What do we know about Peter Milobar's new political party?

0:00Hello and welcome to the Jill Bennett Show Podcast. Today we take a closer look at a brand new political party in BC. What do they need to do to make it work? Plus, we expected a lot of Sakai Sam and returning to the Fraser River. That didn't happen. So what happened? And Kalona's mayor joins me to talk about why an outreach center in that city is not getting the results. We were promised and why he would like to see it shut down. That's all coming up on the Jill Bennett Show Podcast. Well, on the 24th when he and Peyton decided to leave, we talked and we talked about forming a new party and we made that very public. And so Ian and I have been working behind the scenes quite hard over this last 11 days. We've said all along we need to form a serious credible option for voters that are fed up with the MVP and can't see themselves voting for the conservative party at BC moving forward.

1:00That was MLA Peter Milibar speaking earlier today talking about the fact they have officially confirmed that they are setting up that new party. It still has not been named and it is unclear who the permanent leader will be. Peter Milibar is the interim leader and it includes MLA's Rosalind Bird, Bruce Spanman and Alga Horbus. All MLA's who have left the BC conservatives. So how difficult is it to set up a new party and to be successful at doing that and what is this going to do to the political landscape in BC? Joining me now is Stuart Prest, political science lecturer at UBC. Stuart, thank you for coming on the show today. It has been a very busy week when it comes to BC politics and ending the week with this official confirmation of a new party. How much of a challenge to these five MLA's and potentially more who will join how big is the challenge here? Well, normally we would say that this is the kind of project that has a very slim chance

2:02of survival given that first pass the post tends to create space for two major parties and there's not really room for third parties to carve out major spaces unless one of those first two parties effectively dies off. And that's why this is not normal times because we see the BC conservatives in a partial die-off moment where the caucus has collapsed and we have seen about a third of the caucus leave since the election in 2024 and we don't know where the bottom is just yet. So clearly there is an unmet need in the BC political scene and this party seems like a reasonable fit to take up some of that's lack. So whether they can compete for government that's far down the road but they certainly have space to create something that is viable on a more limited basis. Does it make a difference in that we're not talking about a few people who have just decided to set up a political party?

3:03We're talking about five sitting MLA's who in doing this will already have party status and already are there and they're in the legislature. Does that give them a bit of a leg up? Oh I think so. It is not a fly by midnight. It is not taking place on a wing in a prayer. This is going to be a significant part of the BC political landscape for the next couple of years in the legislature shaping political debates and so it gives the new party a center of gravity from which to work. And it puts them far ahead of other efforts that are trying to fill the same space like center BC so they can attract some of that energy potentially as well. If they don't attract some of that energy though, is there the concern that this just is going to fracture? Voters that maybe have a lot of overlap in what they're looking for, what they want to vote for. If it's going to fracture all of those voters, doesn't that hand it to the NDP?

4:06In the short term, it absolutely makes life easier for the NDP. They have to be breathing a bit of a sigh of relief given how rough things look in the spring. But now we see them bouncing back in the polls. And when they are competing against a divided opposition, it certainly makes it easier for them to come up the middle and then win some seats they wouldn't normally win. But at the same time having a credible party that can pull together votes, not from the BC conservatives, those who don't see themselves as fit for this family's approach. But also for those other voters who are perhaps disaffected with the NDP, but not sure where to park their votes, it does create that alternative. But again, this is an unstable situation in the first past, the post system. And we may be headed for a prolonged period of instability given that it seems like a stable right to center united party is not really an option when we saw these two factions

5:08push themselves together after 2024. We've now blown up again. And I don't think that's a blip that seems to be a reflection of the fact that there is as much that divides people who call themselves conservative as united. With the five MLA's starting up this party, which is yet to be named, some people have been sending in some very creative ideas on what the name could be for this party. But with it currently at five, we know nine MLA's have left the BC conservatives. How important is it, do you think, or is it that they bring more of those MLA's over or they do have more sitting MLA's join this new party? Well, it's vital if you have five MLA's, you can be part of the conversation, but you're not really setting the table of the debate. But if they can start to generate momentum that it's five, six, nine, perhaps bringing in a couple of the MLA's who left even prior to this. Eleanor Sturco, we know, is out there. Perhaps she sees the fit to join this movement. It gives the sense of this being a party with momentum that has a real chance to perhaps

6:15even challenge for the official opposition in the near term. Because again, we don't know if this is the end of the story for MLA's leaving the BC conservatives, those who are perhaps uncomfortable with Ms. Dinsley's leadership, but who so far have been keeping their heads down, hoping this would blow over because they don't know where else to go. Well, now they have a place to go. So we may see additional defections as well. And when you talk about the leader of the BC conservatives, and certainly that has been in the news a lot in the past few days as well, I'm curious, your thoughts on this is all happening at the same time. We are getting closer to the Abbots Ford Miss mission by election. That's the by election where Carolyn Finlay is trying to get a seat. How important is it that she win that by election? Well, if she can't win that by election, I think her leadership is mortally wounded. It is already severely challenged if she is able to hold on to the leadership. And when that seat she is leading a kind of rough faction of the BC conservatives.

7:17But if she cannot win a seat in Abbots Ford mission, which is not totally sacie, but certainly a winnable seat where you think a BC conservative would do well. Then I think it really undermines any kind of claim she would have to be the voice and face of conservatism in the problem is going forward. Is it extraordinary to look at that and to look at what's happened since the BC conservative leadership? Sense Carolyn Finlay won that leadership because we've gone from, even those who have to openly we know they didn't support her saying we're still going to give this a chance. We'll give that three months or a certain amount of time. We'll see what's going to happen. Things crumbled in many ways after that or much faster, obviously, than the three month window. What are your thoughts on is this people that are doing this because they simply can't work under these circumstances? Is it sour grapes? What are your thoughts on that? That's a great question. I don't think there is a single answer to it, but we can see that part of it does relate

8:19to that ideological divide among conservatives. So there was this possibility of a fracture, but then it also goes back to leadership in the way in which Ms. Finlay approached the leadership of this party. We normally expect leaders to take a kind of let them up easy approach to former adversaries in the party trying to make it clear that this is still a big tent party that has room for diverse points of view and people from diverse backgrounds. But we saw Ms. Finlay do really the opposite, doubling, tripling down on the idea of creating a populist political vehicle with the staffing decisions that she made. And in particular, doing some things that I think really were unacceptable for MLA's specifically attacking individual MLA's like Theresa Watson and the accusations of being effectively a foreign agent. That is something that it would be understandable people wouldn't want to stand beside, but also bringing in staffers who have ties to the Alberta separatist movement.

9:22This is not something that the vast majority of British Columbians are interested in and the majority of conservatives are not interested in. And yet, it was not a deal breaker for Ms. Finlay. So I think she has really placed herself outside the mainstream even of conservative thought in important ways. And Stuart, going back to the new party that was officially announced earlier today, I think it's October 5th is it that the legislature comes back? What do they need to do? Do you think between now and October 5th? Well, they need to find a name. You cannot say we are the, the no name party is that they have to find a way to really signal to voters and to other prospective MLA members of this caucus. Who they are, what do they stand for, what will they be committed to doing and really then building that case for voters? Clearly, a channel there for voters who let's say are supportive of the federal liberal party who really believe in a united Canada who believe in and really trying to get business

10:25going in the problems of a, just about any means necessary, but doing so in a way that is inclusive and speaks to Canadian values. That appeals to many British Columbians. So they have to find a way to convey, if that is what they stand for, that is the kind of path that they are seeking to carve out. Stuart Press, thank you for joining us. We'll leave it there. Thank you again for this and have a great weekend. Thanks you. Thanks for having me. Thanks for being with us on this Friday afternoon. We're taking a little switch from BC politics to talk about another very concerning story. It has to do with what was expected this year with the return of Sakai salmon in the Fraser River. These were numbers that were put out earlier by the Pacific Salmon Commission. They initially estimated millions of Fraser River Sakai would return, but that estimate slashed to a fraction of what it was and what's very puzzling about this is there seem

11:29to be some ideas, but not a definitive answer as to what happened. Well, Jesse Zeman is joining us now executive director at the BC Wildlife Federation. Jesse, great to have you back on the show. afternoon, Jill. Afternoon to you. What do we know about what was expected when it comes to the Fraser River Sakai and what we're actually seeing? Yeah, absolutely. So on Fraser River Sakai this year is what we would call a dominant year. And every four years we get a really big kind of return. So 2018, 2022, those were big years in 2026 should have been a big year as well. The long term average for this year is about 15 and a half million fish. The long term average what we ended up with was three million off of an original forecast of 7.7. So this is the lowest return that we have for the dominant right and recorded history and significantly below what was actually forecast as well. Okay, that's a big change, a big difference. 7.7 million expected about three million returning.

12:32So do we have any idea what happened? We really don't. And so one of the challenges and you'll recall we had a thing called the Cohen Commission about 14 years ago that kind of gave the government a candidate some ways to look at what was happening with Fraser River Sakai. It looks like the freshwater survival, i.e. from egg to smold before they left for the Pacific. That looks pretty reasonable, but after that it's kind of a big black hole for us. Do we have any ideas or working theories? It seems pretty alarming to have such a big change in the fish coming back and like you said, having it to be a bit of a big black hole. Yeah, and that's the challenge is we really don't. And that was kind of the point when they had the Cohen Commission is one of the most important recommendations was, hey, we need to figure out where these fish are disappearing. A freshwater survival is pretty decent and fish are making it out in their juvenile stages, making it out to the mouth of the Fraser than what's happening after that.

13:35And we really don't know. There's all kinds of theories. There's been a bunch around fish farms, peniped predation, ocean survival. It could be issues around bycatch in places like Alaska. These fish go a long ways and without adequately finding research to understand why these fish are disappearing. We're all we're just going to keep guessing. So what some of the things that you just said, though, penipeds, because I know that's come up. So seals and sea lions, the idea that the population of seals and sea lions has exploded in the last few years. Is that something then that needs more study to see if it's in fact the seals and sea lions that are eating all of the fish? Yeah, I mean, that's just one piece of it. So there's a lot here. When they do, when they're heading down the Fraser, obviously even at the mouth of the Fraser, kind of in Vancouver, there's a bunch of spots where there's logbooms where we know there's a bunch of seals that hang out. Peniped predation has been identified as one of the potential causes. There are concerns around fish farms, of course. There are concerns around commercial fishing in the high seas and even in Alaska that we

14:39don't have a good line of sight on. There's other pieces even around what they call ocean ranching where, especially Russia is putting a ton of fish into the Pacific. Alaska is as well, hatchery fish that are creating competition. Then on top of that, we have warm water conditions attached to El Nino, which actually decreases survival, typically in productivity. So there's a lot here and a lot of things that we can all throw darts at the dartboard. I think that the piece that we can really point you right now is the government economist that has been a ton of money on the Cohen commission. And it said, you need to find out where these fish are disappearing in the marine environment and we do not have a good handle on that quite yet. Do we know as far as fishing? I know you've mentioned fishing in other parts that are outside of our jurisdiction, whether it's in the US or different areas. But as far as fishing here, the commercial fishery hasn't been a thing in many, many years. Do we know are people still fishing or are people taking too many if it's for other types

15:42of fisheries? Yeah, the public fishery hasn't had any kind of opening. There have been some very limited FSCs of food, post-social and ceremonial fisheries this year. But I mean, a lot of the test fisheries that happen on the fishery on their way down the coast are well before there's targeted fisheries on them. So I guess the answer is at least in our waters, fishing is not the cause or over fishing or any kind of fishing, especially when we look at the prediction of 7.7 million fish and we end up with 3 million. There weren't 3.7 million fish that disappeared in fisheries. That is for sure. And what about other rivers? Can we look at other salmon runs and are they suffering the same fate or is it specific to BC and to the Fraser River? It's been, Jill, it's been such a wild year as it relates to looking at all these different fisheries. For example, we have up in the Schina River, which is the other kind of the other big

16:43artery in British Columbia. That produces tons of salmon and steelhead. We had steelhead return in 2021 for the Schina where it was a record low. We were talking like 5,000 fish. And this year we were concerned about the number of steelhead that would return. And as of last week, we were tracking somewhere north of 60,000 fish we were expected to return, which would have been the third highest return on record. So the answer is no. These fish go to different parts in the Pacific and probably have slightly different stressors. And so it's really hard to go what's going on in this stream is it happening in this stream or in this river. And the answer is we don't really know and we can't really correlate between the two of those. That seems pretty wild too though, that it could be 5,000 fish one year. And I remember seeing that and fears that the steelhead was on the verge of collapse. It went from 5,000 to 60,000. And again, we don't really know what's causing that.

17:43No, it's bizarre. So this year there's a few different age classes that come back to the Schina for steelhead, but the number of fish that came back this year just kind of blew everyone's mind. And so they'll be fish that were born in 2019, 2021, 22 from the Schina. And those all kind of come back. There's different life histories. But to see those kind of numbers is not someone anyone could have ever expected and is just blowing everyone's mind. And again, we don't have, there's quite often no smoking gun in this world of fisheries. And for us to get really good handle on what's going on, that's the investment piece. And that's why the government of Canada made a bunch of commitments and has not held a few of the commitments. But this piece about ocean survival is really something that we don't have a good handle on and we need to understand so that we can hopefully help recover and conserve fish. So do we need another Cohen commission because it feels like even though, and I can't believe it's been 14 years, but it has been since that commission.

18:47It feels like that didn't really well that did acknowledge certain things. It feels like that wasn't something that became a template or that answered all of these questions if we are here now 14 years later with new questions. Yeah, well, and that's the thing. They are new questions. I mean, this ties into things like drought and wildfire and fish. Governments are really good at, you know, getting a panel up and putting to other questions and saying, here are all the things that we need to do to do a good job. But quite often, you know, they forget about them. They don't find the harder ones to find or the important ones. In this case, you know, counting fish doesn't make more fish. And I think that's kind of one of our places where we always go is we need more inventory. And in this case, we need to understand where these fish are in the ocean and what is creating kind of these big declines out in the Pacific. And, you know, until we really invest in the world of research and understanding these things, you know, we don't need another commission. We don't need another process.

19:48We need to do the science. Right, which makes a lot of sense, although I would imagine to there might be some people in the school of thought saying, well, if you look at the steelhead, they went from 5,000 and bounced back on their own. Do we wait another four years and see if that happens with the Sakai? I don't think so. I mean, so that the trend is there. I think it was 2010. We had a really good bumper run of Sakai, but you know, since then, it's kind of been sliding down. This one really caught us off guard. Again, so last year, 2025, we were expecting a relatively low return of Sakai and all of a sudden, we had a whole bunch more fish show up that we didn't expect and we ended up having a fishery. So it's unpredictable, but we are way better off investing and understanding what's going on, especially if it's something that we can be doing a better job of in terms of managing these factors that contribute to survival out in the Pacific. We really need to know those because it's not just Sakai or not just steelhead. I mean, there's a whole pile of animals and wildlife and ecosystems and people that

20:51rely on salmon and, you know, in places salmon or struggling, we've got to figure out a way to make things better. All right. Well, it sounds like there is a lot of work to do. Jesse, we'll leave it there for today. As always, thanks for joining us. Thanks a lot, Jill. Have a great day. Thanks for being with us. We talked about this briefly on the show yesterday with a business owner in downtown Vancouver concerns in that neighborhood about the proposal of a supervised consumption site. That proposal was canceled, but she talked about an ad hoc site that had been set up as well as another site that had been in place a couple of blocks away for a couple of years. And how that really did have an impact on the businesses and the residents. And there were a lot of questions about who was actually being helped by that site. Well, there are also concerns about an outreach urban health site that is located in Kelona. So much so that the mayor of Kelona has written a letter asking that the federal authorization

21:57for that site not be renewed. And joining me now is Tom Dias, the mayor of Kelona mayor Dias. Thank you for being with us. Thank you, Jill. Good afternoon. Good afternoon for people that aren't familiar with this particular site and where it is in Kelona and some of the issues. Can you tell us what it's been like having the site there? Well, the site opened in 2021. It is located the outreach site is urban health set it up. And it is located in our downtown core. And the concern that we have had is that we have been since it opened up, we have had concerns with regards to what it brings to that particular area and what it brings to that neighborhood. We have had discussions with interior health. We've also had discussions with the ministry. And so we started to look at keeping records on what's happening within that specific area.

22:59And we've had over 3,400 RCMP calls for service that were related to this site. We've had about 371 medical incidents that were attended by our local fire departments. We've had about 24 outdoor fires, over 420 by-laws for by-law officers. And when we, when the downtown district did a survey with regards to business owners, 99% of them rated the outreach's impact on the downtown as bad or very bad. So we have been continuing to advocate since that period of time that's recognizing that public safety is concerning within our neighborhoods that this structure and the way that this is being delivered at this particular point in time is not working and not working for the surrounding community.

23:59And just with regards to concerns on whether it's working for the individuals that it's supposed to be servicing. So when it was set up, because none of that sounds like that would be the objective, whether it's helping people who need the help but making sure it's integrated in the community and providing these services, that doesn't feel like that would have been the goal when this was first set up. Did it ever kind of serve the purpose it was supposed to and then things went off the rails a bit or what do you think happened here? Well I think communication is key in all of these particular situations. And I think we've just seen the minister come out with a communication a little bit earlier today, recognizing that when we look at putting these in to communities that they serve a purpose and there is a purpose there. And we're not, we understand that there needs to support need to be there so that we do what we can to try to make certain the treatment is there to help people stay alive.

25:04But at the same time there is a toxic drug crisis that is being potentially downloaded upon municipalities to deal with individuals who have these addictions and to deal with individuals who have these mental health issues and municipalities just the way that we're structured and the way that we follow on to a mandate, we do not have the ability to deal with the mental health and addictions. And so we need to have greater communication in order for these services to be all encompassing and to serve a spectrum of different ways of delivering this. But when it's focused in one specific area, it is, it's being detrimental to communities just within this one aspect and delivery model. And Mayor going back to the letter that you wrote and this was a letter requesting health Canada deny the renewal of the federal authorization for this site. Is that because this particular site this falls under the federal guidelines because I know

26:08we also have sites that are mandated by the provincial rules. But is this one because of the type of site it is? It's federal? Correct. There's only a couple of these sites within the province. But Jill just to clarify, originally what we looked at doing is as a council, we came to an agreement that we needed to communicate. And so we initially communicated with the province back in early July. And stated our concerns and asking the province to have greater communication around this and potentially looking at relinquishing the authorization of this site. And the way that the service is delivered. So we did not hear back from the province. We have heard back now, but we did not hear back from the province prior to sending the letter out to the federal government. Just because we recognize that there needs to be greater communication and there needs to be better,

27:11you know, better looking into the way that this service is delivered. And is there a better way to deliver this service and being there for the individuals who need the service, but also being there to help them find a better path forward. More so than just continually cycling through that system and that use of drugs. Mayor Dias, so you mentioned that you hadn't heard from the province, but you have heard from the province now. What has the province told you about this? I have had discussions with with respect to Minister Kailan about it. And he did appreciate the communications that I had moved forward. And he did say that we are heading into UBCM next week. And as we head into that, he did say that he would look at making certain that, we have further discussions with regards to the approach and what this means for our community. I think we all recognize that we need a system that prioritizes public safety

28:19while creating better and real pathways into treatment and recovery for people who are suffering with these severe addictions. But at the same time, are affecting the safety of our businesses and the safety of our communities? That's, I guess it's good on the one hand that he got back to you that he addressed it with you. But saying that you're going to bring it up or it's going to be brought up at the UBCM doesn't sound like anything is being treated as urgent or anything is going to be happening soon. I would imagine you'd like this dealt with faster. I don't, I'm not certain, Jill, on that. I mean, with regards to the conversation that we had and the discussion that we had. And then when I also see the communication that the minister had sent out earlier this morning, I believe they do recognize that there is a need for the individuals who are struggling with this addiction. There is a need for this service.

29:24I think that they're going to be open to understanding the effects that this has upon communities. And how do we deliver this? How do we deliver this service better? Because that's the other part of it, isn't it? I think the number that I had seen from the the outreach urban center saying that last year alone staff had reversed 75 overdoses. And that that's really at the heart of it, part of what this site does and helping people in that sense. But it also sounds from what you've explained. And we've certainly seen this at other sites in other parts of the province. It's, it doesn't seem all that compassionate given what we see outside these sites, what other businesses and residents are now fearful in many cases. People aren't getting the healthcare they need. So is it a sense of a different type of model or is there still a space do you think in Kelowna for some type of treatment center? And I believe that's what we we need to do with regards to having this discussion.

30:30And I go back to the first part of the question. When we look at, you know, the 371 medical incidences that were attended by Kelowna Fire Department. In a lot of those situations, they're dealing with an oxo hits that are being administered to individuals to also save individuals. That could also extend to the paramedics who came into that particular area to almost 3500 RCMP calls. And if a situation came about, they maybe have to deal with that. So by providing this within a specific site and then allowing those individuals to use it and then basically then just opening a door and putting them back onto the streets. And then potentially, you know, one of our service providers have to deal with it. And then the cycle continues. We, you know, I think that's where the discussion comes about. Municipalities, as I mentioned, it's not within our mandates. We're not in the medical field. We're not medical professionals. It's under the health authority. It's also

31:31under the ministry. But it's affecting municipalities and we don't have the core ability to change the structure on it to make real changes. This is where we need to continue to have those discussions. And we need those partners, the health authorities. We need the ministry at the table. And we need them to understand that, you know, we've had lots of discussion around this. We have lots of facts. We need to start to address this right away. And I think a lot of people hearing this would can relate to this. Certainly the people in that area of Colona just going back to that number. Almost 3,500 RCMP calls since this opened in 2021 around related to the site or its immediate surroundings. That seems like a very high number. And, and I think that's why we're drawing attention to it. I mean, if we were to, you know, it's something that initially you had gone back to when the outreach opened and the principal behind it and the uncertainty of what it would be like when

32:35this, you know, was delivered within specific areas. We have been collecting the data on it. We've been seeing what's been happening. We've been seeing what's happened to, you know, the businesses in the area. Yeah, it is very alarming. So I think the data itself goes to the fact that we need to have discussions and we need those parties to come together to look at other considerations, recognizing again, the importance of that treatment be there for people who are struggling with these severe addictions, but potentially not in this structure. Mayor Tom Dias, appreciate you making the time. Thank you for coming on the show today. Thank you, Jill. Take care. Thanks for listening to the Jill Bennett Show podcast. Can't wait for the latest episode to drop. Tune in to the Jill Bennett Show live from noon till three on 730 CKNW. Have a question or comment, send me an email. Jill at cknw.com. Thanks again for listening.