rabble blogs are the personal pages of some of Canada's most insightful progressive activists and commentators. All opinions belong to the writer; however, writers are expected to adhere to our guidelines. We welcome new bloggers -- contact us for details.

Gregor Robertson's riot, part three

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

You've got to give the folks at City Hall credit: they run true to form. FOI releases occur on Fridays, usually late enough to make sure they won't get into the news until Monday.

The latest FOI release on the Stanley Cup riot, the "Third Proactive Record Release," came out on Friday, September 23, at 10:59 a.m.

These releases are in response to various queries about how the City of Vancouver did, or didn't, prepare for a potential riot.

The questions asked by various reporters, including me, are actually quite simple. In order:

Question 1: Did the city budget for policing? Answer: We know that they didn't: Chief Constable Jim Chu went to the city in late April asking for about $1.3 million on the assumption that the Canucks would go all the way to the playoffs. City Manager Penny Ballem apparently took the issue to City Council with the notion that the funds would come out of the City's contingency fund. Council didn't give Chu his funds, but only approved a $1 million payout for policing, broken VPD equipment, and damage to the city, after the riot. The money, not surprisingly, came from the contingency fund.

Question 2: If funds for policing were not available from the very same pot of money before the playoffs, why not? We still don't have an answer to this question, but it seems likely that city staff, e.g., Ballem, simply made a number of assumptions/hopes about how it would all spin out. When it didn't go this way, the city engaged in damage payment, and media spin damage control, by making funds available long afterwards.

Question 3: Did the city ask for money from the Liberal government in Victoria? The last blizzard of paper from City Hall answers the question. Contained in folder 5, burying within a 817 pages of electronic paper are four key pages (the rest contain correspondence from concerned citizens about the riot).

On June 4, 2011, Mayor Robertson wrote to Premier Christy Clark asking for some financial help with policing costs. Roberston noted that, "...we believe that extra financial resources from the Province are required."

We know, of course, from the work of reporter Bob Mackin, that the city and province were in the loop about a potential riot. On June 8, 2011, Clark writes back:

"Thank you for your letter regarding the cost of extra policing during Vancouver Canuck hockey games. I appreciate this opportunity to respond to you...We currently, however, have no plans to make further contributions to policing costs for special events."

In other words, no.

So, slowly, the pieces are coming together into focus: The city didn't want to take on the policing costs because they didn't want to go into their contingency fund. We still don't know why, or what shape the contingency fund is in. The province declined to help. Instead, both entities hoped for the best and gave Jim Chu squat. Chu did what he could within his own budget, which was minimal. The outcome: A riot, perfectly predicable based on prior crowd behaviour, happened.

The municipal election is coming and the campaign kicks off in mid-October. Vision can be predicted to duck and weave and blame anyone besides themselves. COPE probably won't raise it given their unholy alliance with Vision, although Tim Louis, one of the COPE nominees for council might. The Civic Green's Adriane Carr likely won't go into this at all. The NPA could make this a key election issue if they had half a brain, but the latter is far from a given. This leaves independents and maybe a rebooted Work Less Party to raise the basic issue of competence at City Hall.

What is certain is that someone should be making sure these events are in front of the voters on November 19.

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.