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.

• Mike Howell’s piece about lone NPA Councillor Suzanne Anton last Friday was very important in confirming what has become apparent: the NPA is desperate for attention, traction, and relevance.  I said it last week, and I will say it again: to attempt to draw Gregor Robertson into responsibility for the terrible gang shooting that happened on Oak Street is about the lowest form of politics one can engage in.  This is particularly emphasized when examining the NPA record of funding police officers, which Howell took a look at, or when considering the $200,000 that the VPD just received in the budget for anti-gang measures, also as pointed out by Howell.  This kind of tactic is in the same vein as Ian Robertson’s complaints about Park Board procedure with regards to the budget, even though he didn’t even bother to show up to speak to Council about the process after signing up as a speaker, and also abstained from voting on the budget altogether.  Empty political rhetoric with little in terms of a political record or current actions to back it up.  Typical NPA.

• Charlie Smith is back with his conspiracy theories.  The entire Park Board budget vote was delayed to allow for public input and further negotiations with City Council, so for anyone to suggest that the process was done in isolation is a complete falsehood.  Furthermore, if Charlie took a look at the conduct of Park Board Commissioner Stuart Mackinnon during meetings, he would realize that there is an attitude that is espoused in the form of belligerence, bullying and condescending remarks and tone.  Stuart is not prepared to work together with anyone unless he can get some cheap political points or attention out of it.  Forget about political deals – this is a stream of behaviour that Mackinnon clings to partially because of his arrogance, partially because of his longing for the spotlight, and partially because of his fear of not getting elected once again.  Go ask any of the Commissioners aside from Mackinnon’s best friend Ian Robertson about his conduct, and you will hear about how he creates conflict and looks to exploit the ensuing drama simply for his own political benefit, not the good of the public.  On this issue, Smith clearly hasn’t done enough research about the claims made by both Raj Hundal and Sarah Blyth.

• The NDP has set its rules and date to choose the party’s next leader, and the group of undeclared candidates are scrambling to sign up members before the cutoff date of January 16.  It is amazing that no one has announced quite yet, although Mike Farnworth and Adrian Dix are clearly the front-runners at this point.  I think that the problem with what has been laid out lies solely with the party’s requirement to be a member for 90 in order to be able to vote.  I think that an April 17 convention date allows the eventual BC Liberal leader to call a snap election and put the party in great peril.  That being said, the NDP is very religious about their rules and procedures, so this is no surprise.  The next few weeks are going to be a frantic race of membership signing between the potential candidates, and it looks as though these new members could be the deciding factor in consideration of the 13,000 that are already on the list, which represents an historic low for the party.

• Is the BC Rail stuff sticking to Christy Clark?  Hard to say.  In one sense, she is clearly the most popular with the public, and still most likely represents the best shot for the BC Liberals to maintain power.  On the other hand, she lacks caucus support, and has the chattering classes of the party talking about how her victory could truly open up a Pandora’s Box with regards to the trial that fellow candidate Mike De Jong thought he had squashed through a $6 million deal.  I don’t think that the story is salient enough with the media and/or the general public to become the thing that tanks Clark’s candidacy.  Yet, she has a long way to go before she is able to test out that teflon quality with British Columbians…she has to win over her own members first.

• Innovation towards business development at City Hall continues under the watch of Gregor Robertson, and this is yet another sign to the business community that this Mayor and Council are ready to serve as partners in prosperity rather than a burden of red tape and the status quo.  The City of Vancouver has always had some of the best city planning in the world, and finally this same kind of planning and infrastructure is being laid down for a thriving economic climate.

• Sorry, even for people who are used to big stars and big productions coming through town, this is very exciting news!  I am totally marking out, regardless of who they choose to fill the role, as Brandon Routh is most definitely not coming back.

• The rest of the world is catching up to Canada’s passion.  It is time that the City of Vancouver steps up to the plate to make Vancouver an annual destination on the UFC calendar.  Because as things stand right now, UFC will be unlikely to return in 2011.  What a terrible shame.

Alright people.  Have a fantastic day, drive safe, have patience in the shopping lineups, and show some good will towards others.

• I obviously ruffled one former mayoral Cheif of Staff’s feathers with Friday’s post, inspiring this lacklustre rebuttal.  Notice how Daniel conveniently ignores my points about EcoDensity being prepared for IN ADVANCE of a Council vote in much the same way as the Hornby bike lane was, and provides no explanation except for this:  “He even goes back in time and tries to redesign history by incorrectly alleging that EcoDensity was handled by staff in the same manner as the separated bike lanes.”  I anxiously await the promised future post on the subject for Fontaine to feverishly spin the virtues his former boss’ baby.  Oh yeah, and one more thing, Daniel: your allusions to future revelations are always humourous…so let’s clear something up about your constant accusations about my relationship to the Mayor’s office.  I do indeed talk to people in the Mayor’s office, Vision Vancouver offices, and electeds on the Park Board and City Council…this is something I have never tried to hide.  Why?  Well, because a) this is a political blog where my political loyalties are very obvious and b) they are in the thick of things and I like to try to pry information out of them.  On that front I am not always successful, but for the sake of this website, from time to time I have inquiries.

• I have definitely graduated from my former fandom of professional wrestling to MMA.  Nonetheless, the WWE didn’t just pull out of a scheduled event in Vancouver for nothing.  The City of Vancouver says it is not anti-combat sports, but it is putting up barriers that make it a) a bureaucratic nightmare b) a costly affair for any promoter and c) a process that directs organizations like the UFC and WWE to look at other options (in the case of WWE, they headed to Washington, where UFC is not adverse to moving into a city like Edmonton or Calgary for a third annual PPV Canadian event, according to my conversations with UFC Director of Operations Tom Wright).  I understand there is a liability issue that the City needs to insulate itself from when it comes to protecting taxpayers.  But after a successful UFC 115, you’d think they’d be willing to negotiate with a little more flexibility.  Based on recent meetings that happened with UFC officials over the past few weeks, however, that doesn’t appear to be the case.

• Seriously, with the way that Minister Rich Coleman has played games with the City of Vancouver in recent months on the social housing component of the Millennium Water development, I can’t see why the City wouldn’t use the time frame of the casino being built as a bigger bargaining chip.  If non-profit groups can benefit, or at the very least if the City can get some better cooperation on a range of issues with the Province, then it might very well be worth it, particularly with the state of the government these days.

• Once again, I think that the NDP caucus Carole James detractors are utter idiots, and handing the BC Liberals a free pass to get back into the game.  This article seems to suggest that Gordon Campbell might be invigourated to stay to fight a fourth mandate as a result of the NDP’s ever-emerging implosion.  But if I am one of the people that actually has a measure of influence with Campbell and who is still interested in the fate of the entire party (and I know of at least a few of those types who stop in to read this site), I would be saying “Look, they are giving us an opportunity to change everything.  So let’s allow a few more disgruntled NDP MLAs to publicly resign, go through these recall campaigns, and then let a new leader emerge as a person of the people by initiating an immediate referendum on the HST.”  Gordon’s ego is unlikely to allow him to arrive at the same conclusion without a little (or a lot of) cajoling.  But I do think it will happen nonetheless.

• I have a feeling that this public consultation process over the budget, which is currently forecast to have a deficit of $20.6 million, is going to be very political.  The City would be well advised to look at their Metro Vancouver partners and find out what kind of deficits they are encountering, because rest assured, most municipalities are in this financial position.  I am interested to see if the NPA can attract more than 200 people to their fundraising dinner on Wednesday (an event, by the way, that no one should be fooled about when it comes to that $185 ticket price – because they are just giving away tons of free tickets for, including many politically active youth), which will indicate to what extent they can organize.  Then again, with the way their candidate selection meeting is shaping up, maybe the crowds that are attracted to come out really will be concerned public members instead of…naw, I won’t go down that road again.

• The kind of political gridlock the Mayor of Toronto will encounter after winning is why I prefer the party systems that are in place in Vancouver and Montreal.  Locally, Gregor Robertson et al. were elected on a platform, and now they are implementing that platform that garnered them a mandate.  That is the way it should be…and the reason why I absolutely abhor minority governments.

• Speaking of the Toronto Mayoral race, it looks like a dead heat.  Unlike what people like my friend Warren Kinsella was saying, I think that Rocco Rossi’s exit from the race really gave George Smitherman the lift that he needed to pull even with Rob Ford.  Joe Pantalone currently looks like Toronto’s version of Ralph Nader, however, which should be very concerning in the Smitherman camp.  The bright side of the eqaution is that less than half of Pantalone’s backers (47.5%) declare their support as firm, which means that Smitherman will benefit from those scared enough of Ford’s potential victory to change their vote.  The next week is going to be very interesting.

OK, off to meetings folks.  Have a great day.

I have been without the convenience of the Internet in my home for the past few days, explaining my absence.

Here’s today’s quick hits:

• For those of you that didn’t see it, the Vancouver Sun did a big two-page spread on the state of political blogging in this city over the weekend.  When I spoke to Lori Culbert, I tried to emphasize how I thought that bloggers who drank their own bathwater – who believed in their own sense of self-importance – was not the kind of model I follow.  I am just another voice within the local political landscape, and for those 600-700 people that come to this site daily (I don’t inflate my numbers like some – that is a consistent and pretty decent crowd that continues to grow), they have obviously seen something that was worthwhile.  Calling yourself the “King of Bloggers” is just a little much for me…but hey, if that’s the kind of title that floats your boat, all the power to you.

• Michael Geller does put forward an interesting analysis about the Olympic Village, and as per usual, it is level-headed, well thought out and reasonably fair.  I do not agree with his prescription to sell the social and market-rental components, however.  In spite of the interference that Rich Coleman are trying to play right now (and make no mistake about it folks – this announcement last week was politically motivated rather than pragmatic), the City is committed to sticking with the commitment that it made NOT ONLY to the IOC, but also to the people of Vancouver.  This was to be a development that incorporated these elements into the mix – and this kind of resolve to follow-through with the commitments in the face of such adversity takes guts and principles.  Furthermore, I found Geller’s “factors” that he thinks are “responsible for where we are now” interesting, considering how many of what he lists can directly be attributable to the decisions and management of the Olympic Village bidding and construction process under the NPA – details that I have written about here and here.  The current administration was handed a dog’s breakfast with regards to the Olympic Village, and everyone that is able to give an honest assessment, and who has followed this issue with any kind of depth over the past few years, is well aware of this.

• UFC is in town toady meeting with City officials about a potential return to Vancouver in 2011. UFC will be coming in looking for a better deal with regards to insurance, although they may very well be barking up the wrong tree on this issue.  Vancouver remains the only city on the UFC calendar without a state or provincial sanctioning body, meaning that everything in terms of liability falls on the shoulders of the Vancouver taxpayer.  Until there is movement on this front with an Attorney General who seems supportive, but won’t budge an inch because of a controlling Premier that will not let the file go forward, it seems as though the City of Vancouver’s terms of compliance will be unlikely to change.

• Nice to see the Raptors out here for some training and an exhibition game, but I still don’t think that Vancouver is ready to consider bringing basketball back.  Fans didn’t have a product to show up to because of poor management for seven seasons.  But the thing that really killed the team’s future in Vancouver was a lack of corporate backing. I still believe that an NBA team would have a difficult time attracting enough money in sponsorship support to make an owner bullish about the Vancouver market.  I guess that might all change if an NBA team with a shot at the playoffs and some established stars was plopped into town.  Anyways, while I was always a huge Grizzlies follower (fan? well, not sure if I can say that), I am also a realist about how sports fandom and corporate dollar distribution work in this city.  By the way, anyone have a line on some courtside seats?  I’m very interested.

• In the world of Paul Sullivan, because ” it’s going to take more than separated bike lanes” to get people to use bikes to get around the city, bike lanes shouldn’t be built.  In Sullivan’s prescription, you don’t start somewhere and work forward incrementally – you have everything as a go to start, or you go home.  Now if attitudes like this were in charge of city planning around the time that Larry Beasley started to transform this city, as an example, then I shudder to think how Vancouver, and particularly the downtown core, would be a merely a meak version of its current incarnation.

• Thanks for the laugh Charlie – I am glad someone reposted the tripe that comes out of this man’s mouth. Funniest line of the speech:  “So the federal government has provided $417m towards the Evergreen Line. We’ve provided $400m.  TransLink is going to provide their share.  I can tell you this, and I can tell you with a degree of confidence that you can take to the bank.  The TransLink Evergreen Line is going to start in the spring of 2011, and it’s going to be there for people of the northeast sector of Metro Vancouver by 2014 when we open it up.  And we’re going to do more.” I love it. Gordo, how you pull these kinds of statements off without wincing is truly a talent.

• Word is that the NPA’s emerging candidates for their upcoming nomination meeting have got the executive and the party in a real panic, considering that none – and I mean none – have thus far captured the interest or imaginations of the power players within the party.  If anyone doubts this fact, they should go talk to Peter Ladner about the idea to pick candidates before the party has a mayoral anchor, and he will tell you the exact same thing that I have.

Nice to be back.  Thanks as always for reading.

GSP will likely be the man that will front a UFC card in Toronto that should attract over 60,000 fans to the Rogers Centre.

I find it ironic that the weekend news of the Ontario government’s decision to sanction MMA fighting in the province comes in the same week that the BC Medical Association is pushing the Canadian Medical Association to advocate for a national ban on the sport.

And so while Vancouver was first to lift the ban and hold a UFC Pay Per View, it looks as though Toronto and Ontario are poised to overtake our position within the country for a sport that clearly has huge economic impacts attached to it.

The BCMA resolution is likely to have a ripple effect that needs to be addressed early rather than permeating the consciousness of the decision-making powers at both the provincial and municipal levels.

First, the BCMA is completely off base with its statements.

Take this for example:

“We’re concerned that this is a sport that’s different from many others, in that the goal is to disable the opponent,” association President Dr. Ian Gillespie told CTV News.

“We know that there is an increased risk of concussion in this type of sport with the nature of the blows.”

Let’s break this down.  First, how is it different from Boxing, where the goal is also to “disable the opponent”?  Second, how can there possibly be more of a concussion risk than in boxing, where 75%  of the blows are to the head (Muhammad Ali is in the state he is in today for that very reason).

Furthermore, with concussions overtaking hockey and football, I guarantee you that the statistics will show that there are far more in those sports than in MMA.

There are is also research that completely disputes what the BCMA is claiming.

A report from the Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine Department of Emergency Medicine entitled “Injury Trends in Sanctioned Mixed Martial Arts Competition: A Five-Year Review, 2002-2007,” details that:

“During the 635 professional MMA matches, 300 of the 1,270 athletes sustained documented injuries with an injury rate of 23.6 per 100 fight participations. Most common reported injuries were lacerations and upper extremity injuries. Severe concussion rate was 15.4 per 1,000 athlete exposures, or 3% of all matches. No deaths or critical sports-related injuries resulted from any of the regulated matches during the study period. Age, weight, and fight experience did not statistically increase the likelihood of injuries after controlling for other covariates.”

The report concluded that injury rates in regulated professional MMA competition are similar to other combat sports; the overall risk of critical sports-related injury seems to be low.

Or how about this:

In the United States, there were 22,900 cheerleading-related injuries treated in emergency rooms in 2002, up from 10,900 in 1990, according to the Columbus study. The Consumer Product Safety Commission, meanwhile, reported there were nearly six times as many emergency room visits for cheerleaders in 2004 than in 1980.

Of 104 catastrophic injuries sustained by female high school and college athletes from 1982 to 2005 — head and spinal trauma that occasionally led to death — more than half resulted from cheerleading, according to the National Center for Catastrophic Sports Injury Research. All sports combined did not surpass cheerleading.

In 2005, the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s Catastrophic Injury Insurance Program found that 25 percent of the money spent on claims for student-athletes since 1998 resulted from cheerleading. That made it second only to football.

So the BCMA has no idea what it is talking about.

Furthermore, the resolution was crafted without a lot of inquiry into it:

“Citing concern for participant safety, BCMA president-elect Dr. Ian Gillespie stated that the decision to ask for a ban on the sport was “not something that had been a long-standing focus for the BCMA in any way,” adding that “it’s not something that has gone through a full policy review.“

“People are going to do these things anyway, and so by driving it underground, we’re not doing a service to the athletes and that’s where somebody is going to get hurt,” he said.

Instead of a ban, Gutman believes that regulation is the answer for protecting fighters’ health — MMA is not currently regulated on an amateur level.”

Involvement, rather than attaching stigma to the fastest growing sport in the world right now, is how things become safer and better.  Turning a blind eye to a phenomenon that is unstoppable is just stupid.

The amount of money that a Rogers Centre event in Toronto with Georges St. Pierre headlining next year could reach $30-50 million in economic spinoff for the city.

BC if now in third place of the three provinces where UFC is heading, largely because of a provincial government that is not willing to create a provincial sanctioning body (a cop-out approach) and a City that is looking to cripple the sport by unreasonable demands on insurance and indemnification clauses – far more than any other jurisdiction.

It’s time to get to work, people.  MMA is not going away.  The economic impact of an event is absolutely huge:

The Ultimate Fighting Championship’s sophomore event in Montreal set a new North American MMA attendance record with 21,451 attendees, who combined for a staggering $4.9 million gate.  The combined economic spinoffs from the two UFC events held in Montreal is estimated to be over $50 million.

A recent study done in New York state found that a UFC event in New York City would generate $11.5 million in ‘net new’ economic activity: $5.3 million in direct event spending, $1.4 million in non-lodging visitor spending, and $4.9 million in indirect/induced benefits.  This would in turn provide and $400,000 in tax revenue for New York City and $550,000 in tax revenue for the state.

Another study in Massachusetts determined that a UFC event in Boston would produce economic output of $12.3 million. provide $775,000 in tax revenues to the state and employ 600 workers.

In Las Vegas, the UFC generated $86.2 million in nongaming revenue for six events between February 2, 2008 and January 31, 2009.

If we don’t get our shit together here in BC, it might be a very long time before UFC returns to this city.

And that would be bad for everyone, regardless of whether you are a fan of the sport or not.

The numbers do not lie.