, former premier of British Columbia.
Bennet, by the way, imposed a two-year oath of silence on himself when he left the political stage. That two years is up in about a month. Stay tuned for some penetrating analysis of the current political scene by the former premier.
The showdown will probably come at the October Social Credit convention in Penticton. If the anti-Vander Zalm camp gets as far as forcing a leadership review, I wouldn't bet a plugged nickel on the premier's political future.
Several observations are to be made with regard to the new cabinet. To start with, the number of cabinet ministers now stands at 22, an increase of six over the previous cabinet. So much for downsizing cabinet and getting government off the backs of he people, one of Vander Zalm's few election promises.
The creation of a ministry of international business and immigration will, no doubt, amuse political observers in the rest of the country. One also doubts the wisdom of appointing Cliff
Michael to the post of government management services. You'll remember he was the guy who tried to unload his own land holdings by passing out business cards to people with whom he had dealings as minister of transportation and highways.
The new cabinet structure is a hybrid, consisting of both the old, traditional line ministries and the new super-ministry concept, built on the premier's regionalization plan. We now have five ministries of state and 17 old-style ministries.
Here's the list of cabinet appointments: Elwood Veitch, minister of regional development and minister of state for Mainland-Southwest; Terry Huberts, minister of state for Vancouver Island-Coast and North Coast, also responsible for parks; Howard Dirks, minister of state for Thompson-Okanagan and Kootenay, also responsible for Crown lands.
Bruce Strachan, minister of state for Cariboo, also responsible for environment; Jack Weisgerber, minister of state for Nechako and Northeast, also responsible for native affairs; Stan Hagen, minister of advanced education and job training, also responsible for science and technology; John Savage, agriculture and fisheries; Bud Smith, attorney general; Tony Brummet, education; Jack Davis, energy, mines and petroleum resources; Mel Couvelier, finance; Dave Parker, forests; Cliff Michael, government management services; Peter Dueck, health, also responsible for seniors; John Jansen, international business and immigration; Lyall Hanson, labor and consumer services; Rita Johnston, municipal affairs, recreation and culture; Claude Richmond, social services and housing; Angus Ree, solicitor general; Bill Reid, provincial secretary and tourism; Neil Vant, transportation and highways.
The ship's crew is now anxiously awaiting orders from the captain to take another run at the iceberg.
TRUST US SAYS THE FOREST INDUSTRY
- Details
-
Hits: 2318
VICTORIA -- If I see that television commercial in which MacMillan Bloedel assures us that the survival of our forests is foremost and forever on the company's mind, I'll get ill.
Nor is Mac Blo the only forest company eager to win public approval with sincere-sounding promises. Take B.C. Forest Products, the company which wants to log part of the Stein Valley, west of Lytton.
The company says it doesn't want a confrontation with opponents of the logging scheme, but wants to build a road into the area exactly where a broadly-based advisory committee said it shouldn't go.
The company says it has a good resource management track record, but didn't do so well when it logged the Lost Creek watershed, north of Mission. The company says it needs the timber in the Stein Valley, even though it accounts for no more than four per cent of the total in the Lillooet Timber Supply Area, an area in which the annual cut right now is 80 per cent over the sustained-yield mark.
Chris O'Connor, woodlands manager for Lytton Lumber, a local firm with an excellent reputation, told me recently in a spirited defence of B.C. Forest Products that one of the problems with the Stein Valley controversy was the emotionalism with which critics pursued their opposition to the plan.
All right, let's keep emotions out of it. Let's not talk about the beauty of the Stein. Let's not wax poetic about the valley's importance to native Indians. Let's just take a look at whether B.C. Forest Products is likely to do what's best for the most people.
O'Connor made a few good points in favor of logging the Stein which I dealt with in a recent column. He wasn't emotional about it. He produced the facts as he saw them. Well, the other side also has people who do their homework. Some of them, too, are coldly analytical. Clinton Webb is one of them.
Webb works as a forestry research consultant for the Western Canadian Wilderness Committee. An eco freak, you say? Well, not quite. Webb has a degree in ecology all right, but for seven years, he worked in the B.C. forest ministry's recreation and silviculture department.
He quit last year because he became convinced that something had to be done about the way in which our forests are managed and the government wasn't doing it. If that makes him an eco freak, so be it. When I talked to O'Connor, he said B.C. Forest Products had an enviable track record in the management of forest resources.
I said at the time that since I couldn't come up with anything to the contrary, I'd let it go for the moment. Webb says the company's record was anything but enviable in the logging of the Lost Creek watershed, near Mission.
Well into logging one of the remaining parts of that watershed, the company, in 1983, asked the forest ministry for permission to significantly increase the rate of cut. The forest service approved the application with only minor changes, despite grave concerns voiced by the provincial fish and wildlife branch and the watershed management branch.
The concerns included fears that the proposed clearcut of two Square-miles might cause flash floods which could cause the demolition of roads and bridges. Some of those fears later proved to be substantiated.
More to the point, a Public Advisory Committee, comprising representatives from the ministries of forests and environment, the federal fisheries ministry, as well as sports fishing organizations and environmental groups, recommended in 1984 that any road into the Stein Valley be located on the south side of the Stein river "to avoid major conflicts with mule deer, goats, grizzly bear and black bear."
What does B.C. Forest Products want to do? It plans to move the road to the north side for about 17 kilometres, in clear contravention of the 1984 recommendation. The point is: how committed to the public's interest is a company which ignores a major recommendation before it even starts?
Finally, I'd like to know just how important the timber in the Stein is to B.C. Forest Products and the communities which have an economic stake in the matter.
With the annual cut in the Lillooet Timber Supply Area running at 80 per cent above sustained-yield level at the moment (partly to combat beetle infestations), does the industry believe that logging the Stein will assure future supply? Or is the Stein to be the price to be extracted in partial payment for past sins?
The Stein Valley controversy isn't over yet. Not by a long shot. In fact, I believe it's barely begun. Stay tuned.
Find out what Beyer had to say
Election are always a hot topic
When is the Budget not a hot search