How is it that people consistently avoid talking about the significance of the BC Liberals falling in a non-confidnece vote? Clark did a massive face plant. Yet like all her other scandals, they act like it didn't even happen. From what I can read on the definition of a non-confidence vote (historical no less) is that the government is too incompetent or too corrupt to govern. I don't think it is something to be ignored or glossed over. What are they going to put by her name in Wikipedia beside the first non-confidence vote at a Provincial level in Canadian history? What's with the fluff and contrived walks leading to some kind of insightful discoveries? NO. She was ousted and ousted for good reason. Will they tell us the reasons. No they will not. But the truth will come out. Woe to a government that will not follow the laws and is prone to nothing but deception and extremism. That's Clark's style. It does not reflect the interests of BC in the least.