Another flip flop from Vision Park Board

Post by Mike Klassen in


Are Aaron Jasper's flip flops worthy of the world famous Chinese Acrobats?

The Vision Vancouver park board caucus have defined themselves by... well, apparently absolutely nothing. Actually, that's not true. We're two years into their mandate with one year left and the only thing they've accomplished it seems is to reaffirm all the decisions by the previous NPA board they campaigned against.

The latest flip-flop by Aaron Jasper and the Vision team surrounds the Jericho Wharf. "We'll keep it!" they cried during the 2008 campaign. "The bad ol' NPA didn't listen to you so we'll be reversing this decision!"

Well, not so much. On Monday they voted to scrap it, and this time the whole thing. The NPA park board compromised by leaving part of the pier in tribute to the war veterans it once served. A study by the DFO indicated to the park board that creosote in the pilings were poisoning the surrounding waters. Whether you accept this as fact is not the issue though, it's how Vision Vancouver continues to handle the issues.

We're seeing a pattern where the promises of Vision Vancouver are not worth the paper they're printed on.

Now we've got another broken promise on the Jericho Wharf. That's not exactly the best record to run for re-election on now, is it? Not that Jasper has any plans to stick with Park Board. He's got his sites set on George Chow's spot on the council slate.

As Aaron Jasper said once on the Bill Good Show, "it's easier when you're in opposition." We now understand that he meant it's fine to make a bunch of promises you won't have to be accountable for, as long as you get elected.

It's hilarious to see the Vancouver Park Board today absolutely forsaking their job to advocate for parks, and leaving the big decisions up to the Mayor's office. Meanwhile, over at the Vision/COPE school board, they're doing "advocacy on steroids" because they get to beat up Victoria and not City Hall.

What a bunch. It's no wonder the polls are collapsing for Team Gregor.

- post by Mike


Leaving the political mudslinging aside, doesn't the study by DFO (and I have no idea why you would question its accuracy or validity...) warrant the removal of the wharf?

Vision's campaign slogan in 2011 will be "We'll do everything the NPA was going to do, so vote for us"

Clearly you've misread the article as usual boohoo. The article isn't crying for the wharf to be saved, rather the contrary. The NPA wanted this thing gone long ago. They knew it was the best option. But Jasper and Vision Vancouver cried and complained that they would keep it. Now they've changed their minds. A total flip-flop of HST proportions.


Sorry, I guess I assumed the intent of this post was something more than tired political bickering and name calling. My bad.

@boohoo Isn't there a high horse you should be riding somewhere in southlands about now? Gimmie a break. You are too much. Is this what conversational mining looks like? if so, it isn't pretty

I'm sure the science is sound on the DFO report, but I understand pro-wharf advocates have been skeptical. This is not about the decision, but the way the decision was revisited.

Tracie, it was an honest question to Mike where he said 'Whether you accept this as fact is not the issue though...' That implies there's cause to suspect it's not factually sound. I asked why. That's all. Just seems odd to say that unless you have cause to doubt it.

I don't care about what this party said about this or that. Surprise surprise, parties lie/change their mind/ to get elected. Wow, what a shocker.

The real story is why we think the next batch will be any different.

Boohoo you seem to imply from your comment that since the next batch of politicians will lie and cheat as much as this one, we may as well stick with Vision forever. Did I read that correctly? I don't think that's something you should be advocating for.


That's a whole lot of assumption in one post.

I think this whole obsession with removing vision is just blinding people to the fact that the alternative is essentially the same thing. Our short term reactionary voting basically guarantees us crappy short term reactionary politicians. We do get what we deserve.

You're absolutely right boohoo, short term - reactionary voting is not in everyone's best interest.

Let's remember that Vision/Cope won because of a manufactured scandal at city hall and people reacted by voting the NPA out of office.

If you're saying that the voters were wrong to do that and that Vision has proven themselves to be liars and cheats, then you're clearly advocating something I can understand.

I'll take that as a ringing endorsement for the next slate of NPA candidates then?

Wow Paul, did you and Tracie go to the same school of twisting logic and assumption?

Vote Vision, vote NPA, it doesn't matter. You'll get the same thing. Your post typifies exactly why I think the system is broken.

Vote party A in, they don't live up to what they promised, sweep them out and vote party B in. They don't live up to what they promised, sweep them out and vote party A in. They don't live up to what they promised, sweep them out and vote party B in. And on and on it goes.

What's that definition of insane again?

I'll speak slowly and clearly boohoo, try to keep up...

See Vancouver
See Vision Vancouver
See Vision Vancouver in Vancouver
See Vancouver go bankrupt

You can't run a city based only on a set of ideals. You must also pay attention to the bottom line.

You also can't yell and scream about things before you're elected and then turn around and do those exact same things when you're in office.

Now go collect your cheque from Vision Vancouver or whichever PR firm they're hiding their dirty work in now. Your conversation mining here is not welcome.

Oh Paul,

I'm so amused by you,rf,glen, whoever else that disagrees with me and claims I'm some kind of secret vision agent. Yet my entire point is that political parties make this a dysfunctional system and the whole system should be abandoned.

Man, it's a wonder I still collect a paycheque from the very group I think should cease to exist!(insert rolling eyes)

Check out!

Paid Advertisement

Paid Advertisement