Category Archives: #VanPoli Civic Politics

#VanElxn2022 | The Season’s Most Important All Candidates Meetings

The buzz we’ll see created during the 45-day civic election season will occur at the various, and critically important, all-candidates meetings that will be held throughout September, leading up to Election Day, on Saturday, October 15th.

In 2018, the well-attended and phenomenally moving UBC Women’s Club of Vancouver all-women-candidates meeting was a key factor in getting City Councillor Rebecca Bligh elected to office. Ms. Bligh knocked us out with her knowledge of city governance, and the challenges faced by its citizens — of course, it didn’t hurt that Ms. Bligh’s gregarious partner, Laura, kibbitzed with us all night long (talk about someone having your number! … omigosh …).

Today’s VanRamblings will be given over to presenting the crucial all-candidate events you should put on your election calendar, sure to challenge your assumptions, and certain to inform, as entertainingly a good time as you’ll have over the course of the next 48 days, and critical to your understanding of the issues we all face in 2022’s crucially important Vancouver civic election.

2022’s Vancouver Civic Must-Attend Mayoral Debates

By far, the most important Mayoral debate to attend in September, will occur at the Britannia Community Centre, in cavernous Gym D, where in 2014 Vision Vancouver Councillor Andrea Reimer blew the rafters off the room — in a hostile room, too, consolidating that, whatever you thought of her — many, many were not fans —  Andrea Reimer was a must-elect to Vancouver City Council.

Monday, September 19th’s must-attend Britannia Community Centre all-candidates Mayoral event will be moderated by the phenomenally inquisitive Kirk LaPointe, who was the Non-Partisan Association’s candidate for Mayor in 2014.

If there’s a more erudite and well-reasoned writer — and former political candidate for office — in Vancouver, we don’t know who that person might be. The Coalition of Vancouver Neighbourhoods folks who organized the all-candidates Mayoral event scored a coup in landing Mr. LaPointe as the night’s moderator.

As has long proved to be the case, and generally the best-attended of the Mayoral debates, takes place at the Christ Church Cathedral, on the northeast corner of Burrard and Georgia, with a seating capacity of only 600, the last Sunday of the election Mayoral debate is generally packed to the rafters, with more than 850 eager voters in attendance). No official notice of the event as yet, but you can be certain the event will occur.

Cathedral Mayoral Debate

Sunday, October 9th, 2022
1:30 p.m. — 3 p.m.
Christ Church Cathedral
650 Burrard Street, at Georgia

Civic Election All-Candidate Debates: Council, School & Park Board

Here we are on Tuesday, August 30th, 2022, and truth to tell it’s still a tad early for those who are organizing all-candidates debates / forums for our myriad City Council candidates seeking office in 2022, not to mention their civic body counterparts seeking to secure a position on the Vancouver School Board’s Board of Education, or a Park Board Commissioner’s position, sitting around the table at Vancouver’s Board of Parks and Recreation’s decision-making table, snuggled within that cherished environmental jewel, (Lord) Stanley Park.

Believe us when say, though, there’ll be debates & all-candidates events aplenty that will occur over the course of the next seven-plus weeks, as anxious politicos and pundits, not to mention Vancouver’s citizenry, await the outcome of the 2022 Vancouver civic election late in the evening of October 15th.

As we’d promised our friend Dulcy Anderson at Kitsilano’s Greek Days, way back in June, we would write to her about the seminal all-candidates events that constitute the two most important candidate events that occur for all candidates running for Vancouver City Council, and the one most important debate dedicated to championing women candidates seeking office in 2022.

Dulcy, we apologize for not apprising you of  the following prior to this date — although arriving  (more than) a bit late, it’s what we’d meant to write to you two months ago, which you’ll now finally find directly below …

Dulcy, each Vancouver municipal election, the good folks who are members of the Residents Association of Mount Pleasant sponsor a bangin‘ all candidates meeting for those who are seeking to become a Vancouver City Councillor. Although RAMP has not revealed the specific date for their 2022 Council all-candidates open forum, just wait a week or so, and all will be revealed to you.

What makes the RAMP all-candidates open forum a must-participate-in event?

  • Held at the warmly inviting Heritage Hall, at 15th & Main, each election year, 25 Council candidates are asked to take a seat on the stage, while 400 or more engaged citizens pepper the candidates with questions;
  • The RAMP forum is the most respectful of all the all-candidate forums held each civic election cycle, open to women and men, and representing the diverse multi-cultural mosaic that comprises the city we love. No cat calling, no acting out, no bad behaviour of any kind allowed— although in all the civic election years past we’ve attended, the audience has always conducted themselves responsibly, unlike the cretin who recently ambushed Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister;
  • All the press in town turn up at the Residents Association of Mount Pleasant all-candidates forum, print, radio, television, independent journalists and muckrakers, bloggers, substackers and those who write what they feel on Medium. In this day and age, you want that coverage;.

Because it’s September, the evening the RAMP event takes place, the weather will be cooler, as will the temperature of the audience politely gathered inside Heritage Hall. The camaraderie of the 25 candidates on stage is something to behold, reflecting well on how our various engagements ideally should be.

Each Vancouver civic election cycle for decades, the University Women’s Club of Vancouver sponsors a well-attended women candidates forum, moderated in 2018 by VanRamblings’ friend, Lynne Kent — but as she was saying to us last week, at the TEAM … for a Livable Vancouver town hall, as the UBC organization transitions, in 2022  will be organized and moderated by a younger group of women members. Dulcy, you’ll to want to be a part of this event.

The 2018 University Women’s Club of Vancouver (video above) was a bumptious, informative and signal event in the previous Vancouver municipal election,  the event providing women candidates seeking office a forum to discuss the issues of importance to all Vancouver voters, and most particularly to women voters and their lived experience. Women vote in exponentially higher numbers than men, in general women’s innate social conscience determining the candidates for whom they will cast their ballot.

In 2022, women candidates for City Council will save our city, and will work with integrity and élan towards a fairer and more just city for all of us.

Dulcy, because we’re aware you know & support City Councillor Christine Boyle — and given Ms. Boyle emerged the victor at the raucous 2018 Last Candidate Standing event (see video below) — we suggest you meet with Councillor Boyle to discuss her rewarding experience of Last Candidate Standing.

We’ll also suggest an out-of-the blue and phenomenally witty indie candidate for City Council in 2018, Elke Porter — she and her family are longtime Kitsilano residents — contact you, in order that she might discuss her experience of Last Candidate Standing, to provide you with further context and insight.

#VanElxn2022 | Plumping | Casting A Ballot for Only Your Chosen Candidates

There is no grand prevailing wisdom about how people should vote.

It’s hard enough to get people to show up at the polls as it is.

But once voters show up to cast their ballot, there are competing views about how we should cast our votes: in this case, to plump or not to plump.

As former Vancouver City Councillor Anne Roberts wrote on a chilly November 14th day, three weeks after Vancouver’s 2014 civic election …

“In the end, the vast majority of voters are going to do what they typically do in Vancouver’s dysfunctional at-large voting system: they’re going to vote slates. People will mostly select 5 to 8 Councillors from the party of their choice and then, perhaps, vote for one or two others. Given there are too many candidates and parties to become fully informed, it’s not a bad strategy.

That is, unless you know about plumping. For individual voters, plumping is really the only way to boost your voter power. Plumping is when you cast votes for your civic party of your choice, only, instead of the full 10. The advantage is you focus your voting power on the ones you really want to win, and don’t dilute the power of your vote by voting for someone who could end up beating your preferred candidates.”

Voter turnout in British Columbia civic elections is generally well below 40%.

In 2005, 32% of eligible voters cast their ballot in that year’s Vancouver civic election — when Non Partisan Association Mayor Sam Sullivan and a majority NPA Council were elected to office — with only 31% bothering to vote in the 2008 change civic election, which saw the newly formed Vision Vancouver civic party elected to a majority at Vancouver City Hall. By 2011, a  whopping 34% of eligible Vancouver voters found their way to the polls on election day, Saturday, November 19th.

Counting the Votes

Where there are multiple Council positions, 10 in Vancouver, to be filled, the votes on each ballot are counted as being of equal value to each other. Even though a voter might have a distinct order of preference among the candidates there is no mechanism for such preferences to be shown on the ballot.

Candidates are elected consecutively according to who receives the largest number of votes. There is no pre-determined percentage of the overall vote required to be gained before a candidate is elected so a candidate can be elected with a very much smaller percentage of the vote than under any other electoral system.

Plumping

Plumping allows voters to vote for fewer than the number of candidates to be elected. It permits voters to concentrate their voting power on those they support, rather than being constrained to also vote for those they oppose. Rather than voting for all 10 Council positions, a voter may choose to vote for simply one, two or more should they wish, in the City of Vancouver, where slates tend to run, voting only for your party of choice.

In Vancouver, the at-large system is in some ways opposite to the first-past-the-post system in the provincial and federal elections. At-large means there are no “neighbourhood ridings” — sometimes called wards — within the municipality or regional district, as is the case in every other province, save B.C..

Aside from casting one ballot for Mayor, voters will vote from a pool of candidates, and select form one candidate to however many candidates they choose to sit on Vancouver City Council, Park Board or School Board.

Eligible voters in the City of Vancouver are allowed to select as many candidates as there are seats on the respective councils, but should they?

In 2022, the answer to that question is a firm, “No”.

Having spoken with strategists working within the 10 civic parties offering candidates for election in 2022,  civic campaign managers are recommending their voters “plump their ballot” — voting only for the candidate(s) they really want to see elected. “Pro-plumping” strategists are telling their voters that giving a vote to someone you really don’t care about, simply to fill the ballot, weakens the position of those you really do want in. Too many votes for a candidate running with a party you don’t support not only weakens your vote for the candidates you want to see win on election night, it dramatically increases the likelihood that your favourite candidates may lose, as a broad swath of the limited number of voters expected to turn out in this year’s October municipal election, in casting a vote for an “add on” candidate enhances that candidate’s ability to actually triumph at the polls.

Even respected Vancouver civic affairs journalist, Charlie Smith, editor of The Georgia Straight, is recommending Vancouver voters “plump their vote”, in this instance when casting a ballot for candidates running for office to become a Board of Education trustee on the Vancouver School Board.

“The only sensible choice for supporters of mask mandates — and safer schools for the many kids with immunocompromised family members — is to only vote for Dr. Zeidler and withhold voting for the NPA, ABC Vancouver, Vision Vancouver, COPE, OneCity Vancouver, Green, Progress Vancouver, or any other party that’s putting candidates up for school trustee.

Voting for candidates other than Dr. Zeidler lessens her chance of winning and promoting actions that will save lives of school students, staff, and their families.”

Mr. Smith must have read Peter Babel’s Meridia article on bullet voting, which is what they — unsurprisingly — call plump voting down south …

Basically, bullet voting — also known as single-shot voting or plump voting — is a tactic used when voters who could vote for multiple candidates actually vote only for the one candidate whom they most want to see among the winners. Imagine a municipal election, for example, in which 65 candidates are running for ten open seats and voters can vote for only ten candidates. Ultimately, the election will produce 10 winners, yes, but using the bullet vote tactic the voter increases the total vote count for the candidate s/he most wants included among the 10 winners — without increasing the vote count of any of the other candidates running for office. By plumping their ballot, the voter strategically avoids inadvertently helping any other candidate gain more votes than the candidates they truly prefer, and whose win they want to secure more than any other.

Fans of plumping argue that most people are not familiar with enough candidates running to be able to cast completely informed votes.

So many people want to avoid casting ballots for people who aren’t necessarily deserving of that vote. All of which nicely plays into the hands of seasoned campaign strategists operating behind the scenes in this year’s Vancouver municipal election, but who are “in control” of this year’s all-important 2022 Vancouver municipal election campaigns.

#VanPoli | Homelessness + Housing | A Series | Part 4

All of 13 years of age, in 1930 my father left his family farm in Saskatchewan, leaving behind his mother and five siblings — his father had died when he was three years of age — set to ride the rails for the next 9 years, alighting in the Annapolis Valley in the later summer to pick apples, working in every province across Canada, for no more than a meal and a roof over his head at night sleeping in a barn, more often than not taking shelter in a hobo camp somewhere adjacent to the railway tracks that span our nation, undernourished always, starving at other times, my father having joined a homeless generation of Canadian youth scrambling to stay alive in the midst of the Dirty 30s, doing the best that they could.

Until, as my father told me one autumn afternoon, sitting at his kitchen table …

“In early September of 1939, I was living in a hobo camp on the outskirts of Revelstoke, on my way to the Okanagan to pick apples. There was talk in the camp that something was up in Europe, that the German Army had invaded Poland. On September 10th, I was in town looking for food out back of a restaurant when I heard a bunch of kids, saw them running down the street, screaming into the air, “We’re going to war. There’s a war. We’re going to fight those dirty …

Next thing I knew, there was a hand on my shoulder, a man in a uniform. “Son,” he said to me, “we’re at war now, saw it comin’. I’m with the Army recruitment office just down the street. Why don’t you come with me, and we’ll get you all signed up. Three squares a day, a nice clean uniform, and you’ll get to see the world. No more living in hobo camps for you.

So, I did, I went with him, signed up. For the first time in almost a decade, things were looking up. After I signed my name on the dotted line, the sergeant handed me an army uniform, saying, “Find a place to put this on.” I ran back to the hobo camp, more excited than I’d been in I don’t know how long. There was a pond nearby the camp, I stripped off my tattered old clothes, jumped in the pond, got myself nice and wet, dried myself with my old clothes, and set about to get dressed up in my spanking new uniform. I don’t think I’d ever felt better in my whole life.”


In 1945, returning members of our armed services were more than a little excited to be returning home

My father remained a private in the army for the next six years — having a Grade 1 education, and being unable to read tends to inhibit one’s advancement — before returning home with all of the other troops in the late summer of 1945, arriving in the port of Halifax, from whence he’d set off to fight the war six years previous.

My father, Jack, had heard much about life in Vancouver from those he’d served with overseas, so chose to make his way out west to build a life for himself.

Prior to the outbreak of World War II, 83% of Canadians lived in the rural areas of Canada, mostly as members of farming families, leaving only 17% of the population to reside in hub cities like Montréal, Toronto and Vancouver, with much lesser populations in the prairie cities, and provincial capitals. On the Lower Mainland, Richmond was called Lulu Island, and was largely a farming community, as was the case in what we now call the suburbs: Coquitlam, Surrey, and Maple Ridge,

Almost overnight after the war ended, the rural-urban mix in Canada was reversed.


Berlin, post WWII: Statisticians calculated for every inhabitant there was 30 cubic metres of rubble

Following the end of the conflict overseas, with the industrial heartland of Germany, not to mention a great swath of Europe, and the production capitals of Japan leveled by the ravages of war, North America soon became the industrial heartland, and the bread basket, for the world. There were jobs aplenty across the North American landscape, as the U.S. & Canada became industrial powerhouses.

Most soldiers arriving home from Europe, rather than choosing to return to the farming communities from whence they had come prior to the outbreak of the conflicts in Europe and Japan, moved to the cities to make their fortune, many of them choosing to marry. Thus began the much vaunted baby boom, of which this writer is a member, born in 1950, and modern society as we still know it today.

Prior to the 1930s, most rural towns and cities across North America had within their midst indigent, homeless populations, but these were folks who were generally well known in their communities, boys who became men, men who’d lost their way and turned to alcohol to numb their pain. The homeless in these towns, and even in our cities, were well cared for by their contemporaries, who’d gone to school with these men many years prior, knew them from the time they were boys.

In every society throughout history, dating back centuries, there has always been 4% of the population who find themselves locked out of conventional society, women and men alone and without resources, perhaps suffering from some mental health disability, mostly uneducated, alone, without family or resources, and as conventional society would state, without the “spunk” that would help them to lead productive lives of meaning, to be  part of the conventional work-a-day world.


The Raymur Housing Project, just south of Raymur and East Hastings — social housing in Vancouver.

In the 1950s, in perhaps a more empathetic time, when we actually cared for one another, provincial government social planners spanning the nation, in concert with their federal government counterparts, set about to house the homeless by creating “urban social housing complexes” to house the provinces’ poorest citizens, who would be brought to the city. In doing so, Canadian provinces adopted the multiple family dwelling, or “apartment”, model as the housing form to shelter the indigent population. In U.S. cities like Detroit, we are much more apt to call these “urban social housing complexes” by a more colloquial name: ghettos.


The Regent Park social housing community in Toronto, which expanded from the south Cabbagetown community in the Toronto of the 1930s, long one of the city’s worst slums, targeted by Toronto city planners for a grand urban renewal in the 1950s and 60s, which became known as Regent Park South.

As above, in Vancouver, the new community to house the poor was named The Raymur Project, where residents from across British Columbia were brought to Vancouver to live in the newly-conceived urban social housing complex.

Such projects, whether in Canada or the United States — in Toronto, Vancouver, Chicago, and New Orleans — proved abject, crime-ridden encampment failures.

Still and all, the homeless were off the streets, with a roof over their heads, pretty much hidden away from the eyes of conventional society, a forgotten population most people didn’t want to see, acknowledge or engage with on any level.

And so it remained through until the early 1980s, as we wrote on Tuesday.


An interview with Premier-in-Waiting David Eby, conducted by CBC Early Edition host, Stephen Quinn

Thus far on VanRamblings’ four-part series on homelessness + housing, we’ve tracked the history of homelessness in B.C., from the 1930s forward until now.

We have touched on a modular housing model as a temporary “fix” for our current homeless crisis, and suggested that homelessness is a national issue of critical importance that requires the intervention of the federal government, working with the provinces, to address the ongoing issue of human misery on our streets.

In the interview with Premier-in-Waiting, David Eby, Stephen Quinn holds Mr. Eby’s feet to the fire, questioning him on the resolution to homelessness in our city and province. Mr. Eby is forthcoming about what he feels is necessary: build social housing, lots of it, transitioning our homeless / barely housed population out of sub-standard, one room single occupancy resident accommodation, or temporary shelters, into livable, one-bedroom furnished apartments — with a bed, kitchen, bathroom and living room, TV, internet and all the amenities — this housing to be located in every neighbourhood across our city, what yesterday we referred to yesterday as the “Finnish model” in Wednesday’s VanRamblings’ column.

On the day VanRamblings attended David Eby’s campaign launch to become British Columbia’s 37th Premier, the event held at the Kitsilano Neighbourhood House —where Mr. Eby gave one of the best, most moving and humane political speeches we’ve ever heard  — we wondered how Mr. Eby was going to position himself in order that he might retain power when the next B.C. election is called.

In 1996, BC New Democratic Pary leader Glen Clark positioned himself as a working man, a boy who grew up on the east side of Vancouver, who had fought all his life for better for all of us. A working class hero. Mr. Eby, whose father practiced law in Ontario as a partner in a prestigious law firm, and whose mother was a school principal could hardly pull off the Glen Clark’s “pulled myself up with my bootstraps” man of the people working class hero approach. What then for Mr. Eby?

“ICBC is dumpster fire.” “Money laundering in B.C. is artificially inflating housing prices.” “B.C. car insurance rates are too high … we’ll convert to no fault insurance, lower insurance rates, and provide a $400 rebate cheque to all B.C. motorists.”


David Eby, British Columbia’s Premier-in-Waiting Man of Action, ready to fix B.C. homelessness crisis

VanRamblings believes that British Columbia’s new “man of action” Premier, 45 years-young David Robert Patrick Eby will upon assuming the office of Premier of British Columbia declare a homelessness crisis emergency in our city and province.


220 Terminal Avenue, the first temporary modular housing building constructed on City-owned land

In declaring a homelessness crisis emergency Mr. Eby will, as a temporary measure, order the construction of 1500 units of modular housing, to be built on city and provincial Crown land with all possible haste, on suitable sites across Vancouver, those modular housing sites to be occupied no later than the autumn of 2023.

Premier Eby will then appoint a Commission with the mandate of reforming the multi-billion service model that allegedly provides succour to those resident on the DTES, “a broken system,” Mr. Eby has said, that ill serves those in need.


A tent encampment at Vancouver’s CRAB Park, which has maintained for two years. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

As a next order of business, VanRamblings believes that a Premier Eby will expedite the construction of social and affordable housing on city-owned (Vancouver is a creature of the provincial government), provincial Crown land, and in a co-operative agreement, on federally-owned Crown land, on a 66-or-99 year leasehold basis, ordering that the city of Vancouver will charge no development permit, or related fees, and that the approval process for construction of the social and affordable housing will occur sans City Hall red tape, and any measure of undue delay or intransigence on the part of the Planning, Urban Design and Development Services Department, lest the office of the Premier assume full responsibility for every aspect of the approval and construction of this necessary new housing.

#VanPoli | Homelessness + Housing | A Series | Part 3

British Columbia, should candidate to lead the BC NDP become our province’s 37th Premier, David Robert Patrick Eby — and the City of Vancouver, as well, should TEAM … for a Livable Vancouver Mayoral candidate Colleen Hardwick be elected as Vancouver Mayor this upcoming October 15th — may be on the verge of adopting a revolutionary new approach to the provision of care for, and provision of housing for, our province’s homeless population, once and for all eliminating the scourge of a homelessness crisis that has for so long bedevilled our city, and our province.

In 2008, the Vancouver Police Department released a 56-page prescriptive visioning report titled Lost in Transition: How a Lack of Capacity in the Mental Health System is Failing Vancouver’s Mentally Ill and Draining Police Resources, that cogently argued for a near revolutionary reformation of the service model the VPD felt must be adopted to better provide for the necessary care for all those persons in need who are resident in the square mile around Main and Hastings, a report compiled and written by a particularly illustrious and celebrated cabal of PhD holding Vancouver police officers, long in the employ of the Vancouver Police Department.

In essence, the Lost in Transition report argued for the provincial appointment of a czar to oversee the provision of social services on the DTES. When the Lost in Transition report was updated in 2013, the world czar was replaced with the phrase, “the provincial appointment of an individual with the authority of a Deputy Minister”, and in the 2018 update of the Lost in Transition report, that individual was now called a Commissioner, a provincial appointee who would be given the authority to oversee a radical reformation of the DTES social services model.

In 2012, Charles Campbell — a former editor of The Georgia Straight — was commissioned by Vancouver Coastal Health to author a report on the provision of services on the DTES. Mr. Campbell’s report, Working With Health Agencies and Partners On Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside [PDF}, identified 277 social agencies providing services to those in need who were resident on the downtown eastside.

Arising out of the publication of both the Lost in Transition and Partners reports, a serious-minded and goal-oriented discussion on a reformation of the social services model that had long been in place on the DTES commenced in earnest.

This past weekend, TEAM … for a Livable Vancouver Mayoral candidate Colleen Hardwick apprised VanRamblings of a discussion she’d had with Chief Constable of the Vancouver Police Department, Adam Palmer, where the two touched on what might constitute a radical reformation of the social services model provided to habitués of the DTES, in order that those in need might receive better and more appropriate care, and how — working with the province — a plan might be developed that could eliminate homelessness across the city of Vancouver.

VanRamblings believes — based on what David Eby told The Vancouver Sun’s Katie DeRosa last Friday, and may also have arisen from TEAM … for a Livable Vancouver Mayoral candidate Colleen Hardwick’s discussion with VPD Chief Adam Palmer — the following aspects of a revisioning of the social services model for the DTES may be on the table …

  • As David Eby told Ms. DeRosa last week, “There really hasn’t been a co-ordinated strategy or a plan about how we get out of the problems of the Downtown Eastside. I think … putting an invisible fence around the neighbourhood and saying ‘this is the best we can do’ and just hope that things work out, it’s a strategy that will no longer carry us forward.” Eby said if he’s successful in his bid to replace Premier John Horgan … he’ll co-ordinate a long-term response to the issues in the Downtown Eastside with help from the federal government, the city & concerned groups;
  • In 2008, discussion surrounding the publication of the Lost in Transition report touched on / recommended consideration of the following: merging the 277 social services agencies on the DTES into 30 umbrella organizations. Each of the 277 social agencies employs an Executive Director, Director of Finance, Director of Human Resources, Manager of Supported Housing, among other senior administrative staff — each earning up to $325,000 annually — a duplication of services and administration funded by the province, at a cost of almost $1 billion dollars, annually. The initial 2008 VPD Lost in Transition report questioned if such duplication of services properly served the interests of those who are resident, and cared for, on the DTES;
  • There was also discussion upon the publication of the Lost in Transition report, and a recommendation within the report, that argued for the provincial appointment of a Commissioner who would oversee the reformation of the provision of services on the DTES, a person with the authority of a Deputy Minister who would report only to a provincially appointed Board of Directors who would oversee the transition of the current service model, reporting as well as to the office of the Premier.

For a great long while, there has been much talk about the DTES on the perpetuation of a “poverty pimp industry” within the community, an “industry” that pays well upwards of a billion dollars annually to fund a social services administrative structure on the downtown eastside that better serves the interests of those highly paid administrators over those persons who our society is truly meant to care for.

At present, as well, and impeding change are the various unions representing their members: there are 10,000 union employees who work on the DTES, represented by the BCGEU, HEU, CUPE and the Health Sciences Association, whose members fill union coffers with 2.7% of their gross pay each and every two week pay period.

At one social services agency where VanRamblings was employed, senior staff worked fewer — and were available on site for fewer — than 30 weeks a year. Each time an administrator traveled to Nova Scotia, or some other locale, for a 3-day conference — air fare, accommodation and expenses provided by the employer (that’d be you and me) — each day away meant the banking of two days in compensatory “vacation pay”, or more than one week of paid time off. Same thing for attending evening meetings, and working “overtime”, wherein the administrator banked more paid days off. Nice work if you can get, paid for at taxpayer expense.

And don’t get us started on the absenteeism rate for employees working on the DTES, averaging 6 paid days off per month, despite what the union contract says, replaced by on-call staff who generally work more hours than full-time employees.

As a final note today on VanRamblings’ four-part series on homelessness and housing: Premier-to-be (let’s face it, come December, we all know who will become British Columbia’s 37th Premier) David Eby has made a commitment to moving away from a corrupted and wholly unsuitable SRO (Single Resident Occupancy) housing model providing shelter for B.C.’s homeless population, while moving towards something akin to Finland’s ‘Housing First’ concept, where those who are affected by homelessness are provided with a self-contained apartment — with their own bathroom, bedroom / sleep area, kitchen / dining room, fully furnished with amenities provided for — and counseling, without any preconditions.

Four out of five of those previously affected homeless persons, in time, make their way back into a stable life, re-joining our society as productively happy citizens.

All this represents a responsible, fiscally sound model of service provision to those in need, so much better than accepting homelessness, and perpetuating an administratively corrupt model that has for far too long ill-served indigent persons.