July 1st, 2025 | Allan Ray

British Columbia Needs Conservatives

A province in crisis needs realistic solutions.

If you’ve been living in British Columbia over the last few years, you’ve likely felt it—that sense of gradual drift, of the system grinding slower while everything gets more expensive and less accessible. It’s not dramatic at first. But it adds up. Grocery bills grow, your doctor gets harder to reach, housing doesn’t just cost more—it disappears. If you’ve ever wondered whether this province is still working for people like you, you’re not imagining it.

What used to be a vibrant, fast-growing province now feels tangled in its own red tape. Despite how much more government we’ve paid for, things don’t seem to function better. We’ve gone from a $2.7 billion surplus to nearly a $9 billion deficit in the span of one administration. It’s a staggering reversal. Meanwhile, business formation has slowed, private sector job growth lags, and small entrepreneurs quietly disappear or relocate. It’s not dramatic—but it’s widespread. You hear about it at the post office, at your kids’ soccer game, or from your neighbour who used to run a shop and now sells online.

Health care tells a similar story. For all the investment, outcomes remain grim. British Columbia ranks among the highest in per capita health care spending, yet patients routinely wait months for surgeries or diagnostic tests. Stories of people dying on waitlists are no longer shocking. They’re just the new normal. Whether it’s a specialist, a scan, or mental health support, the experience for many is delay, deferral, or denial. The frustration is not just personal—it’s systemic. The system can’t keep up, and government expansion hasn’t changed that.

Housing has become its own crisis. Promises have been abundant, but deliverables haven’t kept pace. Government-led density strategies are reshaping communities faster than infrastructure can support. Meanwhile, younger residents are increasingly resigned to the idea that they will never afford a home. Even renters are squeezed. Some recent proposals offer cash rebates or incentives to ease pressure, but the market remains undersupplied, overpriced, and overheated. Whether you rent or own, chances are you’ve noticed: the math no longer works.

There is no single villain. There are just a series of decisions made over time—well-intentioned, perhaps, but disconnected from the everyday lives of those they affect. Provincial governance has grown technocratic and abstract. Many policies come from desks in Victoria, not conversations in community halls or with local leaders. The result? More bureaucracy, less clarity, and even less trust.

Amid all this, some are proposing a different direction—one that looks to scale back government sprawl rather than expand it, prioritize economic productivity over symbolic regulation, and restore local voices to policy debates. That vision includes shrinking the regulatory burden on small businesses, creating space for private and non-governmental health partnerships, and restoring fiscal balance before debt becomes its own crisis. It’s a call not just for a change in party, but a change in philosophy: less central planning, more flexibility, more accountability.

There’s talk of cutting red tape—making it easier for people to build, start, and grow without waiting six months for a permit. Proposals for health reform focus on incentivizing efficiency: giving funding to providers who deliver outcomes, not just who process the most forms. Some suggest allowing patients to seek private or out-of-province treatment—with the province covering the cost—if the local system can’t provide timely care. The idea isn’t to gut public services, but to stop pretending that rationed care is somehow ethical or equitable.

On affordability, there’s been discussion around eliminating the provincial carbon tax and rolling back certain levies that hit commuters, tradespeople, and farmers hardest. It’s a controversial idea—but it resonates with those who feel punished for driving to work or heating their homes. For small businesses, a lower tax rate and fewer compliance costs could mean survival instead of shutdown. For many working families, it could mean hundreds back in their pockets every month.

Public safety is another area where frustration simmers. In cities like Vancouver, concerns about crime are real. Storefronts board up early, and residents alter their routines. Addiction and mental health are complex challenges, but simply expanding harm reduction without robust treatment options has led some to ask: where does this path lead? Some are calling for a shift—away from open-ended tolerance and toward enforced care, especially for those in crisis. Others propose reopening mental health institutions or repurposing existing infrastructure to treat, not just manage, the symptoms of collapse.

Even on reconciliation, the conversation is changing. Indigenous communities are increasingly pushing for real partnerships, not symbolic inclusion. That means resource projects with revenue sharing, land access, and decision-making authority—not bureaucratic gatekeeping. It’s a vision of reconciliation rooted in economic sovereignty, not perpetual dependency. The role of government, in this model, is to facilitate—not dictate.

Not everyone agrees on the pace or direction of these reforms. Critics worry that deregulation will erode protections, or that private health options will draw talent away from the public system. Others point to proposed budget deficits as a contradiction: how do you cut taxes and increase investment? These are legitimate concerns. But many British Columbians seem less afraid of risk than they are of drift. The current model isn’t working. For some, the greater danger is in doing more of the same.

The Choice Media Hates

The BC Conservative Party's platform is a direct response to the problems so many British Columbians are already living. They are offering a set of pragmatic, measurable solutions rooted in accountability and results. Whether it’s reducing taxes for small businesses, expanding health care access through partnerships, respecting local decision-making on housing, or returning budget surpluses to taxpayers, their approach is grounded in the idea that government should enable—not obstruct—progress. They aren’t promising miracles, but they are promising change where it’s needed most. And increasingly, that’s what people are looking for: not ideology, but a government that listens, acts, and adapts.

Many British Columbians have watched with growing dismay as mainstream media outlets, turned into echo chambers for political opponents, have attempted to define the BC Conservatives by a series of sensationalized and often misleading scandals. Over long weekends, NDP-aligned sources leaked a nearly 200-page dossier—framed as “MAGA conspiracy” evidence—accusing John Rustad and his candidates of endorsing fringe theories, from pandemic hoaxes to accusations of children being forced to eat insects. Headlines splashed labels like “crackpot” and “bizarre internet conspiracies,” often repackaging old social media posts out of context and omitting any substantive policy discussion. The cumulative effect has been to implant doubt, distract from real issues like housing, cost of living, and health care, and shift the focus away from the Conservatives' platform. In doing so, the narrative didn't just challenge individual statements—it chipped away at the legitimacy of the entire party before they were even given a fair hearing.

Rustad responded by calling it a deliberate campaign to smear his movement, suggesting that the decision to attack him and his team through selective leaks and media framing was meant to deter any momentum they were gaining. As one independent analyst pointed out, this isn’t just campaign strategy—it mirrors a broader pattern seen in polarized politics, where character assassination replaces policy scrutiny . The fallout wasn’t limited to social media. Even attempts to ask direct questions in legislative sessions or press conferences—such as a simple inquiry about a textbook or climate science position—were met not with answers but with public criticism of the journalists, reinforcing the narrative that the party was being persecuted by a hostile press. Many voters now wonder: if these leaks were designed to silence debate, what does that say about a system that values spin over substance?

Politics often encourages us to choose sides. But the deeper choice here isn’t left or right. It’s between management and transformation. Between passive administration and active problem-solving. Between a government that presumes to know best, and one that trusts the public to decide what works best for them. In British Columbia today, that choice feels closer than ever.