A few days ago, a 67-year-old man paid $4,000 at a Texas auction for a Taylor Swift-signed guitar. A gift for his granddaughter? Not quite. Instead, the clearly addled Trump devotee went onstage and smashed the guitar to pieces with a hammer in front of a cheering crowd of MAGAts, a sickening act of proxy violence for what actually threatens the superstar on a daily basis. Meanwhile, had the $4k been donated elsewhere, it could have helped any number of people, including fellow MAGAts, latest victims of climate catastrophe in the U.S. Southeast.
Politics doesn’t get much more absurd.
Oh, wait… it does. A small-minded person might not know any better than to rent performative anger on someone he considers an adversary. Plus, it’s Texas—climate schlimate. But someone who should know better, like the BC NDP’s David Eby, recently mused that he’d reverse a policy his government has long supported—B.C.’s successful, world-leading carbon-pricing scheme, which all serious economists agree is the most effective way of sending market signals on lowering emissions while causing the least impact to individuals and forging an economic path based on renewable energy—should the Feds drop their requirement for provinces to have a carbon levy. As far as is known, he said this for one craven reason: his union, forestry and oil-and-gas overlords might otherwise move votes to the MAGAt, anti-science, climate-denying BC Conservatives challenging his government in the coming election. This carries the stench of desperation in a time when we can ill-afford to let criminal resource industries dictate the agenda.
And though it comes as no surprise the players behind late-stage capitalism are in lock-step decline with non-representative democracy, when it comes to climate, the stakes have never been higher than in the coming election. (People say this every election, but it’s materially true: as climate change accelerates apace, little to nothing gets done in a four-year cycle and thus, the stakes indeed ratchet up).
It’s too bad, because Eby and the NDP have ostensibly done a decent job of governing through an unprecedented period. Though falling short on some fronts, as all do, B.C.’s provincial government is one of the country’s best, working well with the Feds (for comparison, imagine a Doug Ford- or Danielle Smith-type obstructionist catastrophe here) and keeping the province productive. Like Canada, perennially ranked top-five globally in the indices of living desirability, freedom and safety, B.C. isn’t “broken” as conservatives mewl, nor in need of the destructive, costly, wholesale change they preach (e.g., tearing up agreements with First Nations, tax and service cuts, walking away from climate, less-regulated-but-more-rapacious resource extraction). What B.C. needs, rather, is improvements, in the way we’re represented, in the way evidence and policy work together, and in the way we address the No. 1 existential crisis of our times—one inextricably linked to every other concern.
“More than anything we need to go forward and not backward on climate,” says Mike Douglas, local filmmaker, climate champion and chair of Protect our Winters (POW) Canada. “And the comments from David Eby and lack of action on the environment by the NDP make me fearful they’ll take us backwards as well.”
So, how to keep moving forward with the NDP, which hopefully prevails in the election, taking more than baby steps?
On climate, environment and every social front, the choice in West Van-Sea to Sky seems clear on either a strategic voting or mathematical basis. Vote totals for our three candidates in the last provincial election were thus: the candy-coated-conservative BC Liberals (now the forlorn, adrift BC United) 9,249; BC Greens 9,189 (only 60 votes out!); and BC NDP 6,197 (who was that guy, anyway?). A quick analysis returns the following information: 1) as befits a major national outdoor-tourism destination, we’re a nature-focused, climate-concerned, resource-industry-leery riding where the combined progressive vote was 63 per cent of the total—some 26-per-cent higher than an incumbent winner with significant name-recognition; 2) by splitting the progressive vote, we wasted a chance to elect a candidate who was on the same page about most of the concerns of that 63 per cent, but who would have also advocated for the one thing neither of the big-box parties offered: aggressive climate policy.
That candidate was professional geological, environmental and remediation engineer, one-time Gibson’s city councillor, and BC Green Jeremy Valeriote, who in addition to having the momentum of almost winning last time around, represents the latest vanguard of a constantly increasing Green vote over the past 20 years. And he’s running again.
“The Sea to Sky is ready to vote Green,” he says. “I understand the NDP watched from the opposition bench for 16 years, but an intense need to keep the ‘enemy’ out of government can make you do the wrong thing. Changing your mind on something as critical as carbon pricing because the cons are getting votes on it is a cynical, opportunistic flip-flop that puts bad politics over good policy. I gave Eby credit for strong leadership before, but this was incredibly disappointing.”
In case you forgot (pandemics do that), as the ardently evidence-based, non-polarizing, conscience-of-the-legislature, BC Greens had a hugely positive impact on our democracy through a Confidence and Supply Agreement that brought the NDP to power in 2017: reforming electoral finance to take the big money of unions and corporations out of the political equation; having another referendum on electoral reform (sadly, proportional representation failed because the gov’t wanted it to fail); reforms to lobbying; the Clean BC program, with its climate action and targets, and more.
After the C&S agreement ran its course, Greens remained instrumental in getting the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous People through the legislature, bringing salmon and old growth to the forefront of public discourse, and relentlessly pushing things likely to be adopted in future—free transit, four-day work week, excessive-corporate-profits tax, bringing mental-health services into the health-care system, and a new primary care model based on community health centres.
Yes, there’s an argument for having an MLA in the governing party, but we’ve been fine without one, and Green MLAs have proven how well they can represent independently of big-party orthodoxy (and obligations) to get things done. Though we know the Greens won’t form government, they’re an ever-more-effective part of the mix—whether joining in support of the government of the day or, as the only adults in the room of an otherwise polarized legislature, holding it to account.
“Most people don’t love being told they have to vote a certain way to ‘defeat’ another party,” says Valeriote. “But this isn’t warfare, it’s democracy. People should be able to vote for what they want, and a better future for all. The good news here is that you can vote with your head and your heart! The numbers here are very clear.”
Leslie Anthony is a scientist and author who enjoys connecting the dots to reverse political and media spin.
