[Canada] Canadian Politics Redux

[Malthus]

The answer there is pretty simple.  Conduct an investigation before acting. 

I was under the impression he did, and he decided to side with the victim's version of the event.  I doubt any of the MPs would say candidly "Yeah, I grabbed her butt a few times, I tought she liked it".  It would be more along the lines of "I didn't do it" or "it was an accidental contact" or "We were at a party, I was totally drunk, I may have said something I don't remember, but it was a one time event".

But it's kinda hard to investigate, and it depends what is sexual harassment.  Did he touch her inapropriately?  Did he try talking her into having a drink outside the house?  Did he made silly comments of a sexual nature?

Also, it always ends up between the version of the victim and the presumed harasser.  If both contradicts themselves, what kind of investigation can really be done that won't put any lights on these MPs and the victims?

Yup - what you want in these kinds of investigations ideally would be some sort of evidence from third persons, which you can only really get if the allegations are made public.

Btw, on the political side, the media consensus in Quebec seems to be he did the right thing by sending a clear message.

Seems to me though that it would be a shame to 'send a clear message' that resulted in destroying the careers and reputations of two men based on, as far as we know, to be simply allegations.

Also, looking at the Gomeshi saga, it seems clear the CBC knew about it and didn't want to do anything, even when where there was a complaint.  In retrospect, did they take the right approach, one of caution, until the story could likely be made public, or should they have acted and suspended their radio host?

My read of the Gomeshi saga was that the CBC knew he was an asshole, who in addition may have made inappropriate comments towards an employee, but were completely unaware he enjoyed beating women without their consent.

Evidence of this is that the employees on his show made some sort of formal compaint about him this summer - but not one word in it about inappropriate sexual stuff: it was all about how he was an ass and a tyrant.

[crazy canuck]

The answer there is pretty simple.  Conduct an investigation before acting. 

I was under the impression he did, and he decided to side with the victim's version of the event.

No he didnt.  His public statements are quite clear.  On the same day he said he suspended the MPs the party whip stated that an investigation was going to be started.  And why did they do this?  Because Justin said he had to give the benefit of the doubt to the complainants. 

@ Malthus, this shows his inexperience if he was trapped so easily that he felt he had no option.  A couple other options jump to mind immediately:

1) Justine could have asked the complainents whether they would be prepared to participate in an invetigation process.  If the answer to that is no then that is safely the end to the matter.  If the answer is yes then Justin could have retained a harrassment investigator to conduct the investigation and await the results.

2) Justin could have asked the complainants if he could have their permission to speak to Mulcair to approach the Speaker to create an investigatory apparatus and whether they would be prepared to participate in that process.  As it turns out this is a little bit of what he did except he didnt first ask the complainants and he suspended without any investigation.

Really any other option is better than the one he picked.

Also, looking at the Gomeshi saga, it seems clear the CBC knew about it and didn't want to do anything, even when where there was a complaint.  In retrospect, did they take the right approach, one of caution, until the story could likely be made public, or should they have acted and suspended their radio host?

The news stories I have heard indicate that the CBC did not have knowledge of an employee complaint until after the firing.

[viper37]

The news stories I have heard indicate that the CBC did not have knowledge of an employee complaint until after the firing.

It's possible I was mistaken then, I didn't follow the entire story, it's not like he's a known figure here.

[crazy canuck]

Jacob,

Here is a piece on the Vancouver civic election you might find interesting.  From the Globe BC reporter.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/vancouvers-election-just-got-interesting/article21544863/

[Jacob]

Jacob,

Here is a piece on the Vancouver civic election you might find interesting.  From the Globe BC reporter.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/vancouvers-election-just-got-interesting/article21544863/

Yeah, it's interesting. The G&M has been pretty good on this election IMO.

One thing about LaPointe, though, I don't know what the fuck he stands for and what his agenda is. I may have missed something, but mostly he comes across as platitudes. I mean, his personal history is fine, but what exactly does he stand for? The NPA is tight with the BC Liberal power structure as I understand it, and that's fine. Maybe that'll help us with the provincial gov't so that's potentially a plus. I've heard some rumblings that he wants to "renew the war on drugs", but I think that's just rumour mongering? But other than "listening" and "being responsive", I don't know what he's about. Being NPA is not a minus in my book, but it's not a plus either.

With Robertson, there's a record I can look at; and while he has his problems, I don't really fault him on the big decisions. I don't have an issue with the Chevron thing (either way, to be honest); I support the use of old hotels to alleviate housing shortages and despise the NIMBY reaction to it; on the whole I think the bike paths were good; and I think his general direction on density is good as well. So I definitely don't have the burning rage against him that some people obviously do. I would, for example, be okay with Robertson as a mayor with a more mixed council backing him up.

With COPE I have an idea of what we'll get - standard issue NDP leftism. I'm not as allergic to that as you, but I do think some of the things Wong are saying are basically simple leftist populist promises and blue sky stuff. If she gets in - and it looks unlikely - I won't panic, but I'm somewhat skeptical.

The rest are obviously no-chancers for the mayors office.

So yeah... I'm not super enamoured of Robertson, but I think he's alright. I think a fair bit of the animus against him is from the game of politics being played well rather than substance, and most of the rest is pushback from bigger decisions that I don't actually hold against him (bike paths, density, homelessness); and LaPointe hasn't actually made a compelling case beyond "I'm pretty cool and I'm not Robertson; that guy's such a wanker, am I right?" And that doesn't do it for me.

... I know you're in the next city over, but I'm still curious to hear your thoughts.

[Monoriu]

Looking at this thread, I suddenly realise that I have absolutely no idea who the mayor of Vancouver was during my 4 years there.  I have a general idea about the parties at the federal level, less on the provincial level, and nothing at the city level.  I had a brief look at what the city government did, and concluded that it was not worth paying attention to them. 

[Jacob]

Looking at this thread, I suddenly realise that I have absolutely no idea who the mayor of Vancouver was during my 4 years there.  I have a general idea about the parties at the federal level, less on the provincial level, and nothing at the city level.  I had a brief look at what the city government did, and concluded that it was not worth paying attention to them.

Yeah, we know how you feel about democracy.

[garbon]

[crazy canuck]

I've heard some rumblings that he wants to "renew the war on drugs", but I think that's just rumour mongering? But other than "listening" and "being responsive", I don't know what he's about. Being NPA is not a minus in my book, but it's not a plus either.

I am not sure where that comes from.  The four pillar approach was championed by the NPA mayor Owen back in the day.  I did a quick google search to see if I could get some historical context for you and I turned up this article form the Tyee which points to the fact that under Vision that approach has essentially been abandoned.  So it is ironic that Vision is rumour mongering that the NPA will do what Vision has been doing.

http://thetyee.ca/News/2014/09/05/The-Four-Pillars-Revisited/

My take on it is that Robertson is all sparkle and no substance.  He has been long on "vision" and very short on getting anything done.  You are right that Lapoint has been short on specific policies but he is long on consultation which I think is the most important at the municipal level because that is really where the important day to day decisions that can really effect people's lives are made.  For that reason alone I would vote for him.  Vancouver has had enough the closed shop mentality.

[Jacob]

I am not sure where that comes from.

It came from some random acquaintance posting on Facebook. It's not fair to put it at Vision's door... it's just some cranky internetter who doesn't like LaPointe. Compared the the unrelenting torrent of Robertson hate I'm getting from this one other guy I know on FB, it's quite mild.

My take on it is that Robertson is all sparkle and no substance.  He has been long on "vision" and very short on getting anything done.  You are right that Lapoint has been short on specific policies but he is long on consultation which I think is the most important at the municipal level because that is really where the important day to day decisions that can really effect people's lives are made.  For that reason alone I would vote for him.  Vancouver has had enough the closed shop mentality.

What are the parts where the "closed shop" mentality and lack of consultation have really told?

Like I said, I think the bike paths are generally good and I like the hotels as transitional housing as well. I know there are objections about not enough consultation from the people who oppose those. Are there other big issues where this has come up? To me those are fairly relevant actions, and not particularly "sparkly". Similarly, as I said, I think he's going in the right direction on density - the objections I've heard to his policies there strike me as pretty unconvincing (but I may have missed the better ones).

Honestly, when I hear "lots of consultation" I'm kind of suspicious. I've been involved in enough consultations in various capacities to think that there's usually an agenda involved, and somehow the consultations will support it. I guess if LaPointe and his crew win, we'll see how it turns out. Where LaPointe has articulated policies he mostly seems sensible enough (Vision and NPA are both pro developer, so I expect he won't mess with density stuff too much, for example); but when he talks about mass transit, transportation, and most other things it's all "studies" and "consultation" and to me that sounds like "not doing much" and "NIMBY sentiment galore" neither of which sound appealing to me. Basically "consultation" is not, for me, an acceptable substitute answer for priorities and goals.

[Grey Fox]

I don't like fixed date election. Now we get a 1 year long election campaign

[viper37]

I don't like fixed date election. Now we get a 1 year long election campaign

Instead of a 1.5-2 years long election campaign followed by a sprint of public expenses in the last 3 months.

[crazy canuck]

I am not sure where that comes from.

It came from some random acquaintance posting on Facebook. It's not fair to put it at Vision's door... it's just some cranky internetter who doesn't like LaPointe. Compared the the unrelenting torrent of Robertson hate I'm getting from this one other guy I know on FB, it's quite mild.

My take on it is that Robertson is all sparkle and no substance.  He has been long on "vision" and very short on getting anything done.  You are right that Lapoint has been short on specific policies but he is long on consultation which I think is the most important at the municipal level because that is really where the important day to day decisions that can really effect people's lives are made.  For that reason alone I would vote for him.  Vancouver has had enough the closed shop mentality.

What are the parts where the "closed shop" mentality and lack of consultation have really told?

For me the main example is the "process" that was used to reconfigure the roadway and bikepaths that run parallel to Kits beach.  To make a long story short there is a very small enclave of houses that front onto the ocean in that location.  They complained about local traffic.  Well yes there was public traffic because Kits Beach and the Eastern End of Spanish Banks are very popular destinations and the best way to access those locations is using that road.  Without any consultation construction started to rip up the existing road to make it essentially a one lane private drive for those residents and to create bike lanes through Kits Beach park.  That in turn got a lot of the local residents very upset because parts of the park they enjoy using were going to be destroyed (there was a particularly good response made by the folks that use the Kits beach basketball courts  ) ).  The City eventually backed down on some of their plans but large amounts of people who wish to access that area are being inconvenienced in order to convenience a small group of very weathly land owners.

[viper37]

Road contracts are for Liberal supporters

In the email passing on Pelkey's request to local Liberals, Myer Rabin, the Liberal riding president in Riverview, writes that it is "the usual practice that upon a change of government, road work contracts are made available to supporters of the government in power."

[Jacob]

Looks like Robertson has a lead of 5% points with 60 out of 129 stations counted. Vision looks set to get a majority on City Council and School Trustees, while the NPA look set to get a majority on the Parks Board. Other than likely getting back breeding of captive whales and dolphins at the Aquarium, I wonder what we can expect from an NPA Parks Board.