Mediaboss Marketing

Nearly $1 million in contributions were deposited into the B.C. Liberal partys bank account just three days after the May 9 election, reinforcing the perception that this province is the wild west when it comes to its unfettered political donations.

The most recent donors are the whos who of corporate B.C. with real-estate developers leading the way followed by construction and forestry companies, big oil, big banks and big law firms.

And, amid a slew of $25,000 donations, theres one from an unnumbered company. A corporate search turned up no information on the B.C.-registered company, not even a mailing address.

No doubt, Liberals are anxious to restock their campaign war chest before the new government rewrites legislation governing both contributions and campaign spending.

Campaign financing reform was one of the non-negotiable demands of the B.C. Green party, which holds the balance of power and has agreed to support a minority New Democratic Party government.

The other reason is that a government with a one-seat majority is at daily risk of toppling, despite the brave words from John Horgan and Andrew Weaver that their alliance is intended to last 4 years.

Its unlikely that the Liberals bank account was empty post election. By the end of 2016, it had already raised $7.6 million more than enough even with B.Cs unusually high spending limit of $4.9 million. Of course, individual candidates are also allowed to spend up to $77,675.

Still, its clear from the Liberals online donor disclosures that in the past month Christy Clarks party has been doing what it does best raising money.

May 12 was a bountiful day for the bank account, according to the Liberals disclosure for the week ending May 19. Just over $900,000 from 437 donors was deposited. Of those, 84 donors gave more than $1,000.

Seven of the 10 largest donations came from developers, led by Richmonds Rick Ilich at $100,000. Norman Cressey gave $75,000 in $25,000 increments through three numbered companies, while Wesgroup Properties (owned by the Weesik family) also donated $75,000.

Maple Ridge Plaza Properties gave $50,000 and three other developers donated $25,000 each BlueSky Properties, Bosa Properties and Reliance Properties. Shato Holdings gave $20,000.

Other notable donors are: law firms Fasken, Martineau, DuMoulin LLP and Farris, Vaughn, Wills and Murphy LLP, Seaspan, Neptune Terminals, Toronto-Dominion Bank, CIBC Head Office, Chevron Canada, Encana, Enbridge, Canadian Pacific Railways, Buron Healthcare (which runs care homes in partnership with Interior Health) and the B.C. Professional Fire Fighters Association.

The following week, there were more deposits 856 in all. Most were under $100, which added up to roughly $60,000. The exception was a $5,000 donation from A&W Canada CEO Paul F.B. Hollands.

Its not clear whether these reported donations were made before or after the election. Party spokesman Emile Scheffel said contributions are only recorded by deposit date.

He noted in an email, All contributions we receive of more than $250 are reported to Elections B.C. as part of our Annual Financial Report and, if applicable, our Election Financing Report, which covers contributions deposited during the writ period up to and including May 9.

Aside from that reporting requirement, there is no rule about how much can be raised either during a campaign or between campaigns.

While the Liberals voluntarily disclose their donations online, the other parties dont. So, well have to wait to see how they fared in the money sweepstakes.

Still, what we do know is that as soon as the NDP forms government, it will likely put at least as much energy into ending 16 years of the Liberals pay-for-play system and reforming the election spending laws as it does raising money.

Exactly how theyll do that hasnt been determined. But it will be one of the first issues that the Green-backed New Democrats will tackle.

Meantime, it bears pointing out that for a political party to deposit a million bucks a few days after an election is impressive at anytime and especially following a defeat. But in the coming weeks, there may be fertile ground for the Liberals to raise even more among the free-enterprisers who are deeply suspicious of socialist New Democrats, let alone tree-hugging Greens.

Those fears were likely stoked with the release of the NDP and Greens ambitious and sweeping alliance agreement that includes: doing everything possible to stop construction of Kinder Morgans Trans Mountain pipeline expansion; a review of both Site C dam and a Massey tunnel replacement; increasing the carbon tax; potentially raising the minimum wage; and adding new social programs including $10-a-day child care.

That potential for raising even more money may help explain why Christy Clark is in no hurry to hand over government. Her decision to recall the legislature and force the alliance to defeat the Liberals in the legislature buys the party more time for fundraising.

It may also buy Clark time. Shes a superb fundraiser, a skill that may keep the knives of disaffected Liberals sheathed at least for the short term.

dbramham@postmedia.com

twitter.com/daphnebramham

B.C. Liberals contributions of $1,000 or more in the week ending May 19

AmountDonor

100,000Rick Ilich

75,000Norman Cressey (through three numbered companies)

75,000Wesgroup

50,000Maple Ridge Plaza Properties

30,000Burnco Rock Products

25,000BlueSky Properties

25,000Bosa Properties

25,000Reliance Properties

25,000318219 BC Ltd.

24,000Fasken, Martineau, DuMoulin LLP

20,000Laurmel Holdings Ltd

20,000Shato Holdings

15,000Progressive Waste Solutions Canada

15,000Seaspan ULC

15,000The Arrow Group of Companies

15,000The Toronto-Dominion Bank

10,000Pacific Customs Brokers Ltd

10,000Quantum Properties

10,000Landcor Data Corporation

10,000Lake Excavating

10,000James A Allard

10,000In Re Capital Inc.

10,000Farris Vaughan, Wills & Murphy

10,000Chevron Canada Limited

10,000Buron Healthcare Ltd.

10,000BC Professional Fire Fighters Assoc

9,875North Shore Studios Management Ltd

9,500Horizon Construction Management Ltd

8,500London Air Services Ltd

8,000Intracorp Projects Ltd

7,500Carrier Lumber

7,500Joey Restaurant Group

5,000BA Blacktop

5,000Bayshore Healthcare

5,000Berezan (Juniper) Entrerprises Ltd.

5,000Burke Mountain Ltd Partnership

5,000Canadian Pacific Railway

5,000Canoe Forest Products

5,000Cascade Aerospace Inc

5,000Chalk Hill Investments Ltd.

5,000CIBC Head Office

5,000 Downie Timber Ltd.

5,000Encana Corp Ltd.

5,000Gorman Brothers

5,000Inwest Investments Ltd.

5,000Kirmac Automotive Collision

5,000Neptune Terminals

5,000Pageant Holdings Ltd.

5,000Persis Holdings Ltd.

5,000Steve Evans

5,000Triple E Ventures

5,000Wesbild Holdings

4,000Steelhead LNG

4,000Harbour Air

4,000Centra Construction Group

3,500Barry Marsden

3,400Wazuku Advisory Group

2,500Progressive Holdings Ltd

2,500Arin Industries Inc

2,500Sharon E White Law Corp

2,000Geoffrey Cowper

2,000BC Fresh Vegetables Inc

1,800William B. Fox

1,750Boralex Inc

1,500Yaletown Brewing Co.

1,150Bobleeco Family Holdings Ltd.

1,150Pencor Capital Corp

1,150Blue Grass Holdings Ltd.

1,150361036 BC Ltd

1,150502178 BC Ltd

1,000Portrait Homes

1,000Randy F Bartsch

1,000Nelson Management & Construction

Read this article:
BC Liberals deposit close to $1 million in donations three days after election - Calgary Herald

NewsBusters (blog)

USA Today: Trump Driving Liberals to Yoga NewsBusters (blog) This news comes to us by way of the May 29 USA Today in which Paul Singer reports that the election of Donald Trump has driven many liberals to take up yoga as a means of escape or to energize themselves for the "resistance" ahead. So perhaps those ...

Read more here:
USA Today: Trump Driving Liberals to Yoga - NewsBusters (blog)

VANCOUVER- British Columbia's minority Green Party on Monday struck a deal with the left-leaning New Democrats to govern Canada's western-most province, a move that casts doubt on the future of key energy projects from firms such as Kinder Morgan Inc.

Announcement of the partnership ends a stalemate that emerged last week when the final tally of votes from a May 9 election stripped Liberal premier ChristyClarkof her majority. She will now leave office.

The two parties said they will disclose details of their plans on Tuesday.

Green leader Andrew Weaver did not reveal what the pact says about Kinder Morgan's plans to twin its Trans Mountain crude oil pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific coast. Both parties oppose the $7.4 billion project.

"This issue of Kinder Morgan is one that was critical to us and I think you'll see that reflected in tomorrow's announcement," Weaver told a news conference with NDP leader John Horgan.

Clarkhad backed Trans Mountain as well as liquefied natural gas (LNG) projects.

Kinder Morgan's Canadian unit is expected to debut on Tuesday on the Toronto Stock Exchange in an initial public offering to part-finance Trans Mountain. The company did not immediately respond to a request for comment, although it acknowledged last week the political climate was "not ideal."

Any move by the new government to block Kinder Morgan will be a blow to federal Liberal Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, whose government approved the project last November.Clark's Liberals are unrelated to Trudeau's party.

Trudeau's spokeswoman Andree-Lyne Halle said the federal government would continue to "work constructively with provincial and territorial governments on the issues that matter to Canadians."

Trudeau says the Alberta energy industry needs the pipeline to boost exports to Asia and reduce reliance on the U.S. market. Opponents say the risks of a spill are too large.

"We will continue to do what we have done all the way, which is standing up for Alberta's best interests. That includes Kinder Morgan and making sure we have access to tidewater for our products," said Alberta Deputy Premier Sarah Hoffman.

Hoffman said Alberta would intervene in lawsuits against the project.

While there is some dispute over whether British Columbia can actually formally block a pipeline project, it can raise multiple hurdles like denying local construction permits that could effectively make it impossible to build.

FIRST MINORITY GOVT SINCE 1952

Horgan has also expressed reservations about a $27 billion liquefied natural gas terminal that Malaysia's Petronas wants to build in northern British Columbia. Petronas was not immediately available for comment.

The political agreement reached between the Greens and New Democrats still needs to be voted on by the NDP caucus on Tuesday. If they agree to create a minority government, it would be the province's first in 65 years.

The Greens and the New Democrats together have 44 of the 87 seats in the provincial legislature. Under the terms of the deal the Greens promise not to defeat the New Democrats for the full four-year term of the new parliament.

Richard Johnston, a professor of political science at the University of British Columbia, said the announcement was "a revolutionary moment in B.C.'s politics. This would be the first minority that lasts more than a year."

The Liberals have ruled the province for 16 years.

Clarkissued a statement saying the government had "a responsibility to carefully consider our next steps" and would have more to say on Tuesday.

Her obvious options include resigning, or hanging onto power until she presents her formal agenda to the new legislature. The Greens and NDP would then immediately vote to bring her down.

View original post here:
Future of energy projects uncertain as BC Liberals lose majority - BNN

"The word liberal in this context has nothing to do with today's partisan language, but refers instead to the Latin root, pertaining to liberty. And at the heart of liberty in the Western world has been freedom of speech. From the beginning, people understood that this meant protecting and listening to speech with which you disagreed," Zakaria argued.

That means, he said, not drowning out "the ideas that we find offensive."

In addition, Zakaria noted what he called "an anti-intellectualism" on the left.

"It's an attitude of self-righteousness that says we are so pure, we're so morally superior, we cannot bear to hear an idea with which we disagree," he said.

"Liberals think they are tolerant but often they aren't," he added.

No one, he continued, "has a monopoly on right or virtue."

In fact, it is only by being open to hearing opposing views that people on both sides of the political spectrum can learn something, Zakaria said.

"By talking seriously and respectfully about agreements and disagreements, we can come together in a common conversation," he said.

"Recognizing that while we seem so far apart, we do actually have a common destiny."

More:
Fareed Zakaria: Liberals think they're tolerant, but they're not - CNN

A Gumatj dancer from East Arnhem Land performs at the opening ceremony of last weeks convention on constitutional recognition in Mutitjulu, near Uluru. Photograph: Calla Wahlquist for the Guardian

A constitutionally enshrined Indigenous voice in parliament is unlikely to ever be accepted by the majority in the Liberal party, the Institute of Public Affairs executive director has warned.

John Roskam, the head of the influential libertarian thinktank, rejected the proposal put forward by the Referendum Council at a meeting of more than 250 community leaders at Uluru, labelling it an attempt to enshrine racial division in the constitution.

Conservative Coalition MPs including Craig Kelly and George Christensen have lined up to criticise the proposal, but it was supported by MP Julian Leeser, suggesting the issue will be highly divisive in the party room.

In a statement on Friday the Uluru conference said Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders were the sovereign first peoples of Australia and a significant practical change was needed, not a symbolic reform. In addition to the proposed Indigenous voice in parliament, it called for a commission that would lead to a treaty.

In 2015 the IPA campaigned against constitutional recognition, arguing instead that all references to race should be removed from the constitution to assert the principle of equality.

On Monday Roskam told Guardian Australia parliament represented all Australians and the suggestion of a separate Indigenous voice was just as offensive as to give people a special say due to their religion, or gender or anything else.

In reality, all policy decisions are Indigenous policy decisions, because Indigenous Australians are Australians.

Roskam said that the moral force [of the Indigenous body] would be very significant, in effect making it difficult to override it, describing it as an effective veto on matters of policy such as the Northern Territory intervention.

On the proposed treaty, Roskam argued it was impossible for the crown representing all Australians to make an agreement with a subset of Australians, the Indigenous nations.

The idea of a treaty is radical identity politics. In any case a country cannot have a treaty with itself.

He said the point of the 1967 referendum, in which Australia resolved to count Indigenous people in the census, was to make us all the same but the recognition proposal would do the opposite.

All parties should focus on what unites Australians and brings us together. These proposals are unlikely to ever be accepted by the majority of the Liberal party.

The IPA is highly influential in the Coalition, leading campaigns against superannuation reform that resulted in major changes to the governments election policy and forcing reform of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act back on to the agenda.

On Monday Ken Wyatt, the commonwealths first Indigenous minister, told ABC AM he was extremely confident the Uluru talks would lead to a referendum on recognition next year.

Wyatt said scare campaigns had the potential to derail the process and advocated an awareness program that informs all Australians of the intent behind the set of words what it means and that its not in enshrining special privileges.

But it is in fact recognising the reality that Aboriginal and Torres Islander people lived on this continent long before settlement, and that Australias history should be reflected in that statement within the constitution.

Leeser, a Sydney Liberal MP and constitutional conservative, welcomed the Indigenous delegates strong rejection of earlier proposals for purely symbolic recognition or anti-discrimination reforms which he characterised as a one-clause bill of rights.

Leeser said the government should consider a representative body if it did not have voting rights or a right of veto. He said the Liberal party traditionally had been opposed to a treaty but a settlement could be contemplated.

The conservative Liberal backbencher Craig Kelly said the Indigenous body in parliament would be very divisive in the community and many in the Coalition party room would be very reluctant to pursue the full recommendations agreed at Uluru.

He said there were now a number of Indigenous MPs and they were a strong voice for their community.

Influential backbench MP George Christensen told Sky News it was dangerous to give one group special privileges that no other group in the country has.

Christensen said he would vote against the proposal in both the lower house and in any referendum, saying recognition was segregating us.

He said the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, which was abolished by the Howard government, was a demonstrable failure ... [that] elevated one section of our society to a special basis where there were special policies in place for them.

Christensen said that government should work for practical outcomes for Indigenous Australians, such as jobs, health and education rather than the academic, elitist issue of recognition.

Cape York Institute senior policy adviser, Shireen Morris, said the proposal was not about dividing Australians but creating a fairer relationship between Indigenous peoples and the Australian government.

Morris said parliament already makes Indigenous-specific laws and could do so without the race power, as it had done for the Northern Territory intervention.

All this proposal says is: of course Indigenous should have a fair say and a fair voice in policies that affect them.

Morris said the objection to the crown making a treaty with itself were philosophical but in practice the government enters agreements all the time, including native title agreements.

The Referendum Council has been contacted for comment.

Read more from the original source:
Liberals won't accept Indigenous recognition model, Institute of Public Affairs warns - The Guardian