Scenes like this, whether it is our former Mayor or our current Mayor sitting down with the Prime Minister, are positive and unworthy of petty political criticism.
I just got a chance to read Gary Mason’s fluff piece on Mayor Gregor Robertson (reminding me why his long-winded minor hockey road trip columns as a Vancouver Sun sports reporter were so excruciating), and came across this excerpt:
“Mr. Robertson recently returned from Ottawa where he spent time “bumping” into politicians in the hallways. He was also made available to the media to comment on the federal budget. Beyond that, it wasn’t obvious what his trip to our nation’s capital accomplished.
The truth is it was mostly about exposure and establishing Mr. Robertson, among members of Ottawa press corps, as a player. He plans to travel there even more in the coming months. It is all part of a grand strategy being concocted in the mayor’s office to reposition the city – and the man who runs it – on the national scene with an eye to wielding more clout.
This, apparently, is an early product of the swagger, confidence and influence Vancouver imagines it now has post-Olympics.”
The “swagger” Mason refers to is true to an extent, as Robertson is a hot property these days.
But whether it was four years ago after Sam Sullivan’s Turin flag-waving affair, or now after our own experience with the Olympics, having the Mayor in Ottawa with nothing specific on the agenda other than promoting Vancouver and the office is a worthwhile endeavour.
What is more, critics on both sides of Vancouver’s municipal spectrum are wrongheaded for engaging in such petty criticisms over these trips.
The boys over at City Caucus were resentful of past criticisms from Sullivan’s trips to lobby for his backwards drug policies or to forge relationships with federal politicians.
And yet, they engaged in their own post of ridicule over Gregor planning on “bumping” into his federal counterparts on his recent Ottawa trip.
This is the height of hypocrisy, and like the Vision Vancouver or COPE talking heads that previously took issue with Sullivan’s excursions to Ottawa, extremely shortsighted.
If there is one thing that struck me through the entire Olympic experience (and many others who I engaged in conversation), it is the pettiness of our attitude towards the representatives of our city.
I understand that abuse of public funds is something that we all as citizens should be weary of. But how City Councillors attending Olympic events as hosts is scandal-worthy is beyond me. The real scandal, as far as I am concerned, lies with VANOC charging the city for tickets in regards to such official duties.
In the same way, a Mayor’s treks to Ottawa can only be considered as a positive. I might not personally agree with Sam Sullivan’s lobbying for the “CAST” or “POST” program, but as a Mayor democratically elected on a platform that made clear his views on drug addiction and appropriate treatment, he has every right to do so.
Similarly, whether Robertson ventured to Ottawa to advocate for housing funding or just to make his presence known after a very successful Olympic Games, it is a positive.
Here’s hoping that all sides of the debate can keep their valid passions for their viewpoints separate from the petty politicking that we tend to get into within our own spheres of preference.
It would be nice to know what the plan is beforehand so we can measure his success.
Vision is not open or transparent & they act unilaterally, ignoring the well established public consultation processes set up in the 1970s by TEAM.