THERE wasn't a lot to chew on from Premier Christy Clark's five-minute radio address this week, but she did signal a looming showdown on an issue that has the potential to right her government's sinking ship.
Clark went on radio station CKNW's Bill Good Show to lay out her government's plans for the spring legislative session, and didn't reveal anything particularly bold or new.
But she seemed to go out of her way to call out public sector unions and emphasize, once again, that there was no money on the table for their members to receive wage increases anytime soon. She suggested the only way those wage hikes could occur would be through increased taxes.
Clark desperately needs an issue to change the parameters of political debate in this province. The mood of the electorate seems, according to the polls, to desire a change in government.
So Clark appears to be developing a new theme she hopes resonates with voters her party out of office. She's hoping public sector unions try to take her government on, allowing her to make an "us against them" type of argument.
It can be an effective theme. Public support for unions has dwindled over the years (the percentage of unionized workers has steadily declined in this province). In particular, support for public sector unions is likely not very high.
Public sector employees generally enjoy benefit packages that are much richer than anything found in the private sector. They also battle a misplaced public perception that they perform work of a substandard nature - the lazy civil servant stereotype.
A number of union contracts expire at the end of March, setting the stage for all kinds of strike action potentially involving nurses, health-care workers and direct government employees.
The B.C. government is insisting there is no money for wage hikes, unless they are paid for by concessions from employees. The B.C. Government and Services Employee Union has already said it won't stand for a continued wage freeze, and other unions may follow suit.
Clark is no doubt hoping the NDP aligns itself with these unions if a showdown does occur. The theme of "who's running this province" can be a game-changer, and it may allow Clark to consolidate her voter base and bring back disaffected B.C. Liberals currently parking their votes with the B.C. Conservative party.
Some have suggested we could be seeing parallels with the Operation Solidarity protests that erupted in 1983 in the wake of government restraint measures. People forget, however, that despite those huge protests, the Social Credit government of the time was handily re-elected a few years later.
Of course, the public sector unions may opt not to take the bait this time around, thus robbing Clark of a potential "wedge" issue that could clearly separate her from the New Democrats.
Clark will then be forced to search around in increasingly desperate fashion to find another issue that can rebuild her party's popularity. It won't be an easy task.
. . .
As I predicted in this space some months back, former B.C. premier Bill Vander Zalm paid a hefty price for libeling former conflict-of-interest commissioner Ted Hughes in his self-published biography a few years back.
Vander Zalm must pay $60,000 in damages plus an undetermined amount to cover Hughes' legal costs in the suit he brought against the former premier. The total bill could hit close to $100,000.
Vander Zalm opted for a jury trial, clearly betting that his personal charm and charisma could win over the hearts and minds of fellow citizens.
His gamble did not work, thankfully. The seven-person jury found him guilty - and yes, that is the legal term in libel trials in this province - and his ego and reputation will suffer accordingly.
And yet Vander Zalm remains unrepentant. He appeared on CKNW radio the day the verdict was reached, saying he "stands" by what he wrote in his book, which I have suggested to the legislature library be kept on file in the fiction section.
He may stand by what he wrote, but if he repeats the libel against Hughes he will pay dearly for it. Any repeat of something already ruled to be libellous can be a very expensive exercise, with monetary damages being quite high.
But I'm not sure whether Vander Zalm's penchant for trying to rewrite history in more favourable terms to himself can keep him quiet forever.
[email protected] Keith Baldrey is chief political reporter for Global BC.
