POLITICS – BC United, Conservative leaders swap barbs as coalition off
BC United Leader Kevin Falcon.
An agreement between BC United and the BC Conservatives to team up in an effort to defeat the NDP in the October provincial election is officially off.
BC United Leader Kevin Falcon issued a news release today (Friday, May 24, 2024) saying Conservative Leader John Rustad has rejected “a reasonable offer” and placed “his own ambition above the best interests of British Columbians.
Rustad followed with a news release of his own, claiming Falcon “has demonstrated that he will always put himself first and will do absolutely anything for power.”
Here are their competing statements, first from Kevin Falcon:
Over the course of these talks, our only objective was to minimize the risk of vote splitting by prioritizing the good of the province over any personal or political interests. I appreciate the genuine good faith displayed by the BC Conservative officials who worked with us toward our common goal of acting in the best interests of British Columbia.
Despite the common ground achieved during these meetings, last night John Rustad decided to reject a reasonable offer aimed at preventing a vote split, risking another four years of Eby’s NDP government that will further jeopardize the well-being of this province. In doing so, John Rustad placed his own ambition above the best interests of British Columbia.
As British Columbians continue to ask John Rustad and myself on the campaign trail why we could not find common ground, I can confidently say that BC United did everything possible to secure a free enterprise, non-competition framework.
Our BC United team remains focused on the upcoming election, presenting credible and accomplished candidates who are ready to govern, and offering a positive vision for the future of British Columbia.
Before today, there were two officially sanctioned meetings in an attempt to explore cooperation between the two free enterprise parties in our province.
The first meeting took place on May 2, 2024, in Vancouver between two BC United representatives, and two BC Conservative representatives. This meeting confirmed a mutual interest in exploring common ground, addressed misconceptions from unofficial representatives, and agreed on continuing negotiations in good faith.
The second meeting occurred on May 22, 2024, in Vancouver between two BC United representatives, and two BC Conservative representatives.
However, the resulting non-competition framework proposed by BC United was ultimately rejected by John Rustad, and despite an invitation to do so, no counter-proposal was offered.
The non-competition framework was set out as follows:
The parties will not merge. They are each responsible for their own leaders, fundraising and election campaigns.
The parties agree not to attack one another over the course of the campaign.
The parties will not run candidates against each other’s MLAs who are running for re-election. This is two BC Conservative seats and 15 BC United seats.
The BC Conservatives will run 47 seats and BC United will run 46 because BC United has more incumbents to protect.
The seats will be divided up between the parties in a draft format, whereby the BC Conservatives can each make three choices for each one that BC United makes until each party has picked the same number of ridings (including incumbents). From that point, the parties will alternate choices until the agreed-upon total number of seats for each party is reached.
If the combined seat total in the election exceeds the NDP the parties agree to form a coalition government. The Premier will be the party leader that won more seats, while the party leader that wins the smaller number of seats will be the Deputy Premier and hold a senior ministerial portfolio. Cabinet seats would be allocated in proportion to the number of seats held by each party.
Statement from Conservative Party of BC Leader John Rustad in response:
I can say with certainty that the Conservative Party of BC and the BC United Party will not be merging before the upcoming provincial election this fall.
BC Conservative Leader John Rusted.
Kevin Falcon declined our offers in December 2023 to discuss a possible merger – with a single message stating, and I quote, ’F#ck Off.’
In February, we tried again and BC United stated they’d be interested in speaking but Kevin Falcon would ‘dictate’ the terms.
On May 23, 2024, a mere 4 months before the election and now that the BC United is tied with the Green Party at 12% in recent polls – he finally presented our Conservative Team an “offer.”
Time and time again, and in this ’offer,’ Kevin Falcon has demonstrated that he will always put himself first and will do absolutely anything for power: before the BC United Party, before his own candidates, and ultimately before the province.
Kevin Falcon says publicly that he wants to put his ego aside, but privately, any discussions or “offers” have been completely unserious and dishonest.
Kevin Falcon also stated he didn’t want to make these talks public, yet here we are. Falcon is clearly irrational and unreasonable and prepared to lie. This makes it impossible to trust anything he says.
As I have previously promised, the Conservative Party of BC is committed to running candidates in all 93 provincial ridings and unlike Kevin Falcon, I intend to keep my promises.
This election is between the Conservatives and the radical BC NDP. The Conservatives are committed to restoring common sense in British Columbia.
ArmchairMayor.ca 
Kevin Falcon is just another in the line of truly respected BC Liberal/United statesmen cut out of the same cloth as Gordon Campbell and Christy Clarke. A man of vision, integrity, a concesus builder. A wordsmith, who’ll always be remember for his diplomatic heartfelt response, “F#ck Off”.
ps
say hi to Rita
LikeLike
BC United is finished. A spectacular fold in BC politics. Rustad is better served by not entertaining a coalition with losers.
From a personal standpoint, I called to speak with Mr. Milobar about shootings in the city. I left a message. No return call. If that is what constitutes servicing constituents, I’ll gladly pass and park my vote elsewhere.
LikeLike
John Rustad, please define your own “common sense” rather than riding on Poilievre’s coattails where his “common sense” supposedly frees “hardworking people to earn powerful paycheques that buy affordable food, gas and homes — in safe neighbourhoods”. I think that Mr. Stone, Mr. Milobar and Mr. Eby have their own definition of “common sense”. Tell us Mr.Rustad. what politician will dare disagree with something universal as common sense?
Most people in BC and Canada are concerned about taxes on income, food, housing bills and crime in our neighbourhoods. I think its time for you Mr. Rustad, Mr. Stone, Mr. Milobar, and Mr. Eby to dispense with the political BS and spell out what you will do to tackle the national and international macroeconomic issues that feed into the cost-of-living problems in BC.
Most people, at least in Kamloops. I think, will vote either for the candidate or the political party and its policies. For me this time it will be the candidate and no one is come close to challenge Mr. Stone and Mr. Milobar locally. However, they need to stop sloganeering while our forest and homes are burning, the rivers are drying up, people are sleeping on the streets , inflation is driving some into bankruptcy, , greenhouse gas emissions targets are low, spending million on the military, and explain their common sense plan to tackle all this ,
LikeLike
Milobar won the last election by 196 votes, less than 1% of the votes to Sadie Hunter even though he was the incumbent and spent 3x what she had. Additionally, 2 yrs later she was thoroughly beaten in the municipal election. So how do you write “no one is come close to challenge Mr. Stone and Mr. Milobar locally”.
Stone will now face off with a strong right wing contender, Ward Stamer, in the redrawn N Thompson riding whilst an already unpopular Milobar is facing a significantly weaker rightwing stronghold riding with the subtraction of Juniper and the addition of N Kamloops. With plummeting party poll numbers both of these guys need a miracle to get re-elected.
Lastly, be an adult and use your name.
LikeLike
For all that I know Mac Gordon is a pseudonym. Mel knows who I am and we have had a discussion for the reason I use a pseudonym. Your comment (Mac??); “Lastly, be an adult and use your name” is obtuse. Deal with my comment if you can, insult indicate inability to do so.
LikeLike
As I said in a recent editorial, I encourage commenters to use their real names because, in my view, opinions have more impact when those expressing them put their real names to them. However, in order to promote dialogue, I don’t insist on it. At the same time, though, I discourage commenters from getting into personal arguments with each other. Better to stick to the issues.
LikeLike
I mentioned to you before that you allowed an individual to be derogatory towards me and a response was required which you ameliorated by deleting the comment. This Gordon person was derogatory and you allowed it. I wrote to you the reason for the phytonym. My daughter works for the city and you know that she can be targeted because of my criticism of the administration. Pierre has been targeted by the city administration. A derogatory comment towards me has been allowed twice including this one by Gordon, first one when I used my own name and this one when my post was in no way derogatory. Why the duplicity
LikeLike
I don’t regard Mac Gordon’s suggestion that you use your real name to be derogatory.
LikeLike
I don’t object to him telling me to use my real name. But what do you thinh ” be an adult” innuendo means? In my humble op[inion it’s a personal attack at me not at what I said . If one is not an adult then what is he/she a child? Someone who is irresponsible?. Someone who lies, cheats and steals? An adult plays by the rules . You made the rules but bend them when it suits your interpretation. Have a great day. Mac’s comment is an attempt to bully.
LikeLike
Clearly my moderation displeases you but I don’t ‘bend the rules’ to suit my interpretation, I just do the best I can to run a civil forum.
LikeLike
An opinion or thought it no less valid if it’s attached to a name or not. This is the internet, people. It’s quite ridiculous to demand people use names on the internet, when any “name” could be a pseudonym.
Mac Jack
Tony Ealton
Jack Donsal
Barbara Kelly
Tracy Bordonna
Would any of those names make you feel better about a comment? How do you propose to verify the identity of anyone here?
It’s quite futile. I’ve noticed less posters here because of these odd and frankly outdated demands.
LikeLike
For my thoughts on the use of pseudonyms, please refer to https://armchairmayor.ca/2024/03/08/editorial-a-letter-to-all-those-anonymous-keyboard-commenters/.
LikeLike
Over time, I have written many letters to the editor using my own name, which Mel has published but when someone tells you to “grow up” because you did not use your real name that is an insult. All of you know Mel’s view on pseudonyms but he allows them to criticize the blog owner, not the one who plays by the owner’s rules.
When one laces comments with insults, this nullifies any useful input they may have on the issue under discussion. The fact that one uses their own name does not make their comment any more valid than the comment made by the person who uses a pseudonym. This is about the facts which can be verified and measured.
LikeLike
Did Kevin Falcon say an oxymoron: “I can confidently say that BC United did everything possible to secure a free enterprise, non-competition framework.” Kevin wants to introduce a new form of socialism; “it leaves profit to the private market but it socializes risk, which is in effect assumed by the government, which then spreads the cost across the backs of the taxpayer.” We had this before Kevin it was called “Reaganomics”, “Thatcherism”, “Trickle Down”, and my favorite “Horse and a Sparow Theory” where the sparrows compete for the oats that the horse did not digest.
LikeLike