« Cultural Beginnings #8 | Main | Imperial Commander #10 »
Goodbye Democracy, Hello Back Rooms
In a stunning upset yesterday, Vancouver voters chose the current at-large system for municipal elections over the proposed new ward system. The unofficial vote tally was 54% to 46%.
To understand just how surprising this is, yesterday afternoon one of the leaders of the "NO" (anti-wards) campaign, Councillor Sam Sullivan, publicly stated that he thought his side would lose by "quite some margin", and that he had consulted with City Hall officials about the protocol for issuing a concession speech.
Vancouver's very popular mayor, Larry Campbell, was a leader on the "YES" side, and it will be interesting to hear his thoughts later today.
This is a sad day for the city. Our best chance at genuine participatory democracy in a generation has been swept aside through ignorance, fear of change, and a deep-seated indifference to municipal politics (only 22% bothered to vote). Our city leadership will continue to come from the backrooms of COPE and the NPA, and the technocrats in the city hall bureaucracy will continue to rule the roost.
Sad day, indeed.
October 17, 2004 in Vancouver | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8345191c469e200d83433ddd953ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Goodbye Democracy, Hello Back Rooms:
Comments
Spot on Jak.
What concerns me most is the fact that it looks like progressives were bamboozled by the money men pulling Sam Sullivan's strings.
Posted by: JackW | Oct 18, 2004 11:38:07 PM
I find it amusing that an article on the democratic selection of an "at large" system by Vancouverites should be entitled, "Goodbye Democracy, Hello Back Rooms". The fact that the results do not suit you do not make the process undemocratic - the referendum was nothing less than an exercise in democracy. As for the turnout, well, I suppose democratic freedom includes the right to vote, as well as well as the right to abstain.
As a Vancouverite, I was quite torn about the ward issue. On the one hand, wards are quite clearly a more democratic system insofar as the impact a single vote has, as well as increasing the council's accountability to its electorate. On the other hand, predictions that a ward system would eliminate party politics from Vancouver's city hall are a bit naive - with a heavy dose of arrogant presumption, COPE councillors were already moving/planning to move to various wards to ensure they'd be able to run again. That's not exactly the same as having someone OF the neighbourhood represent the neighbourhood. Really it amounted to a million dollar attempt to ensure a COPE re-election, and in general I'm always delighted when smugness in government is rewarded by the cold hard slap of reality by way of an unpredictable electorate...
I'd also take issue with JackW's description of the current bunch at city hall as "progressives". Jak, your description of the governing of the city being behind closed doors, whether those doors belong to the NPA or COPE, is on the money - they're both having their strings pulled, just by different masters.
Thanks, by the way, for a great site - keep it up!
"The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not." Thomas Jefferson
Posted by: Martin | Oct 22, 2004 11:01:19 PM
Though Jak didn't bring it up, an at-large system has at least one advantage: elections can become referenda on controversial issues. If there were a controversial plan to overhaul the police department, a slate of candidates could run on that issue, providing the voters a clear opportunity to vote the proposal up or down.
Montgomery County, Maryland, where I live, uses a hybrid system wherein some Council members are elected by district and others are elected at large. It's a fairly good scheme that combines the advantages of both systems.
Posted by: Peter Caress | Oct 23, 2004 2:33:16 PM
