OK, Lefty, that’ s funny!

It would be a terrible mistake to rename the country’s longest-standing, most successful political organiztion because of a loss at the ballot box that we caused ourselves through a destructive leadership battle.

The NPA has elected eleven of the past seventeen mayors of Vancouver. The city we see around us was created largely by the NPA and a related TEAM government – green, full of parks, with a vibrant service and information-based economy, and a dense but livable urban core full of life.

The NPA were environmentalists before Vision held its first organizing meeting, making Vancouver’s building standards the most environmentally advanced in North America – LEED Gold standard. And we always maintained a long-standing requirement of 2.75 acres of park space for every 1000 residents in all new developments. That has not been maintained by the current administration.

And the NPA undertook more socially assisted housing than any administration in the city’s history (including the current Vision administration), partnering with the province to build or refurbish twelve residences creating more than 2400 units of assisted living housing. One of them is going up right next to my home in Tinseltown.

It was the NPA that initiated the Four Pillars program to address addiction – abandoned by the current administration – which created the first safe injection site and treatment centre in the nation’s history.

It was the NPA that initiated the first Community Court in the city’s history to deal with first time and repeat offenders by connecting them to social services and treatment options instead of just punishment.

Vancouver is a beautiful city because the NPA has always offered good, pragmatic, financially responsible management of the city’s resources and enlightened programs to address the city’s challenges. We should be proud of our heritage and the city we’ve helped build and the name that emphasizes our non-partisan nature and openness to the best solutions for the challenges we face.

Keep the Non-Partisan Association. That’s the banner I’ll be running under regardless of the name selected on the 29th.

The trouble with the Non Partisan Association moniker is that the association is anything but.

The NPA needs to make Michael Geller and Sean Bickerton more vocal. Those two I can respect and vote for. When I read Mike Klassen and the commenters at citycaucus.com, it ensures I’ll never vote for the NPA.

Sean Bickerton says it would be a “….. mistake to rename the country’s longest-standing, most successful political organization because of a loss at the ballot box that we caused ourselves through a destructive leadership battle”.

As the author of the motion to consider the name change I must clarify that the above was not even remotely the motivation for bringing this motion forward. I &, many others within the NPA, as well as many more outside the organization have realized for many years that it needs to become more inclusive, relevant & effective within the present day political reality. The name change is an important step in that renewal.

Vancouver First says very clearly to voters that this organization places the City of Vancouver & Vancouver citizens first. While Vision Vancouver is found to be wanting in the vision department & it’s becoming clearer that their ‘vision’ is not necessarily that of the wider citizenry, Vancouver First will be judged clearly on what they do for Vancouver first & foremost. The name itself is a positive, clearly stated, unambiguous position which does indeed express our core values “good, pragmatic, financially responsible management of the City’s resources and enlightened programs to address the City’s challenges”.

Unfortunate short term events such as those Sean referred to occur in all political organizations from time to time. But, they have nothing whatever to do with the above 3 core motivations. Sean is, however, correct in suggesting that those events have created some baggage. He is furthermore correct in describing the proud history of the organization.

However, in today’s reality we must not only be, but, be seen to be more inclusive. The organization has active members from all parts & communities of the City. They are open, welcoming & inclusive in my own experience. The” Civic Non-Partisan Association” name itself does not particularly evoke a sense of inclusion while “Vancouver First” says very clearly, if you’re for Vancouver first we want you involved. I think that’s a pretty large constituency & one worth having in our tent.

The NPA name in 1937 reflected what it was, a coalition of liberals & conservatives. Today’s Vancouver is a far more diverse & complex City. The old name has lost its relevance & meaning. However, Vancouver First cannot be more relevant. The name embodies the hopes & aspirations of all the citizens of Vancouver.

On the other hand Vision have recently polarized political discussion in Vancouver &, through their initiatives, have succeeded in dividing Vancouverites one from another. This is unfortunate because a great deal of progress had been being made to change that mentality of solitudes.

This political reality & other far reaching changes in our society are forcing our organization to not only rely on sponsoring good candidates, as it has traditionally done, but, to further clarify where those candidates stand on relevant issues of the day. I think & hope you will see this happening over time because it is essential if we are to be politically effective. Increased clarity & accountability is a requirement in today’s fast paced, better informed world.

So, if we adopt the Vancouver First name, become clearer about our base values & where we might be going if elected &, have good candidates we will have the 3 fundamentals for political success today. Don’t count us out by any means.

“Vancouver First says very clearly to voters that this organization places the City of Vancouver & Vancouver citizens first.”

I predict this name and its mandate will be trotted out by every other mayor in Metro Vancouver (as a criticism and useful hook for same) again and again if the party returns to power, just as the name Vision is regularly used as a way to question the current gov’ts leadership and long-range planning.

I have enormous respect for Bill McCreery and the TEAM administration he was part of – they accomplished great things for this city. But my loyalty is to the NPA and I’ll be running under that banner no matter what’s decided on the 29th.

Most Vancouverites vote on party lines. And my vote won’t change at all. I will vote Vision and COPE all the way down because they have done a great job.

Vancouver First : Vancouverites Last

@Sean Bickerton: you seem to have forgotten about the Liberal Party of Canada, anc organization that is substantially older and more successful than the NPA

Point taken Bill – the NPA is the longest-standing and most successful municipal political organization in Canadian history. Quite a record!

Since there are at least a couple of NPA heavyweights commenting on this thread, I’m interested whether anyone still believes the pretence that the NPA is not a party (and is truly a non-partisan association).

Just like any other party, the NPA puts the pictures of all of their candidates on the billboard/flyer/website and says “please vote for all of us”. It is difficult to believe that all NPA candidates cooperate with each other during an election campaign purely because every one of them honestly believes that all of the NPA candidates are better than all of the non-NPA candidates. Once in office, do voting records show that NPA elected representatives don’t vote along party lines to the same extent as other parties?

If the NPA were truly a non-partisan association, the past successes that Sean Bickerton describes above would be irrelevant, because many NPA candidates will have played no role in the past successes of NPA councils. A truly non-partisan NPA would ask voters to judge candidates purely on their personal records and qualities, and not be influenced by the banner under which they run.

Interesting thought Brad.

Shane, Vancouver representatives @ Metro mtgs are there to represent Vancouver just as the other cities’ reps do for their jurisdictions. That is where regional concerns are dealt with & responsible Vancouver reps normally realize that Vancouver must work constructively within the regional context. In some instances Vancouver’s self interest might take a back seat to the greater good of the region. However, in the bigger picture the health of the region is essential for Vancouver’s well being also.

Vancouver reps are not @ Metro mtgs as political party reps they are there representing Vancouver. The name of the regional entity is not Metro Burnaby. It’s Metro Vancouver for important historical reasons.

Vancouver First is a Vancouver political organization, not a regional one. Vancouver First speaks to the citizens of Vancouver about that organization being accountable to the people of Vancouver. One of the most often heard criticisms of politicians is they are not accountable. Vancouver First elected representatives will be accountable to & judged by the citizens of Vancouver first & foremost.

Following your logic, you would agree that Vision Vancouver is, therefore, also “an arrogant, divisive name for a political party” & “nobody else matters”.

Julian, a good question.

Non-partisan relative to the NPA is a non-ideological, rational, merit based approach to finding solutions for City of Vancouver has been the longstanding strength of the NPA. The NPA does not have to “get permission” from Ms. Watts as Francis has mused. She, in fact, has borrowed the “non-partisan” approach to civic politics from the NPA, where it has been the mainstay of the organization since 1937. This is from the Surrey First Facebook page:

“Surrey First is a coalition of strong, independent and non-partisan people who want to focus on local issues rather than local politics. The strict boundaries, party discipline and block voting found at the provincial or federal level are often impediments to new ideas and perspectives and often make it difficult to get things done.”

From the NPA web site:

“The non-partisan model of civic government has served the City of Vancouver well since 1937. The tenets of the NPA’s original constitution still stand today:
• To strive to improve civic government in Vancouver.
• To support the election of the most suitable candidates for civic office.
• To oppose the introduction of party politics into the elected boards of the city.”

Who needs “permission” from who? It is also clear from the NPA constitution that the organization is mandated to put “Vancouver First”. We have over the years &, to the benefit of our City & can continue to do so in the future under the banner NPA, Vancouver First!

Elected representatives from NPA / Vancouver First can & will continue to vote as they personally see fit. There are many examples where they do support well founded initiatives brought forward by other political organizations. For instance, Councilor Anton has done so, not infrequently, over the past 18 months. They, on the other hand, sometimes appear to be voting in a block because the motion under consideration is not in the best interests of Vancouver first & foremost.