There is one problem with politics. Politicians are always working with divided loyalty. On one hand, they want to do what is best for their constituency. On the other hand, they want to get re-elected. In a simpler world, this would mean the same thing. In the complex world of modern politics, it doesn’t always work out that way. There are so many different constituencies in a province or a nation that what benefits one is guaranteed to be to the detriment of another. And of course there’s the third motivation: their own egos. Never discount the self-interest of someone who chooses to spend a career in the eye of the public.
Political Motivation.
There are leaders of both the right and the left whose political theories I do not agree with, yet I respect them because they truly believe that their way is the best way for the country.
There are also political leaders, notably ones whose training is in the media, whose only skills are those that get them elected. They have only a peripheral interest in the weal of their constituency, because their total focus is on getting into power and staying there. It is these leaders who make important decisions influenced by the basest of political motives.
The Site C Dam in Northern B. C.
Construction of this project has proceeded under great protest, mostly from the residents of the region around the site. And they have their arguments, some of which are persuasive. The governing party in BC has been pushing this project, and they have their own arguments, which are also meaningful.
The Political Timeline
But the part of it that I object to is the motivation of the government. They are pushing a huge, expensive project against the wishes of a percentage of their constituents. What is driving them at the moment? They admit it themselves. To hurry the project to the point where it is too late to shut it down, before the provincial election takes place. They want to win, even if they lose. They want to force their will on the province, even if the voters reject them.
Think that one over a moment. Where is the benefit in this approach? Where is the democracy? How does it help the people of the province make the right decision? It doesn’t. It helps a small number of people who have their egos deeply involved in winning. Winning what? The satisfaction of winning, I suppose. I have news for the Premier of the province; the government of B. C. was not set up solely to provide you with photo opportunities.
Personally, I am divided on the construction of a huge hydroelectric project at this point in the development of our society. I have listened to all the arguments, and I cannot trust the rhetoric of either side enough to accept their data at face value. As I mention above, I distrust the present government because I suspect there is more ego than conscience in their approach. I also distrust the NIMBY tunnel vision of the opponents of the project.
I am in the strange position of supporting the left-wing party, who want the decision taken out of the hands of government and put into the responsibility of the BC Utilities Commission, (getting the government out of business) against the right–wing party, who want government to have complete control of the process (thus wanting government to interfere more in business). A complete doctrinal flip-flop, which could be seen as the party in power wanting the government to have more power, and the party wanting to be in power wooing votes by promising to give power away.
Which once again reinforces the contention that all the decisions about this megaproject are being made on a strictly political basis. Not only that, but on the most self-serving of political motivations: to get elected.
Historically Speaking
The first Peace River Dam in the 1960s was, in retrospect, a great triumph of foresight. B. C. rides on the carbon-free power it creates to this day. (I did consider it rather over the top for the premier to name it after himself, complete with three initials. He did build it with our money, after all).
However, that was 50 years ago, and technology is changing rapidly. It occurs to me that the huge line loss (in the range of 1% per 150 km) might make even this powerful a project over a thousand kilometres from its markets to be inefficient, compared to smaller, closer sources. I wonder whether a forced dependence on an outmoded technology will allow B. C. to slip behind in the development of more modern power sources.
How Democratic Are We?
On the other hand, an observation occurs to me. It is pretty well accepted that one of the problems of our society is the small number of people who are in control of a huge percentage of our money. The 99% of the population who don’t have control feel this way. Fair enough. We should do something about it.
Now look at our country from another perspective. It is also true that a small number of people are in control of a huge percentage of our land. Applying the same rules, this should be considered an equal problem. Well?
Members of that minority tell us that they live on the land, and they have a much better idea of how it should be managed for the benefit of all. But the people who control the majority of our money will make the same claim. Fair is fair.
The Bottom Line
I don’t envy our political leaders their task in balancing all these conflicting demands. What I do object to is the misuse of political power: not for the good of the people, but for the sake of staying in power. And if there is ever a movement to name the new dam after Christie Clark, the Photo Op Queen, well, (to make a very politically incorrect joke) I’ll volunteer to light the fuse.
(John Horgan Photo – Vancouver Sun)