mr.x
Feb 19, 2008, 12:04 AM
Poisonous politics hurt Vancouver's image at a critical juncture
Miro Cernetig, Vancouver Sun
Published: Monday, February 18, 2008
What we have, Vancouver, is a great moment, waiting for a mayor with the potential for greatness.
Not since Expo 86, two decades ago, has Vancouver been at such a crucial juncture in its young history.
The world is literally turning its attention to us as the 2010 Olympics approach. That brings another chance to transform our international image and redefine what we are as a city, in much the same way Expo 86 did, making it clear Vancouver was changing from a sleepy city on the West Coast to a metropolis with ambitions to be a player in the Asia Pacific.
John Furlong, who runs the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee, puts the Olympics best when he compares it to hosting 17 Super Bowls simultaneously. It's a good analogy because it's not just visitors who will count in 2010. The real bonanza that comes from this mega-event is the magnifying power of television and digital media. The world may be a global village -- as Marshall McLuhan predicted -- but for a few weeks in 2010, Vancouver will be its epicentre, with billions of people watching the city as never before.
So what are our civic leaders doing with the important task of picking the mayor to lead us into this moment? Sad to say, apparently they are failing us.
Just nine months away from the election of Vancouver's next mayor, the city's political elites and backroom strategists seem to be defaulting to the West Coast's old-style, small-town, partisan infighting. You couldn't make up political flakiness like this.
First, there's the mess inside the Non-Partisan Association, the civic party that supposedly wants to take the politics out of city politics. Instead, it's riven with political ambitions and petty personal feuds that are in danger of ripping it apart.
The latest evidence of the ruling NPA's centre-right political dysfunction is the showdown between Mayor Sam Sullivan and his city councillor, Peter Ladner. The latter created a furore by challenging the assumption that Sullivan should be able to run for re-election without facing a nomination challenge from party members, what some argue is Ladner's high-minded commitment to democratic principles.
That is, of course, a red herring. The reality is that what Ladner -- and those behind him -- are attempting is a leadership challenge. Who knows if it will work? What's for sure, though, is that it's hurting the party's image.
But let's not let Sullivan off the hook, either. Aside from that inspirational moment in Turin -- where he made headlines for waving the Canadian flag attached to his wheelchair -- he has been less than inspiring as a mayor. He comes across as a technocrat, a politician who is down fixing the pipes in the engine room, when the city is facing a moment when it needs a captain at the helm.
Here are some examples.
1) Gangs are shooting people openly on Vancouver's streets, yet there's no sense of outrage from the mayor's office, no attempt to use the mayor's position as a bully pulpit to help galvanize the province or federal government into beefing up policing. Instead, Sullivan has seemed more vocal on pushing for downtown ambassadors to help deal with tourists and bylaw infractions.
2) The mayor also missed a chance to brand the city as a high-tech centre. For reasons that mystify, Vancouver city hall couldn't get its act together to find space for Microsoft when it came knocking. The City of Richmond did and got the prestigious research facility. Good for Richmond and good for Metro Vancouver's broader economy. But shouldn't the mayor have sped up the wheels at city hall, had some land rezoned so that Microsoft's banner would be glowing on Vancouver's downtown skyline for 2010?
3) Then there's the mayor's tendency to polarize. We got a taste of that in last summer's civic strike, when he accused the union of being his political adversary.
But it's even more evident with people who should be in his tent. Aside from losing the confidence of Ladner, a stalwart of the NPA, Sullivan was also unable to keep Al De Genova, the NPA's park board member, in the party. The mayor's backers will argue these are personal feuds. Maybe so. But the reality is Sullivan's image as a polarizer has been cemented.
That brings us to the other major civic party, representing the centre-left, Vision. Things don't seem to be going much better there. De Genova, of course, has decided to run for that party's mayoral nomination. But given his centre-right history, Vision's left-centre establishment (mostly New Democrats) is justifiably feeling nervous. Count on De Genova seeing challenges against his candidacy that are going to be divisive and, I'd bet, as bitter as what's unfolding in Mayor Sullivan's party.
Maybe all this poisonous political intrigue is just in the political DNA of this city. But my bet is most Vancouverites are sick of it.
Miro Cernetig, Vancouver Sun
Published: Monday, February 18, 2008
What we have, Vancouver, is a great moment, waiting for a mayor with the potential for greatness.
Not since Expo 86, two decades ago, has Vancouver been at such a crucial juncture in its young history.
The world is literally turning its attention to us as the 2010 Olympics approach. That brings another chance to transform our international image and redefine what we are as a city, in much the same way Expo 86 did, making it clear Vancouver was changing from a sleepy city on the West Coast to a metropolis with ambitions to be a player in the Asia Pacific.
John Furlong, who runs the Vancouver Olympic Organizing Committee, puts the Olympics best when he compares it to hosting 17 Super Bowls simultaneously. It's a good analogy because it's not just visitors who will count in 2010. The real bonanza that comes from this mega-event is the magnifying power of television and digital media. The world may be a global village -- as Marshall McLuhan predicted -- but for a few weeks in 2010, Vancouver will be its epicentre, with billions of people watching the city as never before.
So what are our civic leaders doing with the important task of picking the mayor to lead us into this moment? Sad to say, apparently they are failing us.
Just nine months away from the election of Vancouver's next mayor, the city's political elites and backroom strategists seem to be defaulting to the West Coast's old-style, small-town, partisan infighting. You couldn't make up political flakiness like this.
First, there's the mess inside the Non-Partisan Association, the civic party that supposedly wants to take the politics out of city politics. Instead, it's riven with political ambitions and petty personal feuds that are in danger of ripping it apart.
The latest evidence of the ruling NPA's centre-right political dysfunction is the showdown between Mayor Sam Sullivan and his city councillor, Peter Ladner. The latter created a furore by challenging the assumption that Sullivan should be able to run for re-election without facing a nomination challenge from party members, what some argue is Ladner's high-minded commitment to democratic principles.
That is, of course, a red herring. The reality is that what Ladner -- and those behind him -- are attempting is a leadership challenge. Who knows if it will work? What's for sure, though, is that it's hurting the party's image.
But let's not let Sullivan off the hook, either. Aside from that inspirational moment in Turin -- where he made headlines for waving the Canadian flag attached to his wheelchair -- he has been less than inspiring as a mayor. He comes across as a technocrat, a politician who is down fixing the pipes in the engine room, when the city is facing a moment when it needs a captain at the helm.
Here are some examples.
1) Gangs are shooting people openly on Vancouver's streets, yet there's no sense of outrage from the mayor's office, no attempt to use the mayor's position as a bully pulpit to help galvanize the province or federal government into beefing up policing. Instead, Sullivan has seemed more vocal on pushing for downtown ambassadors to help deal with tourists and bylaw infractions.
2) The mayor also missed a chance to brand the city as a high-tech centre. For reasons that mystify, Vancouver city hall couldn't get its act together to find space for Microsoft when it came knocking. The City of Richmond did and got the prestigious research facility. Good for Richmond and good for Metro Vancouver's broader economy. But shouldn't the mayor have sped up the wheels at city hall, had some land rezoned so that Microsoft's banner would be glowing on Vancouver's downtown skyline for 2010?
3) Then there's the mayor's tendency to polarize. We got a taste of that in last summer's civic strike, when he accused the union of being his political adversary.
But it's even more evident with people who should be in his tent. Aside from losing the confidence of Ladner, a stalwart of the NPA, Sullivan was also unable to keep Al De Genova, the NPA's park board member, in the party. The mayor's backers will argue these are personal feuds. Maybe so. But the reality is Sullivan's image as a polarizer has been cemented.
That brings us to the other major civic party, representing the centre-left, Vision. Things don't seem to be going much better there. De Genova, of course, has decided to run for that party's mayoral nomination. But given his centre-right history, Vision's left-centre establishment (mostly New Democrats) is justifiably feeling nervous. Count on De Genova seeing challenges against his candidacy that are going to be divisive and, I'd bet, as bitter as what's unfolding in Mayor Sullivan's party.
Maybe all this poisonous political intrigue is just in the political DNA of this city. But my bet is most Vancouverites are sick of it.
