Monday, September 08, 2008

Vision and COPE, Greens reach Vancouver election agreement

Late tonight Vision Vancouver, the Coalition of Progressive Electors and the civic Green Party reached a Vancouver municipal election agreement to avoid competing with each other and instead present a united alternative to the governing Non-Partisan Association at all three levels of civic government - city council, school board and park board.

The announcement of that agreement follows:

Cooperative Agreement between COPE and Vision Executives

(VANCOUVER) The COPE and Vision executives are announcing a tentative agreement for cooperation for the 2008 election.

Both organizations feel that the agreement is an important step to create the kind of campaign that can return progressive government to city hall.

Members of both organizations have consistently sought a cooperative effort and the executives of both Vision Vancouver and COPE have endorsed an agreement that will see the following:1) COPE, Vision, and the Green Party have agreed to run less than a full slate of candidates for each level.

The breakdown is as follows:

a. Mayor: Gregor Robertson

b. Council: 8 (Vision), 2 (COPE)

c. School Board: 5 (COPE), 4 (Vision)

d. Park Board: 4 (Vision), 2 (COPE), 1 (Green Party)

2) Vision and COPE will cooperate around specific policy issues, including a strategy on homelessness.

"Vision Vancouver believes the issues in this upcoming election are too important to be ignored. With this agreement, we can work with COPE to maximize our chances to bring progressive government back to Vancouver," said Mike Magee, co-chair of Vision Vancouver.

"It is crucial that we work together to return progressive government to city hall, park and school board, said COPE Councilor David Cadman. "We want to work with Gregor Robertson and Vision to cooperate around areas of common concern. With this agreement we can avoid splitting the progressive vote and create a better Vancouver."

The cooperation agreement is subject to ratification by the COPE membership at their Sunday, September 14 policy conference.

-30-

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Yeah, but how is this scenario going to play out with centrist federal Liberal voters?

It's something akin to Gordo and his Libs cutting a deal with right-wing Reform in order not to split the vote provincially.

DPL said...

Seems pretty reasonable to me. If the folks on the left and leaning toward the middle can't get a slate, well it would be back to the NPA running things. And eith one candidate for Mayor, that sorts the position as well. I look forward to a real council school parks board and mayor working for the PEOPLE

Anonymous said...

I think that Vision has made a major mistake coming to an accomodation with COPE. While it might prevent the splitting of the left wing vote, it divides the centrist vote, which is much more important to Vision's gaining control of civic politics. Vision must ask itself, did the NPA elect 5 city councillors because Vancouverites wanted 5 NPA councillors, or did the NPA elect 5 city councillors because Vision only ran a half slate and Vancouver voters didn't want the COPE candidates.

A. G. Tsakumis said...

"I think that Vision has made a major mistake coming to an accomodation with COPE. While it might prevent the splitting of the left wing vote, it divides the centrist vote, which is much more important to Vision's gaining control of civic politics. Vision must ask itself, did the NPA elect 5 city councillors because Vancouverites wanted 5 NPA councillors, or did the NPA elect 5 city councillors because Vision only ran a half slate and Vancouver voters didn't want the COPE candidates".

Finally someone who genuinely understands Vancouver's local political scene.

Unlike shamless partisan buffoons like Kennedy Stewart, the above poster actually gets it: it's the center stupid! The four of five elections have been won by capturing the middle.

Anonymous said...

For anyone wanting celebrate the COPE-VISION agreement, don't count your chickens before they are hatched. When the vote on the agreement was taken, the chairperson of the meeting, some bimbo from the BCTF, failed to count how many people voted for and against. She merely declare that the yes side had won after surveying the room. Also the vote was taken by a show of hands. No one bothered to check if all the people who raised their hands possessed valid COPE voters cards. So nobody in COPE know how many people voted for or against the agreement or whether all of the people who voted were entitled to vote. My understanding is that some COPE members who opposed the vote plan to launch a legal challenge to have the vote declared non-binding.