32 responses so far ↓

• 1 penguinstorm // Sep 7, 2015 at 6:23 pm

  Once again, Vancouver’s mayor seeks to run a city-state. He’s got no power to influence this and we’re in the middle of a federal election. Maybe try…um, I don’t know…running the city for a while?

• 2 IanS // Sep 7, 2015 at 9:35 pm

  Not like the Mayor to be slow off the mark when there’s some PR to be had. Perhaps a few staff members were away on holiday?

• 3 peakie // Sep 7, 2015 at 10:46 pm

  Mayor has no solutions. Housing policy turns city into NPA town.
  The Victoria Drive “hostel” at 10th and Victoria was made years ago from a triangle of land from the Vancouver East Public health clinic moved to Broadway and Commercial. interimly, the low rise with courtyard building was used as a winter homeless, made infamous in a CBC Stephen Quinn column. Now tower completed, late as always, it is being used as a FLAILING Vision gimmick.

• 4 peakie // Sep 7, 2015 at 11:20 pm

  Marcella Munro oft-used by Vision, skips town to be “responsible for Southern Alberta stakeholder relations and managing communications out of the Calgary office [for $130,000]; She reports to the Deputy Chief of Staff to the Premier, Adrienne King”
  Jessie Adcock, “chief digital officer” (Ir-responible for the Talk Vancouver Potemkin Village) is off to run as a Liberal in Port Moody-Coquitlam and is still using city resources used to promote Vision, to promote herself, and Justin Trudeau.

  Meggs probably got an earful from his ex-labour buddies on the weekend for sitting on his hands again. He will make the vain (in many senses) motion to “do something” but it’s federal. (he thinks).

  “Something must be done” in the mis-quote of Edward VIII of 18 November 1936 in Dowlais, South Wales.

  The Pope Francis does more than Vision, and better than Merkel’s ex-Yugoslav refugee camp policies of shelter but little else.

• 5 spartikus // Sep 8, 2015 at 8:22 am

  I know to even mention the historical record in a dry, matter of fact way will bring hysterical accusations of partisanship, impropriety and calls for my head on a platter, but proposals to turn Vancouver into a “sanctuary city” were made in 2014.

• 6 IanS // Sep 8, 2015 at 8:50 am

  You improprietous Partisan! I demand your head! 🙂

• 7 peakie // Sep 8, 2015 at 12:35 pm

  In Quebec
  [English version] Premier Philippe Couillard, his wife and a group of Lac St-Jean residents announced they will pool their resources to help a Syrian family immigrate to Quebec.
  The Premier’s office confirmed Couillard’s intention to help the family settle in his riding of Saguenay-Lac-St-Jean, but refused to name
  other members of the group.
  “Mr. Couillard was shaken when he saw the picture of the little boy on the beach,” Harold Fortin, spokesperson for the premier, told The Montreal Gazette. “He decided to do something, it was a personal initiative, and if it inspires other people, then good.”
  Refugees can come to Quebec if they are sponsored by the province, an organization or a group of two to five citizens. There are also steps to follow with the federal government.
  Couillard’s group has committed to covering the newcomers’ food, lodging and clothing expenses for one year, as well as helping them learn French, find jobs and get their children signed up for school….

  « On va augmenter beaucoup au Québec le nombre de réfugiés qu’on va accueillir. On va passer de 1200 à 3650 dès cette année. Et on va probablement reconduire ça l’an prochain. Donc, on devrait accueillir l’équivalent de 7230 réfugiés sur deux ans », rapporte M. Couillard.

• 8 A Taxpayer // Sep 8, 2015 at 2:13 pm

  Once again, by pushing the Sanctuary City folly, the Mayor is wading into an area he has no control over, immigration, and without the appropriate authority and information has no idea about the people he may be allowing to remain at large in the city. It is only a matter of time before someone who is in the city illegally
  commits a serious crime that could have been prevented.

  Of course Canada should and does accept refugees but this must be done deliberately and selectively. All you have to do is look at the example of Sweden to see what happens when you just open the doors wide.

  http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5195/sweden-rape

  Canada does have a humanitarian responsibility for the world at large but it must not come at the expense of the security of its citizens.

• 9 For realz // Sep 8, 2015 at 6:22 pm

  I was wondering myself where the province’s and mayor’s lead was on this when other mayors/premiers were already making announcements. Perhaps it was comms staff away. Or maybe needing to be in touch and coordinated with the provincial government, whose announcement on this came forth today.

  Anyway, jumping on the federal soap box for a sec, the Harper government’s continuation of the general policy of downloading costs, to either lower levels of government or private organizations, created a vacancy for others to fill. It’s no surprise then that cities are coming across as city-states having to fill the gap that the federal government fails to manage or coordinate, in some cases spectacularly. Unfortunately that leaves higher level services at the whim of our local politics and lesser resources. It also opens up the possibility of imbalances not just here but across the country.

  One local example, Harper’s stop in Surrey 5 days ago was to announce funding for Surrey’s light rail transit project, nothing else for the region. That announcement got buried by the tragedy of the refugee crisis on the day.

• 10 Lysenko's Nemesis // Sep 8, 2015 at 11:20 pm

  Anything shall be done that jabs a stick in the eye of the federal govt. It’s a strategy. Any and all showing up in Vancouver will be coddled because they are needed as pawns in the game.

• 11 Lysenko's Nemesis // Sep 8, 2015 at 11:25 pm

  Federal funds for transit projects are available if applications follow the guidelines. The mayor of Surrey advised the public months ago that an official proposal had been presented to the federal government.

• 12 For realz // Sep 10, 2015 at 2:04 pm

  Thanks. The point I was making had to do with the perception that Canadian cities are appearing to look like city-states due to federal government downloading costs to lower levels of government; the net effect being an imbalance across the country/region etc.

  Metro Vancouver mayors say as much in this Van Sun article yesterday regarding refugees: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/will+take+refugees+need+more+support+metro+vancouver+mayors/11351501/story.html

• 13 A Taxpayer // Sep 10, 2015 at 3:07 pm

  I think in this case the mayors are trying to upload the costs:

  “The mayors of the two cities home to the most refugees in B.C. say they have the willingness and capacity to take in more, but need support and funding from senior levels of government to do so.”

  They may be willing but they don’t have the capacity if they need funding from the senior levels of government.

  We would all be better off if each level of government focused on the services that they have the authority and responsibility to deliver.

• 14 For realz // Sep 10, 2015 at 4:36 pm

  Agreed. I’m not going to get into the semantics about what was meant by capacity however. I assume the mayor’s have a handle on what they’re talking about.

• 15 penguinstorm // Sep 11, 2015 at 8:38 am

  “no idea about the people he may be allowing to remain at large in the city”

  Yes! We cannot allow people to remain at large! In the City!

• 16 A Taxpayer // Sep 11, 2015 at 3:22 pm

  It is not uncommon for people who have never traveled outside of Canada except perhaps for an all-inclusive resort in Mexico or on a cruise ship to believe that beneath the superficial differences of skin colour, language and dress all people share the same core values or would if given the opportunity. Regrettably, the error of this assumption is usually learned too late as demonstrated by the experience of the wealthier European countries such as the Netherlands who are trying to rectify this mistake by trying to ensure the integration of immigrants.

  I fully support immigration – without it we will not be able
  to maintain our standard of living because of a low birth rate and an aging population. However, this immigration must be done legally through the front door with proper safeguards. You choose who you will welcome into your home and if you should discover someone camping out in your basement uninvited
  the rational reaction is to call the police. Illegal immigration is no different.

• 17 Chris Keam // Sep 11, 2015 at 4:52 pm

  Applying for refugee status doesn’t equal illegal immigration.

  Further, most belief systems share core values – the differences between the 10 Commandments, Eightfold Path, Ancilliaries of the Faith, aren’t very notable. Mostly style rather than substance. Is there any culture in the world that does not subscribe to the ‘be nice to people, help out where and when you can’ approach to life?

• 18 A Taxpayer // Sep 11, 2015 at 5:41 pm

  You appear not to consider tolerance of differences, such as sexual orientation or the equality of women as a core value of our society. Interesting.

• 19 Chris Keam // Sep 11, 2015 at 6:57 pm

  Thought that was covered under ‘be nice to people’ frankly.

• 20 A Taxpayer // Sep 12, 2015 at 3:01 pm

  You may very well think so but your simplistic and limited viewpoint in no way represents the cultures of some very significant portions of the world’s population.

• 21 Chris Keam // Sep 12, 2015 at 7:06 pm

  Can’t say I’m looking for lessons on cultural nuances from someone who appears to label refugees from armed conflict as illegal immigrants. It does raise an interesting question however. Which cultures do you think present such a threat to Canada that we can’t afford to let individuals in?

• 22 A Taxpayer // Sep 13, 2015 at 5:12 pm

  Cultural nuances? I have never before seen practices such as female genital mutilation, polygamy, “honour” killing, stoning adulterers, tossing gays off buildings and the like trivialized by characterizing them as “cultural nuances”.

• 23 Chris Keam // Sep 13, 2015 at 9:20 pm

  Of course you haven’t. No one is making that claim. Which cultures do you think present such a threat to this country that you feel we shouldn’t let in individuals trying to escape the countries where those practices are more commonplace than in Canada?

• 24 A Taxpayer // Sep 15, 2015 at 8:31 am

  First it was cultures share core belief systems. Kumbaya. Then it was some acknowledgement of differences but they are merely nuances. Finally we get to acknowledgement that some practices are repugnant to Canadians but these are the practices in countries from which individuals are trying to escape. Once again you have taken an ill thought out position and making it up as you go along.

  But that doesn’t mean the individuals are trying to escape these practices or the practices would not take root in their adopted countries. Clearly the experience of countries like Sweden and the UK demonstrate this is not the case. Further, the failure of the main political parties to confront this reality is only leading to increased popular support for more extremist political parties as seen in Sweden. This will not end well for anyone there.

• 25 Bill_McCreery // Sep 15, 2015 at 3:15 pm

  Hmmm. Ballem’s taken permanent holiday. Do you think it was voluntary? Was this one of the nails?

• 26 penguinstorm // Sep 15, 2015 at 4:25 pm

  Safeguards! Absolutely key!

• 27 Chris Keam // Sep 15, 2015 at 5:52 pm

  You’ve yet to name which cultures scare you so much that you won’t expedite the acceptance of refugees from those same places. Since we are speaking of ill-thought out positions.

• 28 A Taxpayer // Sep 16, 2015 at 9:31 am

  That is because I don’t propose to exclude “cultures” but do favour immigration and refugee processes geared to prevent those cultural practices that are not acceptable to Canadians from taking root so that we don’t end up with the problems that Sweden has. Will that guarantee incidents do not occur? Of course not as certainty would only be possible by ending immigration all together which most people would agree is not desirable. However, we will have better outcomes than just pretending the problem does not exist as you seem to favour.

• 29 Chris Keam // Sep 16, 2015 at 2:41 pm

  This is the kind of garbage editorializing that demeans the entire conversation. I have expressed zero opinion on the issues you raised. I have asked you to be specific.

  The bottom line is that you are invoking an issue unlikely to be faced by Canada if it allows war refugees, a large percentage of which are women and children, to be fast-tracked out of refugee camps and war zones.

• 30 A Taxpayer // Sep 16, 2015 at 3:20 pm

  ” a large percentage of which are women and children,”

  “Most of the migrants are adult men (72%).”

  http://data.unhcr.org/mediterranean/regional.php

  I will not waste any more time with someone who is so ignorant of even the most basic of information.

• 31 Chris Keam // Sep 16, 2015 at 3:58 pm

  Fully one third of the refugees represent almost no need for severe security measures. That’s a large percentage. I expect many of the men are the same. The reality is that we have the infrastructure in place to move more rapidly and in larger measure to get people out of harm’s way and your (apparent) solution is to make it slower. Fortunately, we have people with experience and knowledge available to counter the fear-mongering.

  “Never mind targets of 10,000, 15,000, or 25,000 refugees, he tells her, and this four-year business; bring 50,000 to Canada before Christmas, not in cargo planes, but in leased passenger ships. Let the Canadian Forces manage the logistics, he says; it’s what they do, and they’re more than up to the job.”

  http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/michael-den-tandt-hilliers-right-about-refugees-and-should-lead-canadas-effort

• 32 Look Deeper // Sep 21, 2015 at 9:14 pm

  It is way more fun to pretend to be Prime Minister or Premier or the Pope’s advisor than actually running our City. We are boring. We are hard to deal with. We don’t conveniently fall in-line to his remaking of society. Actually being Mayor is just not interesting – sewers, roads, parks, zoning — pretty mind numbing really and who reads press releases about an upgrade to a library or garbage handling. No, much more fun to play in other people’s sandboxes.