Winnipeg - Mayor Katz turns down Aboriginal/North End Forum Invite

114 posts / 0 new

Topic locked

Mon, 2010-11-01 14:13

genstrike

Stockholm wrote:

I don't live in Winnipeg and I can't say if its "too wide" (or too tall!), but my point is that the urban sprawl has already happened and Winnipeg is not growing much compared to other Canadian cities - so there isn't that much more new sprawl to contain. Unfortunately, the bad decisions that led to all this sprawl happened 30 years ago - and now its too late to do much about it - unless you like my idea above.

Actually, it seems like every few years a new sprawling suburb is being developed. Waverley West and Sage Creek being just two which come to mind. Maybe you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube, but it might be a good idea to stop squeezing it.

Mon, 2010-11-01 14:22

#103

6079_Smith_W

Stockholm wrote:

What i object to is TAKING PART in a process and then refusing to abide by the results.

In what way did he not abide by the results?

They removed their support for him and he did not run as their candidate; Once they severed their political relationship with him it seems to me he is free to do what he pleases. There is nothing in the nomination process that says a person who is turned down for a nomination can't run as an independent.

I didn't mind it when it was MP Bill Casey and the conservatives, and there is nothing wrong with it in this case either. In fact, if anyone is dealing in bad faith here, it is the party.

Mon, 2010-11-01 14:31

#104

Stockholm

As far as i know, Smith made an effort to retain the NDP endorsement. I think that he should have withdrawn his name from consideration by the NDP in advance of the meeting and declared that he would go it alone. The moment that he agreed to let his name be placed in nomination - he was agreeing to take part in the process and he should have respected that process or not taken part in the first place. You can't have it both ways.

Mon, 2010-11-01 15:03

#105

6079_Smith_W

As far as I can see you are implying that there is an agreement or moral obligation that does not exist. Nor should it, in my opinion, especially given that he was the incumbent.

But even if he were not, it is still anti-democratic. Sure it would be very handy for a party that wanted to stake out political turf, and shut out competition, but it would have robbed the people of their right to choose the candidate they wanted. You have only to look at the results of the election to see that.

But clearly no one is changing anyone's mind here. I think we're done.

Mon, 2010-11-01 16:13

#106

jas

Smith, would you be agreeable to having the thread title changed? It will be easier to find in future for anyone looking for discussion on the 2010 civic election.

Mon, 2010-11-01 16:23

#107

6079_Smith_W

I don't mind.

Mon, 2010-11-01 17:07

#108

Stockholm

I would just like to establish one point. Smith CONTESTED AND COMPETED for the NDP endorsement. Then when he was rejected he decided to run anyways. So why did he bother competing for the endorsement in the first place. If you don't plan to respect the outcome - why participate in the process? Why not just run and say to hell with having to vie for some "bogus" (sic.) NDP endorsement?

Its not a matter of being anti-democratic. I'm glad Smith ran and I'm glad he beat the person who came in second in his ward - who i believe is a Liberal. I just think that you should not contest a party nomination if you don't plan to respect the outcome. That's all.

Mon, 2010-11-01 17:28

#109

Aristotleded24

Stockholm wrote:
If a city is already "too wide" what is the remedy? Do you propose demolishing entire suburbs and moving all their inhabitants to high density housing projects close to the city centre?

As the lifestyle becomes more expensive, the suburbs are going to empty out on their own. Every city is suffering from urban decay, but what makes it unique about Winnipeg is that there are several suburban strip malls and commercial developments that have had empty space for a long time. Even Naheed Nenshi in Calgary, who I'm sure wouldn't self identify along the left-right axis, mentioned the costs of urban sprawl.

Regarding Harvey Smith, others here have 2dawall and Smith have already answered your arguments. Even you acknowledge that independent of the party label, he is a solid progressive councillor. I'd add that you are coming across as defending the same type of backroom dealing that we repratedly accuse other parties of and which angers voters. This is an NDP stronghold, and the NDP came in third. What does that suggest to you about how the voters feel aobut the way the NDP did things here?

jas wrote:
Smith, would you be agreeable to having the thread title changed? It will be easier to find in future for anyone looking for discussion on the 2010 civic election.

I wouldn't be expecting an answer any time soon. After all, Smith just fought off 2 parties in a tough political fight, he needs some downtime before issues of council take up his time again! ;)

Mon, 2010-11-01 18:25

#110

Stockholm

"I'd add that you are coming across as defending the same type of backroom dealing that we repratedly accuse other parties of and which angers voters."

No, I'm saying that I think its hypocritical to COMPETE in a party nomination/endorsement contest and then refuse to respect the results. If Harvey Smith had said "I categorically reject the idea of parties making official endorsements in the municipal election and I will neither seek nor accept an NDP endorsement in this election. I will run for re-election on my progressive record and I hope that people who support the NDP will support me for that reason" - I would have applauded him and if I lived there I might have even voted for him. But its obvious that he tried hard to win that endorsement and if he had had the NDP endorsement - he would have flaunted it at every opportunity. Then when he lost - suddenly it didn't mean anything anymore. I just object to the hypocrisy.

Was there any backroom dealing or suggestions of impropriety over that nomination or was there a free fair and open nomination meeting where any card carrying NDP member was free to vote - and where Smith lost fair and square? I don't know, tell me.

Here in Toronto, where a slightly similar situation in 2006 for the ward that Olivia Chow had vacated. The NDP held a nomination meeting that was hotly contested. Adam Vaughan - who has proven to be an extremely progressive councillor - DID NOT CONTEST that nomination and ran as a non-partisan independent - and won. I didn't vote for him then, but as it turns out he's been a pretty good councillor and voted for him to be re-elected. I respect the fact that he never sought the NDP nod in the first place and did it on his own. I would have had a far more negative reaction if he had campaigned day and night to win the NDP endorsement and then after losing he decided to run anyways - making a mockery of the whole process.

Mon, 2010-11-01 19:25

#111

Aristotleded24

Sorry, Harvey owes nothing to the NDP, he had every right to run in the civic election and the voters had every right to choose their own representative. The NDP has no official standing at the municipal level, and to act as if it does simply smacks of backroom political wheeling and dealing.

Did Chuck Cadman make a mockery of the process by running federally after having lost his party's nomination?

Mon, 2010-11-01 19:39

#112

Stockholm

Did Smith seek and campaign for the NDP endorsement or not? That's all I want to know.

I'm not sure what we are arguing about. I agree that he (like anyone) has every right to run in the election and that everyone has a right to vote for him. We agree on that. What I object to is SEEKING and CAMPAIGNING for an NDP endorsement and leading people to believe that the process is valid and that the endorsement means something and then after losing deciding that the process was a sham after all and then running against the winner. I have no objection to him running for city council. i object to him running for the NDP nomination in the first place when it clearly was meaningless to him. If you take part in a process - you confer legitimacy on that process. Why did he run for it?

Mon, 2010-11-01 20:34

#113

Aristotleded24

I can't read Smith's mind, you'll have to swing by and ask him that yourself.

As for the process, it's quite flawed as has been pointed out. Again, what do the results in that ward say about voter opinions about the whole process?

Mon, 2010-11-01 20:53

#114

Maysie

Sorry to butt in, but long thread.

Pages

Topic locked