The BC NDP are very centrist, not left leaning. Like, old growth logging is still continuing and taxes aren’t going up on the wealthy/businesses.
Why do you think they’re “very left”? I can’t think of any strong examples to support that stance, but I admit I don’t pay super close attention to everything they do, so I’m open to hearing your evidence.
If you view them as a centrist party, because they ‘dont’ do a couple of the left-preferred things while aligning with most left-leaning ideologies and policy approaches, then there’s little reason to discuss this, it just feels like baiting. Your implied position is along the same line of reasoning to me, as pretending like the right-wing parties aren’t “right-wing”, because they haven’t dismantled Universal Healthcare (“see, Alberta’s parties are right-wing, because they’re doing it! So every other right-wing party is centrist!”). It’s not really coming from an open-minded place, or one that’s tried to understand other positions, but rather from a place craving argument and conflict.
But to clarify at least a bit, consider the different approaches to equality/equity and regulation/public staffing counts. Left-wing progressives tend more to an equality of opportunity approach, which provides differing benefits to citizens based on demographic variances – people pay in to systems a varying amount based on their ability/income, and they get out of those systems varying benefits based on things like racial/gender/income/disability demographic slices. Their DRIPA gongshow and the generally passive/deferential approach to treaty issues is left leaning, despite Eby’s pageantry to try and stem voter losses at their unpopular handling of it – DRIPA is inherently a hard-left approach, which enshrines benefits/privileges to racially defined groups in perpetuity, using a left-wing determination of equality as its base justification. In regards to taxes, and your claim they aren’t going up, you’ve for some reason ignored the first universal tax increase in BC since 2008, going from 5.06 to 5.6, about a 10% increase – paired with an increased credit for the bottom 40%, so a ‘universal increase’ where it mostly impacts higher earners. Speculation and empty home taxes, are also taxes specifically aimed at capital holders – at wealthier people, and at people who’ve lived in the country longer / amassed real estate through inheritance, the tax generally doesn’t apply to poorer people, and (generally) newer immigrants.
Left-leaning government regulations tend to be fairly complex and onerous for smaller orgs to function within. The state’s ended up having excess staffing to facilitate larger state controlled programs, with a massively bloated budget / deficits that’ve caused BC to have its credit score downgraded. The current govs impact on smaller businesses is fairly entrenched / longstanding at this point. Regulations stifle existing industries, and creep into new ones – like the BC FSA, Regulators for the BC Credit Union system, over-seeing a reduction in industry participants from about 40 credit unions in 2017, down to about 25 credit unions in 2026 (with one of the most cited reasons for smaller CUs disappearing being “Regulatory pressure”), and the BC FSA expanding its mandate to now include Mortgage Brokers. Kill an industry with over-regulation, expand the regulator reach further.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond so thoroughly. I don’t have as much time to respond right now, unfortunately. So, in short
I agree those are generally left-leaning. They are an NDP party moreso than the Alberta NDP, but I would hardly consider them to be far/hard left. Like, a tiny marginal tax increase on the wealthy is barely left leaning, compared to what would be equitable.
But agreed, generally, that there’s a lot of managerial bloat. I see it at all levels, but especially healthcare and education; why do tiny districts need so many superintendents/assistants and directors? Hospitals have so many layers of managers. Etc.
The BC NDP are very centrist, not left leaning. Like, old growth logging is still continuing and taxes aren’t going up on the wealthy/businesses.
Why do you think they’re “very left”? I can’t think of any strong examples to support that stance, but I admit I don’t pay super close attention to everything they do, so I’m open to hearing your evidence.
If you view them as a centrist party, because they ‘dont’ do a couple of the left-preferred things while aligning with most left-leaning ideologies and policy approaches, then there’s little reason to discuss this, it just feels like baiting. Your implied position is along the same line of reasoning to me, as pretending like the right-wing parties aren’t “right-wing”, because they haven’t dismantled Universal Healthcare (“see, Alberta’s parties are right-wing, because they’re doing it! So every other right-wing party is centrist!”). It’s not really coming from an open-minded place, or one that’s tried to understand other positions, but rather from a place craving argument and conflict.
But to clarify at least a bit, consider the different approaches to equality/equity and regulation/public staffing counts. Left-wing progressives tend more to an equality of opportunity approach, which provides differing benefits to citizens based on demographic variances – people pay in to systems a varying amount based on their ability/income, and they get out of those systems varying benefits based on things like racial/gender/income/disability demographic slices. Their DRIPA gongshow and the generally passive/deferential approach to treaty issues is left leaning, despite Eby’s pageantry to try and stem voter losses at their unpopular handling of it – DRIPA is inherently a hard-left approach, which enshrines benefits/privileges to racially defined groups in perpetuity, using a left-wing determination of equality as its base justification. In regards to taxes, and your claim they aren’t going up, you’ve for some reason ignored the first universal tax increase in BC since 2008, going from 5.06 to 5.6, about a 10% increase – paired with an increased credit for the bottom 40%, so a ‘universal increase’ where it mostly impacts higher earners. Speculation and empty home taxes, are also taxes specifically aimed at capital holders – at wealthier people, and at people who’ve lived in the country longer / amassed real estate through inheritance, the tax generally doesn’t apply to poorer people, and (generally) newer immigrants.
Left-leaning government regulations tend to be fairly complex and onerous for smaller orgs to function within. The state’s ended up having excess staffing to facilitate larger state controlled programs, with a massively bloated budget / deficits that’ve caused BC to have its credit score downgraded. The current govs impact on smaller businesses is fairly entrenched / longstanding at this point. Regulations stifle existing industries, and creep into new ones – like the BC FSA, Regulators for the BC Credit Union system, over-seeing a reduction in industry participants from about 40 credit unions in 2017, down to about 25 credit unions in 2026 (with one of the most cited reasons for smaller CUs disappearing being “Regulatory pressure”), and the BC FSA expanding its mandate to now include Mortgage Brokers. Kill an industry with over-regulation, expand the regulator reach further.
I appreciate you taking the time to respond so thoroughly. I don’t have as much time to respond right now, unfortunately. So, in short
I agree those are generally left-leaning. They are an NDP party moreso than the Alberta NDP, but I would hardly consider them to be far/hard left. Like, a tiny marginal tax increase on the wealthy is barely left leaning, compared to what would be equitable.
But agreed, generally, that there’s a lot of managerial bloat. I see it at all levels, but especially healthcare and education; why do tiny districts need so many superintendents/assistants and directors? Hospitals have so many layers of managers. Etc.