It didn't take long in the election campaign for both of our major political parties to prove they are both capable of making foolish mistakes and policies, and that neither has a monopoly on good sense.
The NDP, for example, trumpeted it would freeze fares on the B.C. Ferry routes for two years while it conducts an audit of the company. That no doubt is good news for ferry users, but it is hardly the basis of a sound public policy.
There have been independent reviews of the B.C. Ferry system in the recent past, and they've all made things pretty clear: the systemic problems with B.C. Ferries are steadily rising fuel costs, entrenched labour costs and money losing routes.
Another audit may conceivably come up with evidence that supports actually raising some fares, while cutting others. The point is, if they are going to further study the problem, why would the NDP arrive at a solution before knowing the study's outcome?
Freezing ferry fares simply puts off the day of reckoning for some tough decisions to be made by government.
Freezes of such public services are simply political stunts and are not sustainable over time. They are implemented purely to curry favour with the public, and the timing of this one is crassly political.
The NDP also found itself trying to square a poorly worded fundraising letter to businesses with its promise to ban corporate and union donations to political parties.
The letter was written in January, but presumably at that time the party must have had at least a notion it may be banning business donations, so why it was even written in the first place is bizarre.
And bizarre is the term to attach to Christy Clark and the B.C. Liberals' sudden manic insistence that somehow the entire provincial debt will be paid off before too long. Her fantasy daydreaming of "trillions" of dollars flowing B.C.'s way because of liquefied natural gas exports seems silly at best.
In fact, Clark may be the first incumbent leader ever to wage an election campaign based on something that may or may not happen until after the NEXT election or even the one after that.
But back to this debt thing. Not only is her musing about eliminating the debt coming extremely late in the game (since she became premier, the debt has ballooned from $45 billion to a forecasted $70 billion two years from now) but her government's own fiscal plan forecasts the debt to keep rising.
By clinging to this unbelievable scheme, she risks further straining her credibility with the voters. It will be interesting to see if this is all she talks about between now and voting day.
It certainly appears this may be the case. The B.C. Liberals seem to have no more policies to unveil, and Clark may simply continue to tour various industrial sites (to leave the impression she's all about the economy and jobs and nothing else).
In any event, after week one, I fail to see much evidence that the public is fully engaged in what the politicians are doing, so any gaffes or wrongheaded schemes are more easily overcome.
But it's what happens nearer the end of the campaign that may matter most. If those foolish mistakes occur in that time period, the consequences may prove to be more serious.
In fact, I suspect the campaign won't really get going until the televised leaders' debate (set for Monday, April 29). While the so-called "knockout punch" rarely happens in such events, it may cause the public to be more focused on what the politicians are saying.
Keith Baldrey is chief political reporter for Global BC.
