Still sorting this out myself, but here's an amusing bit for you: What I heard back in '05 was that Taylor was, in part, recruited as a reliable backup for Campbell -- she's popular and trusted by Howe Street and the Board of Trade. Had Gordo had a second term as turbulent as his first, Taylor would have been an easy and electable replacement. That hasn't been necessary.
What I found interesting was Vaughn Palmer's Friday column -- suggesting that Taylor getting credit for being the bearer of good news and symbol of labour peace didn't go over real well in the Premier's office, and that she wasn't the government's idea of a team player. Interesting stuff. I have no reason to doubt Palmer; he's an ace at sussing out this stuff.
Thanks Ian!
But tell us.....
What do think of the idea of an NPA-Free Ms. T. as mayor?
.
I'm distant from Vancouver politics, but think the city would benefit both from Taylor and an independent mayor. It strikes me that the party politics are insanely destructive over there (as they are provincially). The polarized approach chokes off discussion of ideas or policy, since everything the other side says is immediately to be attacked. The parties almost inevitably become choked with careerists protecting small bits of turf and renewal of ideas or people is unlikely.
I've been hugely impressed with Taylor's competence and decency in the last two years. It's enough to give you hope for politics.
I confess to not yet being certain what she stands for in a bigger sense, though - what kind of city or province she would like to see.
Thanks Paul--
I guess we are in agreement on this one.
Ian really knows the civic scene - would really like to hear what he thinks.
.
Darn, and here I was hoping for Paul to fill us in on Taylor's vision for Vancouver (haw, haw). I get the sense that she's a deal-broker and aware of the need to deal with Vancouver's social ills -- but what motivates her? What approach would she take with council, City Hall, provincial agencies, senior governments? You can divine a little bit from her performance as finance minister and her recruiters. (Political columns are the modern-day answer to haruspexy.)
This council has been terrible for partisanship. Far worse than 2002-05. It's practically become the Parliament of Vancouver; positions are made in caucus and almost noone breaks the party line on any issue where there is a clear NPA/opposition split.
What really grates is that I know that most of the councillors are far, far more intelligent and open-minded than they come across when they're pissing away in chambers. Some of the blame has to go to Sullivan and how tightly he controls his caucus to keep that 6-5 majority on almost every substantial vote.
That's where Taylor would be a big shift, party or no party. Everyone else has noted her knack for defusing tense situations -- and I've seen the same in my more limited encouters. She might even be willing to let council go back to a looser, less party-line affair in the way most councils work. Well, a guy can dream.
I'm not sure that it would be practical to get parties out of Vancouver politics. The city is large and complex enough that citywide campaigns need a lot of resources, and that was true before the spending explosion of 2002. Very few independents can muster that on their own; they have to be either very wealthy or very good organisers. With parties, people like Raymond Louie can compete fully.
Great stuff Ian.
Thanks.
Looks like maybe we're back to kinda/sorta agreeing on something.
(not that I would be upset if we weren't, given that I quite enjoy a bout or two of good faith jousting).
.
Commenting by HaloScan
