Ex-NDP Environment Minister Joan Sawicki opposes Tsawwassen Treaty over farmland exclusion, says Gordon Campbell pulled "con job"

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday October 2, 2007

NDP all wrong on treaty: Ex-MLA

By BILL TIELEMAN

We've squandered farmland as recklessly as we did fish or buffalo a hundred years ago.

- Author Thomas Hylton, Save Our Land, Save Our Cities

A former B.C. environment minister says Premier Gordon Campbell has gotten away with a "con job" by using the Tsawwassen First Nation treaty to remove 207 hectares of valuable Delta farmland from the Agricultural Land Reserve.

Joan Sawicki says Campbell "didn't have the courage" to hold what should have been the real debate - of port development versus the province's food security. The Tsawwassen First Nation will use the farmland to expand Deltaport container shipping operations.

But Sawicki, a former New Democratic Party MLA and B.C. Legislature speaker, also said in an exclusive interview with 24 hours that the NDP caucus has taken the wrong position in supporting the Tsawwassen Treaty despite the loss of farmland.

"I appreciate the agony the opposition caucus went through, but I regret that they've let the premier get away with a con job," Sawicki said. "He has slipped port development through using human rights issues, using the treaty."

And Sawicki said if she were an MLA today, she would vote against the Tsawwassen Treaty when it comes to Legislature for ratification this month because of the ALR exclusion. Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows MLA Michael Sather was expelled from the NDP caucus for stating he would vote no.

"There are many different ways of negotiating a fair and honourable treaty with the Tsawwassen people, but there is only one way to protect our food security," Sawicki said from her Bella Coola Valley home.

Sawicki warned that the Tsawwassen ALR exclusion sets a dangerous precedent for future treaty negotiations because more farmland will be lost if First Nations and land developers target agricultural areas.

"If you were a developer, why wouldn't you now go and find land next to a First Nation in treaty negotiations?" she said. "The snowball effect of this decision is going to be serious - overriding one of the strongest pieces of legislation to protect farmland."

And while NDP Leader Carole James says that "the ALR must be protected throughout the treaty process," Sawicki says NDP support for the Tsawwassen Treaty undercuts its ALR position.

"It's going to be a huge challenge for the NDP to oppose future treaties with ALR exemptions," Sawicki said.

Can farmland still be saved? Sawicki says only if "British Columbians make clear to all political leaders not to mess with the ALR."

For six years, Sawicki worked for the Agricultural Land Commission, created in 1973 by the NDP government.

When the NDP government excluded the Six Mile Ranch near Kamloops from the ALR in 1998 for residential development, Sawicki quit as parliamentary secretary to the minister of environment in protest.

NDP Leader Jack Layton says election of new NDP MP Thomas Mulcair in Outremont a sign of political change in Quebec

Layton brings new MP to town

By BILL TIELEMAN, 24 HOURS

New Democratic Party leader Jack Layton visited Vancouver Friday with a message for voters - the decades-old debate about Quebec's future in Canada is nearly over.

As proof, Layton brought with him Thomas Mulcair, the newly-elected NDP MP for Outremont. Mulcair, a popular former provincial Liberal cabinet minister, easily won a byelection with a 20 per cent margin in one of the federal Liberals' safest seats.

And Mulcair says that's just the start for the NDP in Quebec as voters shift more to left-right issues, leaving the pro-independence Bloc Quebecois isolated.

"People in Quebec are fed up with the old divide, based on whether you were a sovereignist or a federalist," Mulcair said in an interview with 24 hours.

"The Bloc Quebecois is past its due date."

Layton said impressive potential candidates for the NDP in Quebec are calling since Mulcair's victory.

"We're going to have a very, very interesting team in Quebec. People will be excited," Layton said. "Tom can help us bridge some of the divides in this country."

And Layton said it is the Liberals who are having problems finding good candidates in Quebec, noting that former Canadian astronaut Marc Garneau dropped out of politics last week after running for the Liberals in 2006 because of leader Stephane Dion's ambivalence about his candidacy.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT PUBLISHED IN 24 HOURS

Layton talked about what has changed since 1990 for the NDP in Quebec, when consumer advocate and Lemon-Aid car buying guide author Phil Edmonston became the first MP elected by the party in Quebec in a by-election.

"We've got a building job to do but unlike with Phil Edmonston where Quebec politics when through a sea change with the creation of the Bloc Quebecois, and frankly, the party did not use Phil in an important role," Layton said.

Mulcair has immediately become co-deputy leader with Vancouver East MP Libby Davies and will also be finance critic in Ottawa.

Layton pointed out that the NDP won about 300,000 votes in Quebec in the 2006 federal election and "if we had proportional representation, we'd already have six or seven seats there."

Both Layton and Mulcair dismissed concern about the federal Green Party eating away at potential NDP votes.

"The Greens were under two percent in the byelections in Quebec," Mulcair said, adding that the deal between Green leader Elizabeth May and Liberal leader Stephane Dion to not run candidates in each others home riding was "a big mistake."

Layton said candidates and policies will make the difference for voters.

"With strong candidates people will come to us - we're not a single issue party," he said.

Mulcair said a key to his Outremont win was pulling support away from both the Bloc and the Liberals.

"The Bloc Quebecois vote went from 30 to 10 percent. The NDP wooed away a lot of the ethnic community that had traditionally been Liberal," Mulcair said.

Brian Mulroney visit to Vancouver pries old Tories out of woodwork

Ex-PM Mulroney comes to town

By BILL TIELEMAN, 24 HOURS

Former Conservative prime minister Brian Mulroney can not only still draw a crowd, he can pry old Tories right out of the woodwork.

Former Social Credit Attorney-General Bud Smith, left, speaks to former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, with Conservative government political aide Colin Metcalfe in centre and longtime Tory supporter and lawyer Lyall Knott at right.

At a Vancouver appearance Tuesday to launch his book Memoirs 1939-1993, Mulroney charmed a gathering that included a large part of his 1984 campaign team, as well as an impressive list of politicians, not all Conservatives.

After entering to a rousing ovation Mulroney quipped: "What the hell - why not another term?"

But Mulroney's most eloquent words were for former South African president Nelson Mandela, who has thanked the former PM for helping free him and his country from apartheid.

"South Africa was a vulgar and vile prison for 90 per cent of its population," Mulroney said.

The crowd included former provincial Social Credit cabinet ministers Grace McCarthy and Bud Smith and former Mulroney cabinet ministers Mary Collins and John Reynolds.

Current office-holders included Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan and councillor Peter Ladner, B.C. Liberal cabinet ministers John Les and Stan Hagen, B.C. Liberal MLA Ralph Sultan, Conservative MP James Moore, cabinet minister Gary Lunn and Senator Gerry St. Germain and even New Democrat MLA Bruce Ralston.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT PUBLISHED IN 24 HOURS

Also spotted at the Fraser Institute-sponsored event - the Pace Group's Norman Stowe, a longtime Conservative activist who remembered being in the same hotel in 1993 watching the disastrous federal election results that left the party with just two MPs and then-Prime Minister Kim Campbell with no seat.

Patrick Kinsella, BC Liberal fixer, racehorse owner and confidente to Premier Gordon Campbell was there, as was Greg D'Avignon, National Brewers President for western Canada, a former special assistant to Kim Campbell and more recently BC Liberal campaign manager to Virginia Greene in Vancouver-Fairview in the 2005 election. and Byng Giraud, a Conservative national councillor and senior consultant with Earnscliffe Strategy Group.

Additional Conservative pedigrees attending included Ray Castelli, Kim Campbell's former chief of staff and now President of Naikun Wind Development, an independent private power producer, and Lyall Knott, the powerful Tory operative most recently in the news for his past work for Francesco Aquilini in the controversial and court-contested acquisition of the Vancouver Canucks.

Other notables noticed were Tung Chan, CEO of S.U.C.C.E.S.S. immigrant services organization and former Non-Partisan Association Vancouver councilor, Peter Armstrong, CEO of Rocky Mountain Rail Tours and a huge BC Liberal Party financial donor, and John Aisenstat, a former Belinda Stronach campaign organizer when she ran for the Tory leadership who also ran John Reynolds 2004 election campaign.

Also attending were my 24 hours columnist colleagues Erin Airton and Alex Tsakumis, both Conservative activists in many campaigns, who were seen clutching Mulroney’s massive book, which weighs in at a 1152 pages!

The photo at left - and the copy of Mulroney's book I am holding - can both be credited to Colin Metcalfe.

Canaccord Capital chair Peter Brown - a friend of Brian Mulroney's since both were university students in the 1960s, sponsored the event for the Fraser Institute and told Mulroney: "Brian, you were probably the best friend the west ever had in Ottawa."

Mulroney told the crowd that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is doing a "fantastic" job.

Mulroney added that he told Harper recently: "That every prime minister has to learn humility. I didn't but all the rest did."

Mulroney also said that "the GST was entirely Michael Wilson's idea" to many laughs, and then added: "But I guess it doesn't matter now because Jean Chretien abolished it, didn't he?" to more applause.

The former prime minister listed what he saw as the many accomplishments of his government - the Free Trade Agreement, NAFTA, abolishing the National Energy Program of Pierre Trudeau, the Atlantic Accord and the Acid Rain Treaty, as well as reducing the deficit as a percentage of gross domestic product.

"In the fullness of time history will judge me," Mulroney said. "It is not a verdict I fear."

But Mulroney did not explain how with all these accomplishments, the Conservative Party was humiliated and nearly destroyed just months after he left office in the election campaign of 1993 under his successor Kim Campbell.

Former NDP senior aide John Heaney joins Heenan Blaikie, working with Peter Gall on management side labour relations files

New Democrats and labour leaders may be shocked to learn that John Heaney, a longtime senior aide in several NDP provincial governments and former BC Federation of Labour staff person has joined the law firm of Heenan Blaikie and is working with longtime management side lawyer Peter Gall on labour relations files.

John Heaney has replied to an email I sent inquiring about his work with Peter Gall and that response is included below in its entirety, as per his conditions for providing it.

Heaney is currently assisting Gall in representing the employer at the BC Human Rights Tribunal hearing on the case of foreign workers employed in construction of the Canada Line or Richmond-Airport-Vancouver Line who are alleging discrimination in wages based on racial origin.

SELI Canada hired a group of workers, predominantly from Costa Rica, to construct the tunnel and related infrastructure.

The workers complained to the Construction and Specialized Workers' Union Local 1611 that they were being paid less than BC's minimum wage despite promises of significantly higher wages when they were recruited, according to testimony at the BC Labour Relations Board. After the workers' situation was made public and reported in the media, their pay went up dramatically. The employer denies any wrongdoing.

The workers were subsequently certified but have not achieved a collective agreement and the LRB has yet to render decisions on several applications.

In the meantime they have filed a Human Rights Tribunal complaint. Gall has been representing SELI Canada at both the LRB and HRT; Heaney has appeared with Gall only at the HRT hearing this week. [I have worked with the BC and Yukon Building Trades Council and Local 1611 on the situation with the RAV Line workers from the beginning, I should note.]

Peter Gall is perhaps the most prominent management lawyer in BC and has represented employers in some of the most high profile cases in the province, most recently defending the BC Liberal government in the Supreme Court of Canada case over Bill 29, the legislation that allowed health employers to terminate thousands of unionized health care workers and privatize their jobs.

Gall has been active on employer side labour law since the 1980s and has also been credited in the BC Legislature for having helped draft Bill 19 - the Industrial Relations Act, draconian labour law passed by the Social Credit government of Bill Vander Zalm that led to a lengthy boycott of the Industrial Relations Council by BC Federation of Labour affiliates and other unions.

Gall has also been employer counsel on a large number of high profile union rights cases.

Everyone needs a job and certainly as a former worker representative on the Labour Relations Board I would never argue that employers do not deserve legal counsel that meets their needs. And as a consultant I work regularly with companies, but not on labour relations issues.

But the approach Gall has taken over many years is diametrically opposed to the interests of workers and their unions. That's his right and his decision.

It's very disappointing to me, though, that John Heaney, who has worked so closely and so long with unions and a New Democratic Party and government supported strongly by unionized workers would chose to work with Peter Gall and Heenan Blaikie to further the interests of employers, not workers.


John Heaney Response

Thank you for the opportunity to respond and for your commitment to publish it verbatim and in its entirety if you do post an item. My response is as follows:

You can call me proud and excited to be working at Heenan Blaikie’s office here in Victoria. We are Canada’s only national law firm with an office on Vancouver Island.

You can also say I am working to build a litigation practice. So far, I have clients here, in Vancouver and in the Interior. Just as I did at UVic’s poverty law clinic and in my two years with Joe Arvay as his co-op student and articling student, I will continue to represent a wide variety of people who need legal advice and advocacy. My clients will include employees and - like you, insofar as I’ve seen from your website – employers.

Working with the people at Heenan Blaikie is one of the best parts of the job. They are superb and I am thankful for the chance to work alongside them.

In the office next to me is our managing partner for Victoria, Joan Young. I think she is held in pretty high esteem by her peers as a savvy, experienced and successful litigator with irreproachable ethics. I’ve known Joan for almost 15 years and worked with her when she was an A.G. lawyer seconded to the Attorney General’s office as a legal advisor. She was later seconded to the Premier’s Office as legal counsel to the Premier. I don’t know if you ran into her during your time there, but she ably served the same Premier as you.

A bit further down the hall is Murray Rankin. I first started working with Murray in about 1993 when he wrote a report for the Harcourt government on the Kemano Completion Project. And I’ve been learning from him ever since. He is peer-rated as the public law lawyer that B.C. lawyers would most refer their clients to. Whether it’s privacy, FOI, aboriginal, resource, administrative or commercial law, Murray’s a nationally-ranked advocate and thinker and a much sought-after negotiator.

I am also really enjoying the chance to work with Peter Gall. I take it this is what you have a bee in your bonnet about. I think my first recollection of talking to Peter is when Mike Harcourt asked me to sort of ride herd on the process of severing some deputy ministers and other public servants the NDP terminated in its first year (ironically, including my now father-in-law).

I’m pretty sure Peter helped us with some of that. And I know for certain he remained a legal counsel to the NDP administration when it came to dealing with employment and labour relations - under Mike, Glen Clark and afterwards. Speaking of which, one of my first files at Heenan was from Peter - on behalf of a small company in the group Glen is responsible for. They seem to have been pretty happy with the help I gave them. I always thought Glen was a good guy and had the best mind of the few hundred politicians I’ve worked for. Still do. I take it from his picture on your website you may feel similarly.

While labour and employment are just part of my law practice, the files I’ve done with Peter Gall so far have shown me why he has received the highest-available peer ranking for ability and ethics in that field of law. A handful of lawyers practicing in the country have it.

I suppose you will probably trot out the names of Peter’s clients who weren’t the former NDP administration. So be it. I know his clients are very satisfied with his work, he has the respect of the people on all sides, and no one has ever suggested he practices law with anything but the highest level of ethics and integrity. Peter is also as bright a person as I’ve met and he is to labour law what Joe Arvay is to the constitution and civil liberties. Ask Joe. I’m pretty sure he would agree with all of the above.

So, while I cannot offer a remedy for your shock, I can tell you that in my 25th year as a New Democrat I am very proud of the work I did with four NDP premiers - and with Ken Georgetti and Angie Schira in that brief time you and I were co-workers at the BC Fed. I am just as proud to be Heenan Blaikie’s newest lawyer in BC.

Sincerely

John Heaney

BC Liberals attempt outrageous gerrymandering by intervening with BC Electoral Boundaries Commission

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column

Tuesday September 25, 2007

Gerrymandering Gord must stop

By BILL TIELEMAN

Gerrymander now means to divide a voting district in such a way as to give unfair advantage to one political party.

- Phyllis Martin, Quips, Quotes and Savvy Sayings

Imagine a place where the political leader overrules an independent commission report on electoral boundaries.

Imagine that leader orders more ridings be created in areas where his governing party is strongest and opposition weakest to win more seats in the next election.

Imagine a place where the vote of a person in an opposition riding is worth just a fraction of the vote of a person in a government riding.

Zimbabwe under Robert Mugabe perhaps?

No. Try British Columbia under Premier Gordon Campbell.

Voters should be screaming blue bloody murder about Campbell's outrageous gerrymandering - intervening in an independent process to determine B.C's electoral boundaries to demand extra ridings that are clearly to the advantage of his own political party.

And all the while, Campbell piously claims to be "protecting" rural ridings.

More like protecting his own posterior. In fact, Campbell will actually dilute the influence of rural ridings by adding more Members of the Legislative Assembly in urban areas where his B.C. Liberal Party is strongest.

The independent B.C. Electoral Boundaries Commission did an admirable job redistributing ridings fairly and in keeping with the fundamental democratic principle of representation by population.

The commission's report angered some rural areas because it would have added just two seats in total to the Legislature while eliminating three seats in places like Prince George, where population is declining.

But Campbell has used that rural anger to attempt one of the most daring and scandalous gerrymanders B.C. has ever seen.

The Electoral Boundaries Commission Act is clear that in sparsely populated areas "very special circumstances" allow the commission to exceed the plus or minus 25 per cent deviation in population per riding.

So a few rural ridings can have a lot less voters than an urban riding - fair enough.
The commission determined that despite allowing two ridings significant deviations of 53 per cent and 54 per cent over the average, some ridings would have to be combined.

But instead of letting the independent commission to do its job, Campbell has ordered it to keep the existing seats in those areas and add five new seats in "growing regions" - regions where the Liberals are strongest.

Why should Education Minister Shirley Bond be elected in Prince George-Mount Robson with 34,968 people, while NDP opposition MLA Jagrup Brar is elected in Surrey-Panorama Ridge with 64,890 people? Both members have one vote in the legislature but Brar represents 30,000 more voters!

There's no perfect solution to fairly distributing ridings but one thing is clear - Campbell's overruling an independent commission to add seats in Liberal areas is the worst kind of gerrymandering - and must be stopped.

Will Gordon Campbell announce 1000 new "non-market" housing units in Vancouver at UBCM?

Reliable sources indicate that BC Premier Gordon Campbell may announce the province is funding creation of 1000 new "non-market" Vancouver housing units at this week's Union of BC Municipalities conference.

The move would shore up a vulnerability on housing issues after the embarrassing claim that the February 2007 budget was a "housing" budget - merely because Finance Minister Carole Taylor said tax cuts in the budget would allow people to spend income they saved on housing.

To Taylor and the BC Liberals that somehow amounted to a $2 billion housing plan, a completely bogus boast that was soon jettisoned.

But this announcement, if it comes true, could be a real attempt at some form of social housing for those in need in the downtown core.

It would also come after the surprise announcement in April of this year that the province was buying up 11 residential Single Room Occupancy hotels - 10 in Vancouver and one in Victoria - in a move that stunned poverty advocates.

With a substantial budget surplus, the BC Liberals can well afford to create housing units - a move that would also further frustrate their New Democrat opposition.

The BC Liberals effort to reposition themselves as a centrist, fiscally conservative but social conscious party and government appears to be continuing, a dramatic change from the hard-right, slash and burn approach Campbell took in his first term.

1000 new non-market housing units from the province would also be of immense relief to beleaguered Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan, who needs some success to point to for his efforts.

Will Gordon "green" Gateway with Evergreen Line realignment? Can BC Liberals grow Astroturf?

A Bridge Too Far? Rumours swirl of Gordon Campbell Gateway repositioning with Evergreen Line realignment over Port Mann to counter greenhouse gas increases

Meanwhile BC Liberal Astroturf group continues to sprout nonsense

The controversial Gateway project that will increase greenhouse gases may be in line for some greenwashing by Premier Gordon Campbell.

Rumours first reported by Gordon Price indicate that the Evergreen Line - long-planned but never implemented - may be funded and realigned to include a branch spanning the Port Mann bridge.

The intent is to blunt strong criticism of Gateway and in particular that the twinning of the Port Mann bridge that will put thousands more cars on the road - and according to Metro Vancouver [formerly GVRD] report, add significantly to greenhouse gas emissions.

"Traffic-related greenhouse-gas emissions with the Gateway Program will be 2.1 per cent (approximately 176,000 tonnes) higher in 2021, as compared to a 'without Gateway' scenario," said the report.

That's a problem, as Campbell has recently stated BC's goal will be to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 33 per cent by 2020, an amount that many experts feel will be extremely hard to achieve.

Price, a six-time Non-Partisan Association councilor and longtime sustainability advocate, says that an announcement on the Evergreen Line could come as soon as the Union of BC Municipalities conference next week.

"Regarding the Evergreen Line, a mayor of an eastern municipality is convinced an announcement is coming soon. Perhaps at the UBCM. The mayor also thinks that the Evergreen Line will take the southwest route along Lougheed AND a branch will head off over the Port Mann to Guildford (maybe further)," Price writes on his blog.

Meanwhile, a BC Liberal Astroturf group continues to sprout nonsense.

Get Moving BC, a group closely connected to key BC Liberals in the South Fraser, released a poll claiming that 72% of Burnaby residents support the Gateway program. Surprise, surprise, Burnaby city council has consistently opposed Gateway!

So it is equally surprising to find that among those involved in Get Moving BC are: Jordan Bateman, vice-president of Forestry Minister Rich Coleman's riding association and a Langley Township councillor; Greg Moore, former BC Liberal candiate,Port Coquitlam city councillor and currently BC Liberal organizer; Brian Bonney, former operations director for the BC Liberals; and Patrick O'Connor, a BC Liberal supporter who is Get Moving spokesman.

Burnaby Mayor Derek Corrigan told the Province newspaper that the poll was "laughable".

Don't know about the poll but the group is certainly worth a chuckle.

Ipsos Poll Detailed Results Not Good News for BC NDP

The latest Ipsos poll on BC politics has been presented as a "no change" story, with the BC Liberals continuing at the same level as previously, 46% to the BC NDP's 36% - a significant but not insurmountable 10 point gap. The leaderless Green Party polls at 15%.

However, a look at the Ipsos detailed tables uncovers some bigger problems for the BC NDP.

In the breakdown for the Lower Mainland, the Liberal lead grows to 49% to 34% for the NDP, and the sample size of 411 surveyed makes it statistically decent. A 15 point gap is enormous and would spell deep trouble for Vancouver, Surrey and Burnaby NDP MLAs if an election were held today.

The Greens hold 14% in the Lower Mainland.

In the Interior the Liberals lead 45% to 33% NDP, with the Greens at 16%. The smaller sample size of 152 is less reliable.

Only on Vancouver Island do the NDP best the Liberals, with a 46% NDP to 36% Liberal score, with the Greens at 17%. A small sample of 88 is even less statistically dependable, however.

In other demographic breakdowns, the Liberals lead in almost every category, including males 50% to 32%, females 42% to 40%, age 55+ by 51% to 37%, 35-54 year olds by 47% to 37% and 18-34 year olds by 37% to 35%.

In other education and income categories, the NDP only leads in the under $40,000 group, by 38% to 30% for the Liberals.

None of these factors are insurmountable but the challenge facing the BC NDP and leader Carole James is considerable to overcome the substantial lead the BC Liberals and Gordon Campbell hold within many different demographic subsets.

Carole James should have thanked MLA Michael Sather, not thrown him out of caucus over Tsawwassen Treaty opposition

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday September 18, 2007

Green trouble for NDP's James

By BILL TIELEMAN

Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country.

- William Jennings Bryan, 1860-1925

Carole James owes MLA Michael Sather a huge debt of gratitude.

But instead of thanking him, the B.C. New Democratic Party leader has thrown Sather out of her caucus!

Sather's offence? The Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows MLA is simply supporting a long-cherished NDP policy to protect valuable and disappearing farmland from industrial and residential development.

Sather's real problem is that he refuses to accept the wrongheaded idea that farmland is only worth protecting unless aboriginal people want to pave it and sell it to park shipping containers destined to and from China.
That means he will vote against the Tsawwassen First Nation treaty - only because the B.C. Liberals exempted the TFN from the provisions of the Agricultural Land Reserve, the historic legislation brought in by Dave Barrett's first NDP government in 1973.

And because James said the NDP caucus supports the treaty, she expelled Sather this month.

But James should instead be thanking Sather for opposing the treaty that removes 207 hectares of farmland from ALR protection and gives it to the Tsawwassen for Deltaport expansion.

That's because Sather is the thin red line holding back NDP voters who are environmental and farmland supporters from giving up on the party and voting Green.

Sather, along with NDP MLAs Guy Gentner, Corky Evans and possibly others who will abstain rather than vote for a treaty that will permanently eliminate a huge tract of productive farmland, is defending one of the NDP's proudest accomplishments.

And by doing so Sather is assuring NDP voters that protecting farms is worth fighting for to some in the party.

With the NDP at 32 per cent support, miles behind the B.C. Liberals at 50 per cent, and with the Green Party at 16 per cent in the latest Mustel Group poll, Carole James is in big trouble.

Two Green Party leadership candidates, Ben West and Damian Kettlewell, say they oppose the treaty over the ALR exemption.

That leaves Sather to defend farmland for the NDP.

"The issue of preserving agricultural land is so essential, whether it's protecting our food supply or climate change, it's so important," Sather said in an interview.

James has also alienated voters who believe - rightly - that an elected MLA is their representative, not simply a political party's. But the NDP provincial council backed James' position against a free vote - something B.C. Liberals MLAs will have.

"I am disappointed - we should have a free vote," Sather says.

And disappointment with the B.C. NDP is becoming James' biggest problem of all.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT PUBLISHED IN 24 HOURS

The Western Canada Wilderness Committee has also supported Sather and his call for a free vote on the Tsawwassen Treaty.

“We consider MLA Michael Sather to be a thoughtful, courageous, and well-spoken proponent for protecting BCs farmland...There are British Columbians who are not in favour of a treaty settlement that would see farmland paved and we would hope that these views could be represented by elected representatives without censure," said Joe Foy, Wilderness Committee National Campaign Director.

"The suspension of Mr. Sather from the NDP caucus and the continuing pressure to prevent a free vote on this important issue is, in our opinion, an assault on the free debate of important issues that a robust democracy depends on,” Foy added.

In a letter to NDP leader Carole James, the WCWC asks her to reconsider the position taken against a free vote on the treaty.

"The Wilderness Committee is extremely appreciative of NDP MLAs Michael Sather (Maple Ridge-Pitt Meadows) Corky Evans (Nelson-Creston) and Guy Gentner (Delta North) for speaking out against the proposed treaty and for speaking up for the protection of farmland, the environment and community health," Foy wrote.

"We are therefore very dismayed to learn that all NDP MLAs are expected by you to vote for the treaty - no exceptions - in order to show party solidarity on this issue."

"Media reports also indicate that NDP MLAs that still choose to vote against the proposed treaty will suffer some kind of sanctions and this has us especially concerned. I note that the governing Liberals are allowing a free vote amongst their MLAs."

"Please, won't you reconsider?"

Single Transferable Vote proposal for BC would be a disaster, electoral maps show

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday August 28, 2007

The stupidity of single transfer

By BILL TIELEMAN

The great thing about democracy is that it gives every voter a chance to do something stupid.

- Journalist Art Spander

Imagine an electoral voting system so complicated, so disliked and so obscure that only two countries in the world - both tiny islands - use it for their national elections.

Imagine British Columbia following in the footsteps of Malta and Ireland.

And imagine a system where all of B.C. would have just 20 giant electoral districts instead of the current 79, with up to six members of the Legislative Assembly per riding.

Then imagine that B.C. voters might seriously adopt it for our own elections.

Stupid? You bet, but B.C. will decide on whether to adopt the single transferable vote or STV system in a May 12, 2009 referendum run concurrent with the next provincial election.

B.C. voters didn't think enough of STV in the 2005 referendum to give the required 60 per cent approval to implement this bad idea, suggested by the Citizens Assembly. Unfortunately, it came close enough that Premier Gordon Campbell is holding a second referendum.

But fortunately, the B.C. Electoral Boundaries Commission has provided what was missing in the last referendum - an STV riding map so every voter can see exactly what STV would look like.

It's not a pretty picture. In fact, it should be enough evidence for anyone who cares about how we vote to flatly reject it.

For example, Ireland is a small place with a population of four million people. Yet Ireland under STV has 166 elected representatives spread over 70,000 square kilometres.

B.C. has 4.3 million people but is a large province of 948,000 square kilometres and under STV, B.C. would have 81 MLAs.

That means on average an Irish politician represents an area of 422 square kilometres while under STV on average a B.C. politician would represent an area of 11,703 square kilometres.

Stupid.

Now, of course, those are only averages and in Vancouver and other urban centres riding sizes under STV would be much smaller.

But that also means under STV northern and interior ridings would be positively enormous.

Take the proposed B.C. STV riding of Northeast. It would have two MLAs and a size of - wait for it - 274,752 square kilometres! That means just one riding with two MLAs is nearly four times bigger than all of Ireland with its 166 members!

And the new riding map shows several other gigantic ridings that are simply unmanageable for MLAs.

Of course, STV advocates dare not suggest doubling our legislature to 166 members but it's obvious that STV just doesn't work for large geographic areas.

There's much more wrong with STV and I will write about it in the months ahead of the referendum.

Meanwhile, I am on vacation - back on Tuesday, Sept. 18.

Tieleman on vacation till Sept 14!

I am headed off to Spain for three weeks summer vacation and therefore will not be able to post or moderate comments after today.

My apologies to any ardent commentators - who are always most welcome -but barring exceptional circumstances I will not be accessing my blog until my return on September 14.

Please feel free to post but it will not appear until I return, unless I forego tapas and vino tinto a few times to catch up!

Hasta luego, amigas y amigos!

Dr. Brian Day & Canadian Medical Association declare war on Medicare

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday August 21, 2007

Watch out for new CMA boss

By BILL TIELEMAN

The public has tasted private health care - and they like it.

- Dr. Brian Day, March 30, 2006

Charge! The Canadian Medical Association has declared war on our public health-care system.

And tomorrow, Canada's doctors install as their commander-in-chief the most radical and outspoken health-care privatization advocate in the country.

Dr. Brian Day becomes president of the CMA weeks after the organization representing Canada's physicians said its members should be able to work simultaneously in both the public and private health-care sectors.

That position is so extreme even Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper rejects it. Last year in a letter to then-Alberta premier Ralph Klein, Harper warned the province to back off the same approach the CMA now favours. And rightly so.

"Dual practice creates conflict of interest for physicians as there would be a financial incentive for them to stream patients into the private portion of their practice," Harper wrote on March 31, 2006. "Furthermore, dual practice legitimizes queue-jumping as it provides an approved mechanism for patients to pay to seek treatment at the front of the line."

But don't expect Day, owner of the controversial private Cambie Surgery Centre, to worry - he has previously argued to "repeal the Canada Health Act" that protects the public system.

And Day has described Medicare, our public health system, as a "Berlin Wall" blocking patients from treatment, and like "Aeroflot" - the former Soviet Union airline.

Fortunately, some doctors disagree.

"As CMA members and physicians, we need to ask our association why, if some physician resources are being underutilized, isn't the CMA advocating for solutions that would increase patient care to all Canadians, on the basis of need, within the public system?" asks Dr. Danielle Martin, chair of Canadian Doctors for Medicare.

And a British organization called the National Health System Consultants' Association wrote to Day last week warning him not to make the same mistakes that England has.

"In closing, we must conclude that neither payment by results, the increased use of the private sector nor the 'patient choice' agenda have proved their worth. On the contrary, they have resulted in a destabilized and damaged public service", Drs. Jacky Davis and Peter Fisher concluded.

Ironically, Canada's doctors chose Day despite the fact that until elected, he had never attended a CMA convention or been involved with the B.C. Medical Association.

Now the radical outsider is in charge and the CMA is pushing for the public to get much more than just a "taste" of health-care privatization. If successful, it will be a bitter one.

Private upscale Arbutus Club takes in garbage for members - anti-poverty group, CUPE trash the service

No trash if you've got cash

Vancouver civic strike

By BILL TIELEMAN, 24 HOURS

A Vancouver anti-poverty group and the union for city workers are criticizing the upscale private Arbutus Club in Shaughnessy for providing garbage disposal for its members during the current strike.

The Arbutus Club is offering to take two bags of members' garbage twice a week for a fee of $5, according to a members-only website.

But if you want to join the club, talk to your banker - initiation fees are $40,000 plus six per cent GST and additional monthly dues of more than $200 a month.

The news dismays Wendy Pedersen, community organizer of the downtown eastside Carnegie Community Action Project.

"It's really unfair, it's overwhelming. They can get rid of their garbage and we're stuck with mountains of garbage and feces in the alleys," Pedersen told 24 hours.

"I find it a bit hurtful. What we really need is their support."

Barry O'Neill, Canadian Union of Public Employees B.C. president, was angered by the club's service.

"This is for the bluebloods only, eh?" O'Neill said. "Don't these kind of things need business licences? Aren't there health concerns? This is too much."

But Arbutus Club CEO Brent Elkington told 24 hours he was only trying to regulate a situation where members and others were dumping garbage at the Club's front gates.

"We're trying to put some control on something that was already happening," Elkington said.

"We don't want to be involved in a dispute with the city and its workers. We are concerned."

But O'Neill didn't buy the explanation.

"That's nonsense. That's hogwash. Members of the Arbutus Club are dumping garbage at their own front gate?" O'Neill asked.

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT PUBLISHED IN 24 HOURS

Elkington said so far Arbutus Club members have not overwhelmed the service.

"Not a huge response but a lot of members are away," he said.

Pedersen said she hoped Arbutus Club members would push the city to negotiate so everyone can have their garbage picked up.

"We really need the Arbutus Club to advocate for people on the downtown eastside and for working people, for the garbage collectors," she said.

O'Neill said his members will be "pretty frustrated to hear about this."

And he questioned how the Arbutus Club is operating.

"Where are they taking the garbage? What do the neighbours think? Can anybody just start collecting garbage?"

Vancouver polling on strike denounced by CUPE, opposition as waste of money while delaying bargaining

City polling its residents about views on strike

By BILL TIELEMAN, 24 HOURS

Polling firm Ipsos-Reid is conducting a survey of Vancouver residents about the city's contract proposals in the city workers' strike, something their union calls "an absolute waste of money" that could further delay negotiations.

Late yesterday the city confirmed its polling and released results of two questions to 24 hours.
Ipsos-Reid asked: If Vancouver offered city workers a 17.5 per cent wage increase over five years would that be fair and reasonable?

Results showed 89 per cent agreed.

The pollster also asked: Are you concerned about the impact on your city taxes of that wage offer?

Sixty per cent agreed.

City spokesman Jerry Dobrovolny said: "We needed to understand the public's level of tolerance for a settlement that is that high."

But the other questions obtained exclusively by 24 hours included:

- How would you rate the job city managers have done replacing striking workers?

- How much have you been affected by the strike?

- Do you support or oppose the strike action?

Results of answers to those questions were not made available.

Opposition Vision Vancouver councilor Raymond Louie said he's concerned the polling is an expensive public-relations exercise.

"Are we wasting money on a public relations exercise instead of bargaining?" he asked.

"It's an absolute waste of money," says Barry O'Neill, Canadian Union of Public Employees B.C. president. "By the time you tabulate the results you should be at an agreement."

ADDITIONAL INFORMATION NOT PUBLISHED IN 24 HOURS

I obtained the questions when called at home by Ipsos-Reid on Wednesday night.

Louie questioned whether Mayor Sam Sullivan was involved.

"Did the mayor direct the pollling?" Louie asked. "Polling is an expensive piece of work. I'm not sure how helpful this exercise is to the situation."

David Hurford, Sullivan’s communications director, said the mayor’s office is not sponsoring the polling but couldn’t say if the city was or if the mayor knew about it when contacted, referring 24 hours to Dobrovolny.

"Politicians do not generally micromanage the city's day-to-day affairs," Hurford said. "The city runs day-to-day affairs regarding the strike and bargaining."

Tieleman on CKNW today at 6:35 p.m. on how cabinet shuffles work

I will be interviewed by Gord MacDonald, guest host of The World Today on CKNW AM 980 today at 6:35 p.m. on how cabinet shuffles work, following this week's federal Conservative cabinet shuffle.

Tune in online at www.cknw.com

And go to CKNW's Audio Vault for Gord's interview with Christy Clark, former BC Liberal Deputy Premier and CKNW's newest talk show host starting Monday August 27 at 12:30 p.m. - that interview was Wednesday August 15 at 6:35 p.m.

KNOW STV says new BC Electoral Boundaries Commission ridings map for Single Transferable Vote shows STV would be disaster

KNOW STV - a group I helped form to fight against the Single Transferable Vote in the 2005 BC referendum on electoral change - has today responded to the report released today by the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission.

The Commission report includes a BC ridings map under a Single Transferable Vote electoral system.

The KNOW STV news release is below.

KNOW STV

NEWS RELEASE - Wednesday August 15, 2007

KNOW STV says BC Electoral Boundaries Commission ridings map for Single Transferable Vote System shows why voters should vote NO in 2009 referendum – STV unrepresentative and unaccountable

VANCOUVER – A group that successfully opposed the Single Transferable Vote or STV electoral system in the 2005 referendum says today’s release of a report by the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission shows why British Columbians need to vote NO to STV in the 2009 referendum.

KNOW STV Director Andrea Reimer says the ridings proposed under STV would be huge, unrepresentative and unaccountable to voters. And Reimer said many of the ridings outlined by the BC Electoral Boundaries Commission would not provide the fair proportional outcomes that STV supporters claim the system creates.

“The BC Electoral Boundaries Commission has done the people of the province an enormous favour by clearly illustrating exactly why the Single Transferable Vote would be a disaster for British Columbia,” Reimer said. “STV would create giant ridings where many communities would not have local representation and where the MLAs elected would have to serve ridiculously large geographic areas.”

Reimer said that STV would also not provide any real proportional representation for the three proposed North and North Central BC ridings or for ridings in the Columbia-Kootenay or Okanagan-Boundary regions because they would only have two or three MLAs per riding.

“Some voters would be treated like second-class citizens under STV,” Reimer said. ”To get any real degree of proportional representation a riding under STV would need to have a lot more MLAs – but even in Vancouver and Victoria, where they are proposing five or six MLAs, STV is nowhere near as proportional as other electoral systems being considered in places like Ontario or already used elsewhere in the world.”

KNOW STV director Bill Tieleman said the organization, which brought together representatives from a wide range of political backgrounds from NDP to BC Liberal to Green to Social Credit, will once again fight for a NO vote in the referendum, to be held concurrent with the May 12, 2009 provincial election.

“The BC Electoral Boundaries Commission’s proposed STV ridings will make our job a lot easier than in 2005, when no one know what the ridings would look like,” Tieleman said. “Now we can go to voters and explain what would happen to them under STV, and it’s not a pretty picture.”

Tieleman pointed to the Powell River-Sunshine Coast riding, which under STV would be lumped into one huge riding with the north half of Vancouver Island.

“How can Sechelt and Gibsons residents expect accountable representation when they have less than 25% of the votes in this STV riding?” Tieleman asked. “And how can MLAs fairly act on behalf of constituents in a riding that stretches from Port Hardy to Tofino to Campbell River to Powell River to Sechelt? How could constituents even visit the office of their MLAs?”

Turning over UBC Golf Course to Musqueam in treaty deal would be massive giveaway of public assets, green space

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday August 14, 2007

Musqueam deal a mass giveaway

By BILL TIELEMAN

The difference in golf and government is that in golf you can't improve your lie.

- former California governor George Deukmejian

The B.C. Liberal government is planning on another massive giveaway of public assets, land probably worth far in excess of $1 billion.

It will be transformed from pleasant green space into highrise condominiums, townhouses, a shopping centre - maybe even a casino.

Private property developers are already drooling at the profits they stand to make if this 120 acres (48.5 hectares) of prime Vancouver land is opened up for construction.

How could Premier Gordon Campbell get away with such an outrageous deal? By turning the University of B.C. golf course over to the Musqueam Band as part of an aboriginal treaty settlement.

We've seen this movie before. The recent treaty with the Tsawwassen First Nation exempts 511 acres (207 hectares) of prime farmland from the Agricultural Land Reserve.

Then the Tsawwassen will sign it over for expansion of the Deltaport container terminal, a key goal of corporations using the port who knew the land would otherwise remain farmland forever.

But the UBC golf course deal may be even more controversial. Longtime Campbell ally and fundraiser Marty Zlotnik, also a Vancouver Park Board commissioner, is actually leading the campaign to stop the golf course giveaway.

Public opposition is so strong that Musqueam Chief Ernie Campbell was forced to say the land would stay as a golf course "until 2033".

But the reality is that there's no way anyone but developers and bulldozers will be on the course right after that.

The Musqueam have longstanding and legitimate land claims, a story I first started covering as a university student reporter 30 years ago. They deserve a fairly negotiated settlement that compensates band members for loss of land and builds economic opportunities.

But turning over 120 acres of publicly owned, green recreational space for what would certainly become housing for the wealthy isn't a good solution for anyone.

The Musqueam people won't be living there, nor will the lion's share of the benefits of development go to them. And they would still have to wait 26 years before selling the course.

Former Musqueam chief Gail Sparrow has criticized the secretive nature of the pending deal and suggested looking for alternative land that could be developed immediately for Musqueam housing and other income. Zlotnik agrees.

One doesn't have to be a golfer to see that the loss of green space to real estate development would be extremely unfortunate.

And another treaty that causes significant community antagonism could lead to major opposition to the tenuous treaty process itself.

Campbell, whose Point Grey riding includes the UBC course, needs to find a much better solution. For more info: www.savethecourse.ca and www.musqueam.bc.ca

Is Tieleman an "extremist columnist"? Doug McArthur, former Deputy Minister to Glen Clark, appears to think so over Tsawwassen Treaty opposition

Doug McArthur, a former colleague in the office of BC NDP Premier Glen Clark and now a professor of public policy at Simon Fraser University, seems to believe I am an "extremist columnist" causing problems through my opposition to the treaty between the Tsawwassen First Nation and the provincial and federal governments.

In a Vancouver Sun opinion piece today, McArthur blames problems the BC NDP is having with the Tsawwassen treaty on myself and others who put MLAs on the spot over the treaty's exclusion of 207 hectares of protected farmland from the Agricultural Land Reserve - one of the key parts of the deal.

"The real source of the trouble and the larger failing was the inability of the NDP caucus, under pressure from a small group of extremist columnists and activists, to understand and accept aboriginal rights and the compromises necessary to achieve treaty settlements," McArthur writes.

"Without this, the political stunt giving rise to the problems now facing the NDP would never have been attempted in the first place," McArthur continues.

McArthur - who fails in the article to even disclose his role as an advisor to the Tsawwassen First Nation and Chief Kim Baird - is dead wrong. NOTE - McArthur told Mike Smyth on Nightline BC Friday that he informed the Sun and they did not include that in his article.

I find it offensive that McArthur can't accept that a principled view other than his own can be legitimate, honestly held and - most importantly - not "extremist".

McArthur has previously used the term "extremist" regarding my views and those of others who oppose the exclusion of prime farmland from the ALR in the Tsawwassen treaty - most notably Richmond Councilor Harold Steves, a former NDP MLA and longtime farmer and agrologist.

On April 19 McArthur and Baird debated Steves and I on the treaty before ratification by the TFN and McArthur said there that: "Extreme positions deny the facts and the law. They also fly in the face of justice."

Let's be clear - both Harold Steves and I support treaties where First Nations wish to negotiate them to end historic injustices.

But negotiation is not capitulation.

I have said that the Tsawwassen treaty is a huge land grab for expansion of the Deltaport terminal, so that containers from China and elsewhere will have a bigger parking lot at the expense of prime farmland that BC desperately needs.

BC Liberal Premier Gordon Campbell used the Tsawwassen First Nation and this treaty to achieve his goal of Deltaport expansion without having to request the farmlands be removed from the Agricultural Land Reserve - a request that would likely have been denied.

The Tsawwassen First Nation will turn their new lands over to Deltaport for a fat cheque worth tens of millions - they will not be using it for farming or anything else.

That's why I've consistently said save the farmland and write a cheque for the TFN members, who would also be better off without further port expansion near their existing lands. Or find another solution that saves the farmland but don't pave it.

The real problem the BC NDP has - contrary to McArthur's misleading article - is that it won't stand up for protecting farmland if it means angering the Tsawwassen First Nation and opposing the treaty on those grounds.

One can support righting historical wrongs without making another one - the permanent loss of farmland for industrial development.

Doug McArthur's position is otherwise - fair enough. But stop throwing the term "extremist" around to describe those who philosophically disagree with you - it demeans those who use it, not the targets.

2nd Green Party leadership candidate opposes Tsawwassen Treaty over farmland exclusion

Damian Kettlewell, candidate for the BC Green Party leadership, has joined fellow candidate Ben West in opposing the treaty between the Tsawwassen First Nation and the provincial and federal governments over exclusion of farmland from the Agricultural Land Reserve.

Their position puts them at odds with an offical Green Party news release supporting the treaty and statements by Interim Leader Christopher Ian Bennett, who "applauded" the treaty when it was announced. Both the BC NDP and BC Liberal parties also support the treaty.

In recent email correspondence with this blog Kettlewell first said he welcomed the treaty but later added that he would actually have to oppose it were he a member of the BC Legislature.

"If I were an MLA I would vote against the Tsawwassen Treaty. Removing land from the ALR is the wrong model for First Nations treaty negotiations," Kettlewell wrote me last week.

In an email prior to that response Kettlewell had said:

"It is good to see the Tsawwassen Treaty move ahead. British Columbians need to make progress on our long-outstanding land claims. Like the recent Elaho Valley victory, a compromise was required for a deal to be reached (in the case of the newly-protected Elaho, significant logging continues in the three other valleys of the Stoltmann Wilderness).

However, taking land out of the Agricultural Land Reserve (ALR) is an unfortunate component of the Tsawwassen Treaty.

I commend the provincial government for reaching an agreement with the Tsawwassen band, but do not consider removing land from the ALR as a suitable solution for future land claim deals.

Ultimately, BC's best agricultural lands must continue to be preserved for future agricultural purposes - in order to protect our local food security, and to prohibit the economic and energy costs of importing foreign food.

I would encourage the government to explore "Conservation Land Trusts" that transfer deeds into a title-holding organization, which then would lease the land back to interested stake holders. With a trust, the land would no longer be owned by developers or people with an interest in making big profit by flipping it.

You can see an example of a First Nations Land Trust at: www.fnlt.org/contact.html

Ultimately, the Tsawwassen Treaty helps build momentum for our campaign team's goal of completing all BC First Nations treaties by 2015. The provincial government must pursue innovative solutions, and the continued removal of land from the ALR should not be a part of future negotiations."

Kettlewell's website is at: www.damiankettlewell.com

Vancouver City's failure to understand how to haggle with unionized workers means strike continues into third week

Bill Tieleman’s 24 Hours Column
Tuesday August 7, 2007

Art of haggling

By BILL TIELEMAN

BRIAN: (as he puts down 20 shekels) There you are.

HARRY: Wait a moment.

BRIAN: What?

HARRY: We're supposed to haggle.

BRIAN: No, no, I've got to ...

HARRY: What do you mean, no?

- Monty Python's Life of Brian, 1979

As we enter the third week of a strike by Vancouver civic workers, the dispute has taken on the air of a Monty Python comedy skit.

That's because Vancouver Mayor Sam Sullivan, city managers and the Greater Vancouver Regional District's Labour Relations Bureau all don't seem to understand the purpose of negotiations.

You have to haggle - it's actually true. With both sides bargaining and moving closer together, you eventually reach a deal.

Unfortunately, the employer and its representatives have continued to screw up what should be an easy deal to end the civic workers strike.

After all, now that striking workers in North Vancouver District have ratified a deal and Surrey, Delta, Richmond and Burnaby have all settled without any strikes, only Vancouver is left so far incapable of negotiating a contract with city employees.

And that is incomprehensible.

Here's the only sensible explanation of the problem - no one on the management side has ever seen Life of Brian. They just don't understand haggling.

The city's spokesman, Jerry Dobrovolny, told the media last week that Vancouver would not table a new offer to CUPE Local 15 but instead wanted the union to make a more "reasonable" offer than the one it presented previously - which included a wage and benefit increase the city claimed would cost 30 per cent.

So the city rejected CUPE 15's proposal for settlement. That's totally fair game as part of negotiations.

But to then ask the union for another proposal that was more "reasonable" is simply not on. It was Vancouver's turn to respond. That's Negotiations 101 - offer, counteroffer, bargain.

What you can't do is keep saying: "Not good enough, try again."

It doesn't work that way. Vancouver should have responded with its own version of what it thinks is reasonable - even if it antagonized the unions - who would then have to reply again.

It's not complicated. You go back and forth until the contract is reached, something that unions and employers do without any strike or lockout 98 per cent of the time in bargaining.

And let's face it - anyone can figure out Vancouver's city workers are going to get some variation of the contract reached in Richmond, Delta, Surrey, Burnaby and North Vancouver District.

So Sullivan, his Non-Partisan Association council majority and the GVRD's Labour Relations Bureau could have avoided all of this inconvenience to citizens and expense by workers and businesses affected by the strike with just a little bargaining common sense.

And a lot of haggling.