Last week I took a much needed break – partially as I mentioned because of a computer melt down, and partially because of a fatigue of pontificating. I promised a return this past weekend, but that also didn’t happen because of my enjoyment of the malaise, some amazing weather, and a full slate of great football games.
But now, armed with a sleek and sexy new laptop, I am back.
This is the way the NPA's membership is being treated by the party with regards to choosing candidates.
For many months, November 20th was heralded as a rebirth for the NPA – the day that the party would collectively choose candidates for the next election.
But due to a lack of interest, the nomination day was only promoted as the first round of the process, with “a second set of nominations to be held in the spring of 2011.”
Eventually, what was supposed to be a day for hope turned into a very limited screening of what the party was about to offer to the public – two candidates for City Council, one candidate for Park Board, and one candidate for School Board.
And now we know that the NPA board has decided that appointments/acclamations, rather than democratic elections via the will of the membership, is the way to go.
Former NPA Councillor Nancy Chiavario was completely handicapped with her fellow vcaTEAM running mates in 2002, largely because of a lack of funding in comparison to her competitors.
From the road, the report that has been released by the joint task force tasked with making recommendations for electoral change on:
is a pretty decent read.
I am intrigued by the prospect of four-year terms (which interestingly would put Gregor Robertson and Vision Vancouver into 2015 if they were to win the next election – their deadline for fulfilling their promise to rid the city of street homelessness).
But the campaign finance suggestions are really going to change the landscape of how local elections are run in British Columbia.
Park Board Commissioner Stuart Mackinnon is playing politics with an issue that is supposed to be close to his heart.
I read with interest Park Board Commissioner Stuart Mackinnon’s blog post from last Friday, which levied criticism at an article published in the Vancouver Courier on the same day, entitled “Green commissioner opposes Beaver Lake plan”.
In his rant, Mackinnon accuses the Courier of getting the details of his political machinations wrong, and goes on to advocate for an overall stewardship plan for Stanley Park.
Well, I have done a little digging about the specifics of what exactly happened, and it is clear that Mackinnon is playing politics with an issue area that a) is a huge component of the core principles he campaigns upon and b) is one that he and his political higher-ups feel as though has been fumbled.
Mackinnon’s rebuttal to the Courier is not only inaccurate, but is also without the proper context regarding priorities and motivations. Here is a clearer account of this whole affair.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
“Perhaps it was my silk dress or the new perfume I’ve been wearing lately. When I asked Suzanne Anton what her New Year’s resolution was, she replied, “To kiss a pretty girl!” and pecked me on the cheek.” – Writer Emily Barca describing her encounter with the lone NPA City Councillor on New Year’s Eve.
