It is, once again, political season here in BC and I am getting geared up to campaign for the government side. The last time, four years ago, I was somewhat disengaged because I had just moved into the area and was going to be away two weeks before the provincial election, which my party convincingly won hands down. This time, I am coming out, fully intending to do my bit to get a Liberal candidate elected in our adjoining riding. As an ideologue, who is right of centre, I am opposed to any government that doesn’t come to the ‘game’ without a plan to make the economy work better. What troubles me about the other side is that it promotes a society that focuses on social programs and benefits without any clear way to pay for it. I guess that makes me a fiscal conservative, if truth be known. I live my life that way and expect my government to do the same. Everything else in the campaign is fluff that is hardly relevant to where we are as a society. While we need more social housing, lower class sizes, more nurses, ┬ámore regulation of the real estate market, and more funding for opioid prevention, this government is committed to finding an effective way to pay for it within the framework of a robust economy. Everything else, in the murky and often incoherent world of politics, is strictly a sideshow for me. Unfortunately, the average voter for the other side attempts to hold government accountable for all that it doesn’t do to make the world a better place, not appreciating that the BC Liberals want to implement policy that they can pay for while answering to the middle-class taxpayer and business sector. Of course, I am not stupid when it comes to realizing that while provincial budgets are now in the black, the operating and long term debt continues to climb. Recent history, however, shows me that any NDP government across Canada has experienced considerable difficulty saying no to social spending when revenues are down: just check out the Rachel Notley record in Alberta.