Pushing boundaries
The BC-EBC posted their prelim report today for SMP and STV ridings today. The report was based on a variety of factors including civic and individual submissions.
Of interest to Burnaby, the Single Transferable Vote lumps Burnaby with New Westminster in a five seat riding and the Single Member Plurality gives Burnaby four whole MLAs as opposed to the current three-plus. Burnaby also seems to have a disproportionate number of submissions from residents when compared with other communities in BC. Is there any explanation for this?
Of interest to Burnaby, the Single Transferable Vote lumps Burnaby with New Westminster in a five seat riding and the Single Member Plurality gives Burnaby four whole MLAs as opposed to the current three-plus. Burnaby also seems to have a disproportionate number of submissions from residents when compared with other communities in BC. Is there any explanation for this?
posted by Robert Burnaby at 7:09 PM
18 Comments:
Burnaby people know politics, but
it is politicla geeks that send in submissions.
Burnaby could use an extra MLA, but Burquitlam spanning Burnaby and Coquitlam and taking in the Cariboo Hill area is a bit much. Cariboo belongs in Edmonds.
But at least The Harry MLA won't need to conveniently move as was
noted earlier in this zoo of a blog.
John Nuraney's riding shrinks a little bit.
Guess that's what happens when you wash knits in cold water. They shrink.
Not sure what you are looking at I see Bloy's old riding stop at North Road on the east and not go into Coquitlam. Does he still live in that riding?
I thought he lived in Coquitlam right now.
Guess Harry will conveniently move back to Burnaby to take the Burnaby Lougheed riding, being the 'preferred candidate' for that new riding.
Harry has lived in Coquitlam, but prior to that lived in Burnaby, so now he's more than likely going to move back to Burnaby so he can be the candidate of choice for that new riding.
Obviously no nomination contest will happen there.
When things like that happen, why bother even going to a Nomination Meeting or being a member of the BC Liberals?
Let's forget about Harry for awhile. He looks as safe as a banker with a new vault.
I think the new Bby-Brentwood is the riding that the Liberals could lose. It now contains at least one more little NDP enclave than it used to and has lost a bit of good turf on the east side.
Bby-Brentwood could be lost, since
it has gained an NDP enclave from
Deer Lake Pkway north to the freeway (the area around Dominion Ave is NDP).
John Nuraney has lost the west part of the South Slope, but has gained a little area along Arcola
south of Imperial. That's a bit of a Liberal / NDP area.
Agree with the previous poster regarding Harry.
Harry is the 'preferred candidate'
in Bby Lougheed. The BC Liberals try to make for a 'democratic' nomination meeting that really isn't worth the time going to.
He gets his friends to run his campaign for him and wins and tries to be the Baron of Burnaby once again. One of his friends ends up being his Constituency Assistant.
Nothing worth discussing there.
Time to move on to more important ridings such as Richard's and John's.
The STV boundaries would apply only if the STV referendum set for 2009 passes.
If it does, then the boundaries would set for the 2013 election.
Personally I wouldn't vote for it, because having several MLA's representing Burnaby / New West isn't what I would want.
There's going to be turf wars going on if that passes, and most likely in our area the region would end up with both Liberal and NDP representation. That would be interesting, as to whom to go to, and who gets to be at the ribbon cutting ceremony for the new Gateway overpass on Wayeburne over the freeway.
Then of course there's the turf wars that would no doubt occur within each party during nomination time.
A system where the preferential ballot to determine a single member MLA would be best. This is what's used in Australia to vote for elected MLA's and Senators.
You still get to choose your first second and third etc. choices, but only one person ends up the winner.
Keep it simple and easy to use.
Here here ........ I am all for a preferential ballot.
Unfortunately the NDP and Greens would never agree as they will find it hard to win over 50% in most ridings.
They can if they actually do the work to get there.
Both might not have fifty percent support in most ridings.
The NDP's claim to fame has always been sliding in with the least number of votes. For example Glen Clark.
Not always.
Glen Clark was an anomaly within the NDP and they know it. You'll never seen another leader like him again, the NDP have enough trouble with Carole James.
But on the other side of the ledger, the BC Liberals are getting too cocky and arrogant and should be 'running scared' but they run things like they own the ridings, which in reality, they do not.
In fact Burnaby Edmonds has been NDP alot longer than it ever was being BC Liberal or previously Social Credit.
Burnaby North up until 2001, had never been anything except NDP.
Burnaby Willingdon turned over from NDP to something else in 1979, and again in 1983, and again in 1991, and once again in 2001.
The BC Liberals and previously Social Credit rarely reached that magical 50% vote either even though it did translate into a win.
The Greens can split the vote as they did in Edmonds in 2005, therefore ensure that they are heard.
It's called changing demographics my son. Whether you want to believe it or not rising housing costs have mean the central part of Greater Vancouver is moving away from the NDP's non business and union oriented way of thinking.
The only areas that the NDP might see a base and/or increase in support is the lower cost areas of PoCo and Surrey and that wont probably last very long.
Of course you will continue to be in denial.
It's also voter preference.
There's quite a few union people who have expensive homes.
If people think that union members live in the more grubby part of town, there's a real problem there.
There has been instances where even free enterprisers have not supported a free enterprise political party. One only has to think back to 1991, and 1996 (the time when Gordon Campbell was going through his first provincial election, and bombed).
Never get cocky and arrogant in politics.
Always run scared.
Run as if this was your last time as MLA.
For some current Liberal MLAs, it very well may be ;-)
If you knew it was going to be your last time as MLA - wouldn't that tend to make you more arrogant, not less? (As in, "I'm going out anyway, so I'll do as I please...)???
On another note, why does Burnaby keep electing the same NDP types in Council and Mayoralty positions, given they don't vote overwhelmingly in that left wing direction for the other governmental elections? And when's the next civic election again? Is there an organized effort yet underway to unseat more of the lefty incumbents, or is it too early? (pardon my ignorance guys)...
"On another note, why does Burnaby keep electing the same NDP types in Council and Mayoralty positions, given they don't vote overwhelmingly in that left wing direction for the other governmental elections?"
Because 'left wing' and 'right wing' doesn't matter too much for Joe and Mary Sixpack. Most of those who are re-elected are re-elected because of their work in the community, but also the BCA is far more organized and and a better civic group than what's been the alternative in the past 17 years. The alternative groups
tend to spend alot of time tearing themselves apart.
"And when's the next civic election again? Is there an organized effort yet underway to unseat more of the lefty incumbents, or is it too early? "
November 2008 is the civic election.
It is a bit early to start, but
some people want to get their candidates in early.
But that doesn't nessesarily translate to a win.
Big problem is that the civic election turns into an "us vs. them" (NDP vs. the BC Liberals),
which ends up being the average
voter doesn't really care about that.
There's not much in terms of 'left wing' politics or 'right wing' politics at the civic level.
Most people tend to vote for the individual candidate anyway, You'll see BC Liberals vote for BCA candidates, and NDPers vote for
candidates who are federal Liberal
or Conservative.
They vote for the person, not the civic group.
What matters are scheduled garbage pick up, open recreation centres,
making sure the fire department has
enough hose for the trucks, and making sure the dog poo is picked up in the park, recreational facilities, and well stocked
libraries, and making sure there's
enough cash in the drawer to pay for the new desks in the engineering department.
The philosophical differences and the power plays doesn't matter.
Well it seems to matter to the backroom boys, but the average voter could care less about their
fortunes anyway.
"If you knew it was going to be your last time as MLA - wouldn't that tend to make you more arrogant, not less? (As in, "I'm going out anyway, so I'll do as I please...)??? "
Not nessesarily. Some MLA's are arrogant and get re-elected.
Gordon Campbell is a good example as is David Chudnovski (NDP). Glen
Clark was a classic example.
Glen Clark won because of an anomaly. He actually lost the election but his support was spread out differently. Not any brilliant doing by him but just the way the dice rolled in the election.
"Glen Clark won because of an anomaly. He actually lost the election but his support was spread out differently. Not any brilliant doing by him but just the way the dice rolled in the election. "
Glen Clark won because of an anomaly, true, but it wasn't all
his..
Glen Clark won also because Gordon Campbell made some rather stupid errors.
It was supposed to be the election that the BC Liberals were to win, and win big, but they didn't.
If they did, the BC taxpayers would have enjoyed an earlier start to the prosperity, and
no Fastcats.
Post a Comment
<< Home