Frances Bula header image 2

Three days to election, mayor apologizes to everyone for “overstepping” and asks COPE voters to come to Vision

November 12th, 2014 · 24 Comments

Jeez, to think this election seemed quiet a month ago. Here’s today’s small bombshell. Note appearance of former campaigners Daniel Fontaine and Neil Monckton further down in story. (Text appended below for you cheapos who are not contributing to my upkeep by subscribing to the Globe.)


Vancouver’s two-term mayor, facing polls that give him a surprisingly slim lead in the mayoral race, has apologized to voters for not listening to them enough as he drove an aggressive agenda on housing and homelessness.

Mayor Gregor Robertson also pleaded for strategic voting, asking supporters of COPE – the party that broke away from its alliance with the mayor’s Vision Vancouver after the last election – to switch to his party to keep a “progressive team” in power.

 

More Related to this Story

  • Editorial Vote Gregor in Vancouver
  • Four things that stand out about Vancouver civic politics
  • In Surrey municipal election, crowded field vies to change the guard

Mr. Robertson launched into the apology as part of his opening statement at Wednesday’s debate.

“I want to start with a message to voters directly, and that is I have heard you. While we’ve done a lot of good things, done very well in the past six years, there are also things we haven’t done particularly well. For those in particular when I haven’t met your expectations, I am sorry. I know I can do better.”

He closed by asking voters supporting COPE candidates to switch to Vision to keep the Non-Partisan Association out – prompting boos from COPE campaigners and a scornful response from mayoral candidate Meena Wong.

She said the apology was six years too late and issued her own appeal: “I’m asking Vision voters, come home to COPE, vote your conscience.”

NPA candidate Kirk LaPointe also said later that the mayor’s apology is “a form of repentance that’s too late – I don’t think the community will buy it. He was obviously put up to it by some strategist in the background.”

Mr. Robertson admitted later that he planned to vote only for Vision candidates on his ballot, even though the party’s decision to leave spots open on each of the council, school board and park board slates meant he could have thrown some support to COPE or the Green Party. Those are parties that many on the left support, along with Vision.

In Vancouver, voters choose 10 candidates to represent the city at large, rather than choosing one person who represents an individual ward.

Mr. Robertson’s apology and appeal intrigued experienced political observers.

“The timing is surprising, coming this late in the campaign,” said Daniel Fontaine, the chief of staff for previous NPA mayor Sam Sullivan. “It smacks of desperation.”

But a former COPE campaign strategist said it’s a technique that the federal Liberals used effectively in previous elections, particularly in 2004 as they asked for NDP supporters to move over to keep the Conservatives out.

“It does work, providing the group you’re trying to move over is open to that,” Neil Monckton said.

He said Mr. Robertson’s move could be successful if the results from a recent poll are accurate. It showed that 42 per cent of people planning to vote for Ms. Wong would consider switching their vote.

Kathleen Wynne was successful in bringing Ontario Liberals back from the brink of defeat in the provincial election earlier this year by apologizing repeatedly for her predecessor’s mistakes.

Mr. Fontaine said Vision invited problems for itself in this election, not just because of the anger it generated with some of its aggressive approvals for rental housing, bike lanes and homeless shelters, but because it chose to run only eight candidates in the 10-seat council race.

“They’ve encouraged their own base to go window-shopping for other parties. And voters are consumers. They make impulse buys. They’ve got themselves in a pickle.”

Categories: 2014 Vancouver Civic Election

  • Kirk

    He’s sorry? What’s his response to Scot Hein? Is he sorry for that too? I’m tired of his BS. I now know whom I’m not voting for. Will a staffer comment on Point Grey Road now?

  • Kirk

    Now it sounds like the “apology” was entirely fake. The twitterverse is full of people who said that they got a phone call poll a few days ago asking if they’d vote for Gregor if he apologized.

    This is leaving such a bad, bad taste in my mouth. Was his divorce fake too? Polled better with women? Sheesh.

  • penguinstorm

    “Point Grey road is awesome now.” – a staffer, who I heartily agreed with.

  • penguinstorm

    Gregor needs to stop apologizing. He’s weakening himself at this point. I heard him on CBC the other morning and it just reminded me of this.

  • Taylor Henry

    Robertson is far from perfect, but at least he does not claim Conrad Black as his patron. I think that says everything we need to know about Kirk Lapointe.

  • Dan Cooper

    An ‘apology’ given only at the eleventh hour and fifty-eighth minute, with disaster looming, is no apology at all. And without any specifics of the changes they would make, it is a joke and an offensive one at that. Just how stupid or cowardly do they take we progressives (as opposed to Vision “progressive”) voters to be? Quite a bit, it seems.

    I saw elsewhere today that Woodsworth is talking about how a coalition between Vision and other parties would be good. Yet the ‘coalition’ she and the rest of the Cadman Faction of COPE were in with Vision was not an actual coalition, and there is no reason to think Vision under its current organization and founding philosophy would be able to agree to a real one. A real coalition is one like that in the UK between the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats. While one party is the leader, both have actual authority, and as neither has an absolute majority each has a potential veto if the other goes too far. The former Vision-COPE-Green (for one term) ‘coalition’ on the other hand always had a pre-determined absolute majority for Vision, who refused in fact to accept anything else or even to let the other parties decided how many people to run for office – which is why the Greens dropped out. Since Vision always votes in absolute lock-step, and indeed does not even seem to have any internal debate or discussion, much less take into consideration the wishes of its ‘coalition’ ‘partners’…what is the point? Getting an appointment to a talk-talk-talk oriented international commission was enough for Cadman to accept not having any actual influence here at home(*) but that kind of thing is not enough for most other parties or potential candidates. So…as far as I am concerned (and anyway, I already voted) Vision can go jump in a lake. As I often say when some dog runs at my barking its head off and baring its teeth, and its owner calls out, “Don’t worry; he’s friendly!”: “I can’t know that; I don’t believe you; and I don’t care! Get your dog away from me and get a clue!”

    (*)I am ambivalent about the current COPE-sters, essentially what was earlier the Cadman Faction, but I have to give them one thing: They stayed in and continued working for COPE during the time when they were not just completely excluded from power within COPE but actively and continuously reviled by the Cadman and Vision Factions. This of course was unlike the Vision Faction that used COPE as a stepping stone and then dumped COPE the moment it decided it didn’t need the Cadman or Louis Factions any more (oops, I mean suddenly – surprise! surprise! and who would have known!? – yes, suddenly discovered they were all ‘wild eyed’ crazies because they actually, you know, discussed issues rather than simply obeying a leader), or the Cadman Faction who – in Cadman’s own case literally – walked away from COPE completely the moment they lost one of three candidate slots in an internal election they thought they had set up to as usual keep Louis and his supporters down, and when the Louisites started gaining some internal say again.

  • q8r1

    Barack Obama after he lost the Senate: “I hear you.” And now is going to keep ruling (not governing) by executive order. Gregor Robertson & Vision Vancouver are playing right out of Obama’s ram it down their throats politics. Vote the incumbent mayor and his gang of cronies out.

  • q8r1

    Do you live on Pt. Grey Road? If so, good for you. For the rest of us losers- try commuting from DT to UBC; 45-60 minutes at rush hour for 12km. Now that is pretty pathetic. Especially when considering all the idling cars spewing their emissions into the supposed greenest city in the world. Better to let traffic move quickly and efficiently and get the cars off the road faster.

  • Chris Keam

    I hope you’re not shocked that traffic moves slower at rush hour in cities. That’s what happens when the bulk of vehicles only have a single occupant.

  • penguinstorm

    Don’t call yourself a loser. It’s not good for your self-respect man. Just because you think it’s your right to go bombing along inside your automobile at some insane rate doesn’t make you a loser. Not that smart: yes. Loser: no.

  • q8r1

    Ahhh. Just another arrogant cyclist living in your utopian perception. You didn’t address the larger issue. Is it more carbon efficient to have myriads of cars idling for hours or have cars move along efficiently to their destinations and switch off? I love your ‘not that smart’ quip. I have a doctorate, over 80 peer reviewed publications, a faculty appointment at UBC, and run my own consulting firm. Before you toss around insults, you would be wise to account for the possibility that the person you are targeting is smarter than you.

  • q8r1

    Now to clear things up… My commute times were 20 -25 minutes at rush hour prior to the closing of Pt. Grey Rd. Now they are 45 – 60. This is an increase of 25 – 35 minutes of my car, and that of everyone else burning gas. If the goal is to turn Vancouver into the Greenest City in North America, VisionVancouver’s strategy is pretty flawed.

  • francesbula

    Sorry to intrude on what seems like private conversation here, but … your commute time has doubled? I’d like to hear more about this. I frequently commute out to UBC along Fourth. I’m trying to understand how having to drive three blocks up Macdonald and along Fourth for the approx. 10 blocks you’d usually travel on the western part of PGR could cause your commute time to double. I usually drive out between 8 and 10 a.m. on the mornings I go and I’ve never seen any congestion there. Only congestion is occasionally on the hill west of Jericho. ???

  • Chris Keam

    What Frances said. I just ran a search for a commute from Burrard Station to the UBC Loop at 8:30am tomorrow using Translink’s trip planner and the longest trip it registered was 37 min. The shortest was 30. Generally speaking I have found its predictions pretty accurate. Hard to believe your commute is taking longer than a transit trip with multiple stops and transfers required.

  • penguinstorm

    You might be wise to account for the possibility of having a sense of humour. (Tossing arrogance, narcissism, vanity and insults around in a single message is impressive though.)

  • Chris Keam

    “Is it more carbon efficient to have myriads of cars idling for hours or have cars move along efficiently to their destinations and switch off?”

    Honestly, the answer to this issue where traffic congestion is a problem is to either switch off your engine for any delay over 10 seconds, or buy a hybrid which will mostly run emissions-free in stop and go city traffic. Your carbon emissions will be essentially the same as if you drove to your destination without stopping AFAIK. Unless you drive a muscle car, in which case you should take me for a ride cuz I love Detroit’s most egregious excesses.

    So pretty….

  • q8r1

    I start at Pender and Burrard. Proceed up Burrard to either 4th, B-Way, or 16th- make the right turn and proceed to campus. The experience on 4th and B-Way is hampered by buses, parking, and unprotected left turns while 16th is constrained by single lane traffic after Arbutus. The beauty of PG Rd was that if you didn’t have business on any of those routes is that you could bypass all of it right to Alma and head up the hill. I commute early in the morning (0500) and the times I am talking about are the evenings (1700 -1830). Also, another issue with shutting down an artery like PG Rd is that if there is ANY problem on 4th, B-Way, or 16th, everything just pretty much grinds to a halt due to overwhelming congestion. Overall, the system does work but it just costs me more time and that is my most valued commodity.

  • q8r1

    Don’t have a muscle car anymore… but did in the 80’s and yes it was fun. I don’t think I should have to buy a new car to accommodate the bad policy implemented by Vision Vancouver. I would however be happy to drive a car that they paid for.

    The reality is that most people can’t afford to buy a Hybrid because they are too heavily invested in real estate. I don’t think it is realistic for people to switch off their cars for delays longer than 10 seconds either.

    What Vision has done here is a social engineering experiment where they have implemented a Field of Dreams (If you build it, they will come.) model. Stats Canada did a study on biking in Van and found it was decreasing despite increasing the number of bike lanes. This by all measures is a policy failure. If they also thought that making it more difficult to drive would get more people out of their cars, I think it has only upset people more. Yes traffic into DT has reduced but that just equates to fewer people coming into DT- not an decrease in non-vehicular traffic. This then has the knock-on effect of reducing business in the DT core. I have come down on the weekend and it is a ghost town- except for a few pockets here and there and the scattering of confused tourists looking for something to do.

  • Chris Keam

    I’m actually more interested in hearing more about your claimed increase in travel times. The anecdote doesn’t jibe with Translink’s claimed travel times, or Ms Bula’s experiences. The idling concerns seem like a red herring when there’s clearly other options. Hard to believe a smart fella would put up with a trip averaging 12km/h when you could be halving your travel time and saving $$ on the bus.

    Also, can you provide a link to the Stats Can data for the rest of us to check out? I would also add that I personally see increased cycling infrastructure as a safety improvement, not a carrot to induce cycling. No one demanded that the Sea to Sky highway changes deliver more people to Whistler — to provide a corollary.

    “Myths and Facts About Idling
    MYTH: Idling uses less gas than restarting the engine. Studies clearly show that idling for over 10 seconds uses more fuel and produces more CO2 emissions than restarting your engine. The amount of time to offset any potential maintenance costs to the starter or battery is under 60 seconds. So, as a guideline, if a car is stopped for more than 60 seconds the engine should be turned off. ”

    http://www.toolkit.bc.ca/tool/idle-reduction-bylaw

    thanks!

  • q8r1

    Here is Calgary Sun’s Synopsis: http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/03/09/going-flat-out–portland-and-vancouver-spent-loads-on-bike-lanes–for-very-little-gain

    Here is Stats Canada Link: http://www12.statcan.gc.ca/nhs-enm/2011/as-sa/99-012-x/99-012-x2011003_1-eng.cfm

    You will notice that cycling remains essentially flat (sorry my mistake)

  • Chris Keam

    I’ll unpack the flaws in using 2011 commuting data to criticize a largely recreational path installed last summer a bit later. More importantly, why are you avoiding any attempt to validate your double commute time claims?

  • q8r1

    I suppose the only way you’d be convinced is by me purchasing a go pro camera so you can view the commute in real time. If you’d like to buy or loan me one, I’d be happy to document it for you over an entire week.

    More interestingly, you admit that closing PG Rd is for recreation only? Now that’s a valid priority…. Close a road that serves 1000’s of vehicles a day so that 100’s of cyclists and the residents of that corridor can have a safe space to play? That thinking is flawed on so many levels. Please face the facts: Whether you favour bikes or cars or transit, commuting in Vancouver is a zero sum game- the gains of any one method come at the expense of another. The way you appropriately allocate resources in a zero-sum game is by serving the relative percentages in a decreasing fashion. This is what is known as Pareto-efficiency. We can both certainly agree that the decreasing order of transportation modes are as follows: car, transit, and bike. That would dictate that resources (both monetary and space) be allocated to cars, then transit, and lastly bikes on a percentage basis. This is the opposite of what Vision Vancouver has chosen to do- ignore a valid economic theory that has served to generate valid policy for hundreds of years. Just so you know, this is how our healthcare resources are allocated.

    Finally, another fatal flaw in Vision Vancouver’s plan is that, since Vancouver is a business hub (at least for now), traffic must come from outside the city as people who work in Vancouver largely can not afford to live in Vancouver. Unfortunately, inter-city transit does not exist in many areas of the lower-mainland. By making cars unwelcome in Vancouver, Vision Vancouver are basically saying that the city is not open for business. If businesses are made more appealing offers by say- Surrey for instance, they will relocate and this will have a detrimental effect on Vancouver’s tax base. Perhaps you can now see the incongruence between perceived environmental sustainability and known economic sustainability?

  • Chris Keam

    “I suppose the only way you’d be convinced is by me purchasing a go pro camera so you can view the commute in real time. If you’d like to buy or loan me one, I’d be happy to document it for you over an entire week.”

    You can document your daily trips using Strava.com
    for free. There’s lots of other trip recording apps and websites too. I’m presuming you own a smartphone.

    “More interestingly, you admit that closing PG Rd is for recreation only? Now that’s a valid priority…. Close a
    road that serves 1000’s of vehicles a day so that 100’s of cyclists and the residents of that corridor can have a safe space to play?

    The road is not closed. I have driven, cycled, and walked on it since the change. If restating the purpose of the changes is ‘admitting’ something then sure, guilty as charged. But, I didn’t say it was for recreation ‘only’. ‘Largely recreational’ is the exact quote and certainly it’s available to whoever chooses to use it for whatever transportation purpose they desire. Is it as easy (for motorists) as making a small route change and taking an alternative path? Probably not. There remains a wide range of alternatives, including a number of direct routes to the UBC campus and the option of buses, cycling, and even walking briskly — if your claimed average speed of 12km/h is the norm.

    “We can both certainly agree that the decreasing order of transportation modes are as follows: car, transit, and bike.”

    Both the City of Vancouver and other levels of government have prioritized other modes of transportation before private vehicles. This has been in place for some time. Even before the current administration if I am not mistaken.

    “Finally, another fatal flaw in Vision Vancouver’s plan is that, since Vancouver is a business hub (at least for now), traffic must come from outside the city as people who work in Vancouver largely can not afford to live in Vancouver.”

    Please provide an example of a ‘business hub’ impacted by the Point Grey Road changes or how those changes would impact driving into Vancouver.

    “By making cars unwelcome in Vancouver, Vision Vancouver are basically saying that the city is not open for business.”

    The only thing worse than claims unsupported by data is hyperbole. It is in fact a million times worse, as every single living being on the planet is acutely aware.

    Now, let’s look at your stats from a previous post.

    From the linked Calgary Sun article:

    “The most recent Statistics Canada data shows that bike commuting in the Metro Vancouver region inched to 1.8% in 2011, from 1.7% in 2006, while in Vancouver
    proper, bike commuting went from 2.9% in 2008 to 3.8% in 2011.

    As well, a study of separated Vancouver bike lanes published in kitsilano.ca last fall shows almost no increase in use since 2009 when they first opened.”

    Actual statistics are available as the first result of a Google search for ‘Vancouver bike lane statistics. Here’s a plain text copy and paste of the top results. I’m saving my one link for a StatsCan web address later in my comments, as I understand multiple links in a post requires moderation. I’m sure Frances has better things to do on such a nice weekend. However, it’s fascinating to me that you chose the fourth link as the one you wished to provide for corroboration. I wonder what search terms you used? Something less obvious?

    Separated bike lanes | City of Vancouver

    vancouver.ca › … › Biking and cyclists ›
    Routes, maps, and trip planner
    Nov 15, 2013 – Find out about Vancouver’s
    separated bike lanes program. … Download monthly statistics on separated bike lanes since August 2009 (70 KB) …

    Vancouver bike lanes boast record summer cycling traffic…metronews.ca/…/vancouver/…/vancouver-bike-lanes-boast-record-summ…

    Aug 27, 2014 – More Vancouverites are using
    the city’s bike lanes than ever this summer, according to statistics released by the city on Wednesday. A record …

    Vancouver’s bike lanes have made it a city
    to watch – The …
    http://www.theglobeandmail.com › News › British
    Columbia

    Aug 2, 2013 – Vancouver’s bike lanes:
    Gordon Price on when to ignore the opposition …. Statistics show the number of bike riders crossing into Manhattan …

    Portland and Vancouver spent loads on bike
    lanes … for …
    http://www.calgarysun.com/…/going-flat-out–portland-and-vancouver-spent-l...

    Mar 9, 2014 – The most recent Statistics
    Canada data shows that bike commuting in the Metro Vancouver region inched to 1.8% in 2011, from 1.7% in 2006, …

    Of course the Statistics Canada link goes
    to data for a ‘census metropolitan area, not Vancouver alone. It included many areas with little or no cycling infrastructure.

    https://www12.statcan.gc.ca/census-recensement/2011/as-sa/fogs-spg/Facts-cma-eng.cfm?LANG=Eng&GK=CMA&GC=933

    Unsurprisingly, this drives the percentage
    of mode share way down. I find it hard to believe a person of your claimed scientific background would make such a rookie mistake. Can you explain? It
    certainly highlights the challenges of encouraging active transportation when there’s a patchwork of lanes that don’t adequately connect. Certainly speaks to
    reasons why some other countries, such as South Korea, embark upon nation-wide improvements to the cycling infrastructure, and why in places like Denmark,
    Copenhagen has cycling stats everybody quotes, but very average numbers for the rest of the country. Without a network, uptake is always going to be less than it might be. It certainly reinforces the need for the PGR changes, in that it linked Jericho Beach and Kitsilano Beach providing a traffic-calmed connector
    to the two areas. That’s why it’s so popular.

    The bottom line however is that in a very short time we are seeing slow, steady uptake of the options provided by improved active transportation infrastructure. But, it’s your argument that this is too slow and expensive. Please come back with some indication that other modes showed greater growth for less money. For instance, what was the market share of automobiles at the turn of the century, when roads weren’t well-suited to their use? This would be a very apt comparison.

    As noted above, Strava is a zero cost method to collect the data you say will corroborate your experience. I will look forward to your post next week providing a link to that information.

    cheers,

    CK

  • Chris Keam

    Oh wow, a bunch of working links. Disqus for the win!