Custom Search
Top Stories
Go to Site Index See "Top Stories" main page
COMMENTARY · 9th May 2013
Walter McFarlane
One thing I never seem to understand is the signs which crop up all over the community green spaces during an election. According to what Iíve heard and read, they follow the concept that by seeing a name over and over again, people will be more likely to vote for this name.

You have to love a system designed to insult your intelligence.

Lawn signs themselves show support for candidates from local residents. One of the best concepts I have seen from this, comes from Merv Ritchie, who, in a previous election put a lawn sign from each of the candidates in his yard, not to show support, but to remind people to vote.

But Iíve noticed the Lawn Signs seem to be playing a larger role in this election in what appears to be a war of attrition. The first shots fired in this sign war were because signs were up for Leclerc in Terrace before the writ was dropped.

The first set of signs to claim Haisla Hill were blue Leclerc signs. The next day, all of the blue signs were replaced by Orange Austin Signs. Two days later, the signs on Haisla Hill were blue again, before switching to a pattern of alternating Austin and Leclerc signs down the hill.

Another issue which has been raised is the placing of signs on the highway. Leclerc has placed her signs on the right hand side of the highway all the way to Terrace (or the left hand side if youíre going to Kitimat, make of it what you will). The argument made is the signs are made of a material which is not friendly to the environment.

But thatís not all. Clearly the Chamber of Commerce in Kitimat is standing behind the Liberal Party because a Lawn Sign has been planted in their lawn. In very poor taste, there was a blue sign in the garden outside the cemetery for two days before someone took it down.

But the sign wars took to a new low on the day Christy Clark came to Kitimat. The night before, a crop of orange signs sprouted outside the viewpoint, where Clark would be speaking the next day. Sure enough, the blue signs at the event outnumbered the orange.

Adding to the mess of signs at the view point were a series of white and blue signs with arrows to point at the other signs and indicate supposed strengths and weaknesses of the two candidates.

In my opinion, during this event, all the signs involved were potential eye sores detracting from the natural beauty of the Douglas Channel. The mess of Orange signs placed up the night before and the blue arrowed signs used to attack were in very poor taste and showed how the parties running in this election have too much money which could be better spent helping needy BC families than getting their candidates elected / re-elected.

One final note, the sign wars were also pretty low on the Conservative side as well. A photo taken in Terrace at the beginning of the campaign depicted a Brousseau large campaign sign located directly over one of his competitionís signs.

Iíve always believed, the best way to tell if a candidate is worthy of the job of leadership, is to ask them to give one reason why they would vote for their competition over themselves. If they cannot say anything nice about their opponents, they are not worthy of being in the role of leadership.
Comment by Dave McIntyre on 10th May 2013
Another devious ploy by a leader in trouble. Artie hit the nail on the head. The N.D.P. signs were planted so the Liberals could place the offending comment signs with the arrows. Just ask the people that woke to find their N.D.P. lawn signs missing..... Christie has no moral compass, she will stop at nothing to keep her dream alive.... And dream she does..... A dream for her, a NIGHTMARE for us.......
I See Through The Lie
Comment by Artie Kull on 9th May 2013
Lets use some logic in this situation to expose some lies.

The NDP signs that were posted across the viewpoint from where Christy Clark was speaking. Who really placed them there?

Yes out of nowhere NDP signs just happen to appear at that location yet no one in the media knew where Miss Clark would be appearing in Kitimat. No media report indicated where she was going to appear until the very day she showed up and yet signs appear and people ignore signs that appeared that say out of control spending and will kill LNG with arrows
pointing to NDP signs.

These other signs must have been created by those with prior knowledge of where Clark would be speaking, meaning this sign controversy was a planned attack to accuse the NDP of trying to attack the rally through sign placement.

This is yet a new low in politics.
Executive Director Kitimat Chamber of Commerce
Comment by Trish Parsons on 9th May 2013
Good morning Walter. To clarify for your records - the right of way in front of the Chamber of Commerce does not belong to the Chamber of Commerce. As in past elections, candidates can choose where they post their signs according to the permit that has been issued to them by the District of Kitimat.