Still a PPC fan: INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM - PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY - FAIRNESS - RESPECT
Clear thinking, plain speaking
Previously: PPC Candidate in Vancouver East
I am running for office because I think Jenny Kwan needs a new job. Perhaps in the private sector, where she is not spending taxes, but just paying them like the rest of us.
With Jenny Kwan and the NDP in office in East Vancouver for over 7 elections, combined with left leaning city councils for so long, it is time to change strategies for the good of the area and its people.
We are a divided population that needs to unite around a common vision of lower taxes, better city. No more chaos on the streets.
The provincial NDP caused the chaos to spiral out of control by closing Riverview with no alternative plan for people who truly cannot be safely independent. The solution starts with solutions for those people, and those solutions are not to leave them on the downtown eastside.
And we need to talk about the mental health of young people as they grow up.
I have lived in East Vancouver for over 25 years and I was an involved parent in local schools. I always stood for lower taxes, better teaching, more respect for parents. Jenny Kwan instead supported higher taxes, worse teaching, because she always sided with the teachers’ union against the parents, against kids.
At one public meeting, I stood up to talk about better teaching, not more funding, and nearly 1000 union people stood up and shouted me down. Jenny Kwan stood with them, shaking her finger at me and yelling. But I was saying what many families, including Chinese families, told me they want.
I later went to court, self-representing, against the teachers’ union to support parent and family rights
At an all-candidates' meeting held by LOCO and the Strathcona BIA on Monday, October 7th, a question came from the CEO of the Culture Crawl asking what the parties would do to support studio space for artists (paraphrasing here).
I didn't get the mike for that question, but it's an important one. It's important because there is a fine line between government supporting the arts, and government controlling the arts.
Government should never control what art gets made.
It's my position on housing (see below) that federal housing dollars should not necessarily flow into the city; that the city needs to do a far better job of handling its real estate markets, and it is not for taxpayers in the rest of Canada to bail Vancouver out of its self-imposed luxury-housing-as-a-commodity trap. We wouldn't bail Moncton out of a similar problem, and they shouldn't have to help us.
And I would extend that to studio space. The arts need to be creative (see what I did there??) about funding while protecting artistic freedom. If taxpayers are paying for it to be made, it's not art, it's a public service.
From time to time, the government should buy art. The government should commission art. The government can give art vouchers (credit an old associate for that idea). But direct funding of art is a slippery slope that should probably not be embarked on.
I have a long term interest in art marketing, and am an enthusiastic consumer of local art. I live in the community of the Culture Crawl and have attended it since its inception. I see what artists and art organizations need to learn to stay at the cutting edge.
Government funding is a buffer that dulls the sharp mindset that artists need to have.
The Green Party is all in for "renewable energy." Well, the wind and sun are renewable, but the physical infrastructure to turn them into electricity isn't: solar panels last maybe 25 yrs max, turbines even less. Both use copious quantities of rare earth metals, and these metals come overwhelmingly from China.
Therefore, a change from fossil fuels, including natural gas, to full electrification will make us fully dependent on China for energy. Being fully dependent on electricity for everything in our homes and offices - heat, light, cooking, refrigeration, communication - is bad enough. When the power goes out, having some gas appliances at least leaves us with hot water, cooking, and heat.
Meanwhile, if China wants our gas, it will find a way to get it, including with political or economic initiatives.
We need to develop our gas resources, including building pipelines, for geopolitical reasons among others. We have the highest environmental standards in the world and can build them best.
Jenny Kwan’s project about commemorating the war history between China and Japan is divisive for Canada. What kind of Canada will we have if Japanese and Chinese kids growing up here are being taught to hate each other? This is the wrong message in a new country.
The NDP is tyrannical and intolerant. The NDP leader Jagmeet Singh wanted our PPC party leader, Maxime Bernier, to be kept out of the leaders debates. He wanted to shut him up.
And you will get shut up if you talk frankly about the DTES. The hidden addiction problem on the DTES is an addiction to government money, and an addiction to easy votes that come from promising miraculous solutions.
The NDP is an enabler: an enabler of addiction, and enabler of letting chaos grow to argue for more funding, and enabler of cheap identity politics that pretends to care but never cares enough to help people succeed.
Federal attention is required to the international flow of drugs and money, but federal funding should not flow into the DTES where it will just draw more people here. The money needs to go where it will reduce the pressure on this area. People who live here deserve a peaceful orderly life like people who live elsewhere in the city.
Individual freedom, with personal responsibility, fairness, and respect. These are Maxime Bernier’s principles, and those of the People’s Party of Canada.
Those principles will help ordinary people to have the conversations that matter in Vancouver East.
Tens of thousands of Canadians have self-represented in courts across the country, and been absolutely hammered by the elite insider culture of law as enabled by a judiciary I won't stop short of calling corrupt.
Tens of thousands of Canadians have been put through hell in family courts, had what could be salvaged of their relationships with each other and their children savaged by profiteering lawyers.
Tens of thousands of Canadians have been through the tribunal system, in which administrative decision makers are given the power of judges with none of the constraints and obligations of judicial independence. With tribunal decisions granted far too much deference by the courts, tribunal-manipulation has become an easy way to shape the law, doing an end run around politics.
Litigation has become so expensive that ordinary people can't litigate in the first place, and can't appeal if they get a bad decision, which they frequently do. The appeals process has failed anyway - parochial appeal courts just sing from the same songsheet as the lower courts.
The judiciary has become activist, and captive to ideology, incapable of real independence.
I am the only federal candidate with a plan for legal system reform. The PPC is the only party that offers a realistic chance of reform being enacted. Here is my proposal: https://ctjester.blogspot.com/2019/10/access-to-justice-legal-aid-federal.html
There is a fabulous article in Quillette about handling problems like Vancouver's Downtown eastside: https://quillette.com/2019/10/08/buying-fentanyl-on-the-streets-of-san-francisco-an-interview-with-heather-macdonald/
This article includes all the reasons why policy-making to date has not led to improvements in the area, but rather continued deterioration and human degradation.
It is almost irresistible to set policies and create agencies that target "the most vulnerable" people; those on the street, in tents, at the bottom of the totem pole.
But every time you pluck someone from the bottom of the heap, that is where you create a vacancy in the local culture. Doing this at scale effectively rewards people who have completely lost civility, and incentivizes other people to degrade themselves similarly.
To effectively intervene in a culture, once certainly needs to look at emergency situations, but one also needs to look away from the loudest situations and at those who are coping pretty well.
Offering services to people who are succeeding, to allow them to move out of the DTES culture, creates space & incentive for everyone else to push themselves to be better.
Addicts can't be forced to improve, they can only be incentivized to do so. That reality needs to be integrated into DTES planning & management.
Free of baggage, flexible and original: talking about problems the other parties have created and now won't admit.
Special interests - local, national, or international - should not control Canadian politics or shape Canadian law.
Crisis thinking creates a window for special interests.
Canada's freedoms cannot be taken for granted. The most equal and tolerant society in the world, and the fairest system of laws, won't survive on hope alone.
WE ARE NOT making extravagant promises to buy votes, and then rigidly controlling MPs to vote in accordance with them.
Maxime has four core principles around which People's Party MPs can have free debates and freedom to vote: freedom, responsibility, fairness, respect.
Free discussions take guts. Some things, people are afraid to talk about. Others, they only dare to express one opinion. We believe abortion, immigration, climate fear-mongering, and other contentious topics deserve open air.
Comforting little lies. Is that what Vancouver East voters want? It’s what we’ve been getting from the NDP for decades.
NDP says: Housing pressure can be alleviated by bringing federal money in to build social housing.
I say: until East Vancouverites want to pay taxes to build housing in Brandon, Grande Prairie, or Moncton, we need to solve our own housing problems. This means holding civic and provincial governments to account where they are wilfully blind and outright corrupt. We hire and fire at the ballot box, but we hold politicians accountable in court. It’s the job of citizens to be vigilant, vote wisely, and take legal action where necessary.
I also say: social housing disrupts the housing market, pushing it toward gentrification. When the government acts as developer or landlord, it outcompetes private landlords to the point of discouraging middle-class rental housing providers. So developers build only for the luxury market, which draws overseas buyers, and paradoxically, the only private landlords that stay in business are those who cut corners to become slumlords.
Solution: mostly, the city needs to come to grips with two decades of relying on higher levels of government to bail them out for bad decisions. For the feds to bail the city out yet again is a perverse incentive for the city to keep up the frenzied money-grabbing and empire-building that passes for land-use management and the building permits process in this city, as exercised by both municipal and provincial governments.
What can a federal government do?
a) decrease immigration to reduce demand, b) fulfill the federal role in currency, banking, or money-laundering; c) reform the legal system to ensure that citizens can take their governments to court where needed.
Only the PPC will refuse to kick the housing can further down the road.
The presumed virtues of a national pharmacare program form yet another set of comforting little lies the NDP tells voters, delivered by Jenny Kwan with her trademark fake compassion. "It's the humanity!"
Anyone with real compassion would look deeper at whether imposing the weight of yet another huge and distant bureaucracy will actually benefit those among the least powerful people in the country: people whose wellbeing truly depends on expensive medication.
As a former health care worker, I look at this issue from the bedside perspective. One of the most frightening phenomena we see in Canada today is the spectre of the overmedicated senior; drugged often to the point of incompetence and loss of independence by careless or outright callous prescribing practices. Prescription practices are also at the root of much of opioid addiction, and the emergence of antibiotic resistant bacteria.
Even if you scratch the topic of vaccines, there too we see pharmaceutical interests influencing individual patient care and public policy in a direction that is not as clearly in the public interest as the pro-vaccine lobby would like us to believe.
On any contentious topic, Job One of a democratic government is the protection of fundamental freedoms. When you throw large amounts of money into the public arena - as a national pharmacare program would do - it's always the biggest dogs that get it. The costs of that program are far more likely to boomerang back as taxes that hit hardest at the same patients who are now suffering under onerous drug costs.
All that said, Canada relies on the research & development done by pharmaceutical companies & must enable them to make a living. But this does not require a national pharmacare program.
None of the objectives of good medical care, efficient government, or good business practices are furthered by creating a national pharmacy bureaucratic empire. This will not reduce prices, and it will reduce individuals' control over their health care choices.
The PPC will keep its eye on the prize of good care, efficiently delivered as needed by the properly accountable level of government
Help us get the word out with flyers, signs, and ads, or contact us to volunteer
Make cheque payable to: Official Agent for Karin Litzcke
and contact us for pick-up or mail to
P.O. Box 88562 Chinatown,
Vancouver, BC V6A 4A7
up to $20 to be accepted in person
Our party is building from the ground up to disrupt the entrenched parties. Your support is needed to renew Canadian democracy!
Maxime Bernier has served in three cabinet portfolios:
Industry, Foreign Affairs, and Small Business/
Tourism/Agriculture. Prior to politics he worked in law, banking, and finance. He’s done politics the old way and he’s ready to do politics differently, based on the principles of:
Personal Responsibility, Individual Freedom,
Fairness, and Respect
To understand my real motives, my critics should read up on “public choice theory.” Developed by James Buchanan, who won a Nobel prize for economics in 1986, it explains how interest groups hijack political debates and capture politicians, winning huge benefits in the form of subsidies, trade protection, fiscal or legal privileges and other favourable regulations. They are willing to devote enormous lobbying effort and large amounts of money to get them.
"We want smaller government because we support individual freedom and personal responsibility. We have faith in people. We have faith that they have the ability, the dignity and the right to make their own decisions and determine their own destiny."
"Today freedom has different enemies. It must be fought for in different ways. It will require different qualities of mind and heart to save it."
“A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it is not open.”
"The other threat to the security of our tradition, I believe, lies at home. It is the current fear of radical ideas and of people who propound them. I do not agree with the extremists of either the left or the right, but I think they should be allowed to speak and to publish, both because they themselves have, and ought to have, rights, and once their rights are gone, the rights of the rest of us are hardly safe. Extremists typically want to squash not only those who disagree with them diametrically, but those who disagree with them at all. It seems to me that in every country where extremists of the left have gotten sufficiently in the saddle to squash the extremists of the right, they have ridden on to squash the center or terrorize it also. And the same goes for extremists of the right. I do not want that to happen in our country."
"It's not hate to defend your rights and it's not hate to speak the truth."
“I happen to be a big fan of Western civilization; I think it beats the hell out of tyranny and starvation.”
"Outrage is a poison YOU’RE drinking, hoping the other person gets sick."