One of the major fault lines that divide the B.C. Liberals from New Democrats was on full display last week, as the government moved to significantly overhaul the Agriculture Land Reserve.
The ALR is viewed in almost religious tones by the NDP. It was the NDP government of the 1970s, after all, that created the ALR in the first place.
So even to tinker with the ALR is viewed as some sort of war crime by New Democrats, who view any changes as nothing less than a sell-out to developers (who are, of course right up there in the NDP's Villains Hall of Fame).
The rumors that the government was going to make major changes to the ALR have been brewing for months, and ardent defenders of the ALR had been making dire predictions that the reserve was going to be destroyed.
In the end, the changes are indeed significant but hardly revolutionary. The ALR will remain, albeit in undoubtedly a smaller size.
I suspect when most people are asked what the ALR actually consists of they point to such places as the farms of the Fraser Valley and Vancouver Island, as well as the tree orchards of the Okanagan.
None of the changes really affect those areas, however. Instead, the government has essentially created a second ALR, comprised of land in the Kootenays, the Interior and the North.
Almost 90 per cent of existing ALR land will be in this new, second zone. And the rules for what can happen to that land will be drastically altered, to allow non-agricultural development on some of it.
From that perspective, it may appear that most of the ALR may be about to be paved over. That is unlikely, however, given that the new regional panels that will make decisions on the use of ALR land must still stick to the guiding principle of protecting that land.
Nevertheless, given that local economic, cultural and community interests will also be used to determine what happens to ALR land in this new "zone 2" there will undoubtedly be more development on much of it.
The government is arguing that since most of the land in zone 2 is not used for food production and is less than ideal "farm" land (i.e. it has poor soil quality or is covered in snow much of the year) the person who owns it should be allowed to make a living off it that may not involve strict farming operations.
This new approach is reflective of the B.C. Liberal government's central thesis: economic development is of paramount importance, and many decisions leading to that are best left to local authorities.
Should bureaucrats based in Vancouver or Victoria decide what is best for, say, the towns of Merritt or Revelstoke when it comes to building things like a motel or a grocery store on zoned farm land, or should local residents have that authority?
Clearly, the government has opted to take the latter view regarding farmland that is outside the food producing areas such as the Fraser Valley, the Okanagan and Vancouver Island.
I suspect this approach will be a popular one in many of those communities that will now move to develop some of the land that was put into the reserve many years ago for various reasons, many of which have outlived their relevancy.
And I would bet the NDP's vociferous opposition to this will make it harder for the party to gain traction in those ridings outside Metro Vancouver.
Whether these changes to the ALR ultimately work for the better likely won't be known for a while yet. As they say, the devil is in the details (in this case, "regulations" set down by the provincial cabinet).
But legislation is contemporized and updated all the time. I'm not sure that taking the view that something done in the 1970s should remain untouched and unchanged for all time is the right approach.
The ALR has become shrouded in romantic myths over the years. Changing its structure is undoubtedly controversial, and loaded with political implications.
But I think it's a little early to say the sky is falling, even though you're going to be hearing that kind of talk for months to come.
Keith Baldrey is chief political reporter for Global B.C.
