Ottawa Municipal Election 2010

[lrt's friend]

But as JP said, better to "save" Hume for the next go-round. Especially if another 4 years of O'Brien means that Watson fades to black and is never heard of again (fingers crossed).

Heaven help us!!!!!!

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Mille Sabords

This must mean that O'Brien will run. Because otherwise, Hume vs Watson would've been no contest. Hume would've won.

I'm not so sure.

Several months back I was called by a pollster concerning politics at all three levels in Ottawa. For the municipal poll Hume wasn't even listed as a choice by the pollster - I had to "write him in" as one of my choices (I literally had to ask "can I add someone else to the list?" - I wasn't even offered an "other"). Most of the others being discussed at the time, like O'Brien, Cullen, Watson (who was still being coy at the time), Deans and even Doucet were offered up, but not Hume, which suggests his potential as a candidate hadn't even filtered into the midst of this pollster.

I think it's all too easy for those of us who follow these things closely to attach a higher weight to some candidates based on our knowledge of their performance/suitability/etc. than would the population at large who doesn't follow things nearly as closely. Name recognition seems to count for a lot in municipal politics and Watson has a lot more of that than Hume, who seems to be more about getting stuff done quietly than making lots of noise. Last time around O'Brien had to buy name recognition using his personal fortune and his connections in the business community; Hume has no such resource at his disposal.

Cullen was/is the outsider; the "centre" would've been too busy with three candidates and yes Watson, as the blandest, would've cut through the middle.

I'm not sure which three you're counting in the "centre": Watson, Hume & O'Brien or Cullen, Watson & Hume... because to me only Watson & Hume are centrist; Cullen is former NDP and O'Brien is a [wannabe] Tory.

But as JP said, better to "save" Hume for the next go-round. Especially if another 4 years of O'Brien means that Watson fades to black and is never heard of again (fingers crossed).

Do you really think O'Brien has a realistic shot at this? Cullen is the nominal leftist candidate but he's liked by very few people anywhere on the spectrum, and I'm sure the average left-wing voter would do whatever they can to avoid O'Brien returning, which means voting for Watson. On the right, thinking conservatives don't like people like O'Brien - his idiocy dragged a bunch of senior provincial and federal Tories into a courtroom, after all - so he's not going to find much support or help there. O'Brien is really limited to the Lowell Green constituency. Hume would probably have captured slightly more of O'Brien's support base than can Watson, but Watson is just going to clean up the huge "centrist" vote that votes on name recognition and safe blandness.

And Hume, btw, has done transit no favours by intervening heavily in the Hospital Link corridor study to ensure that the Browning Ave routing option was removed from further study, thereby effectively condemning the entire study as a pointless endeavour (it will propose a stub into the Hospital corridor from the SE Transitway while the route from the east will head through big box and office block sprawl just south of the VIA station, which is already served by rapid transit). Of all the councillors, none has intervened more heavily in transit matters this term than Hume, and certainly none more successfully. Cullen and Hume sure make the interesting contrast in terms of transit through their wards: Cullen would like to see 25 houses knocked down in his ward for a transitway alignment that's worse than the one we've already planned for, while Hume is unwilling to even let a transitway go past the houses on Browning Ave in a wide, easily mitigated hydro corridor connecting the hospitals with Orleans where many of the hospital workers live.

[ajldub]

The joke's over. Bring back Durrell.

[Ottawan]

The one good thing with four more years of O'Brien would be that the rapid transit plan goes ahead, as opposed to a groundhog-day-esque 'reset'.

I think the focus needs to be on changing some of the Councillors. We know that Cullen will be out, and Doucet has vacillated on running/quitting. I'm hoping that now that Hume is running for Alta Vista instead of Mayor, Deans may make a run at the mayor's chair, eliminating one more.

Of course, this also presupposes the fact that better candidates need to run as replacements in the ridings without incumbents, let alone the others.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Ottawan

The one good thing with four more years of O'Brien would be that the rapid transit plan goes ahead, as opposed to a groundhog-day-esque 'reset'.

Even with four years of jellyfish Watson, if he hits the re-set button, there'll be enough NIMBYism and negativity generated that someone else will come along, pledging to hit the same bloody button, and get elected.

Fact it: this pathetic Crapville hates transit, and couldn't build its way from one end of a wet paper bag to the other. Then we have to deal with inteprovincial issues and the bloody NCC. This town is an ungovernable piece of garbage that should just be bulldozed.

Move the capital to some place that works, like Sault Ste. Marie or Churchill.

Down with Ottawa.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Even with four years of jellyfish Watson, if he hits the re-set button, there'll be enough NIMBYism and negativity generated that someone else will come along, pledging to hit the same bloody button, and get elected.

Fact it: this pathetic Crapville hates transit, and couldn't build its way from one end of a wet paper bag to the other. Then we have to deal with inteprovincial issues and the bloody NCC. This town is an ungovernable piece of garbage that should just be bulldozed.

Move the capital to some place that works, like Sault Ste. Marie or Churchill.

Down with Ottawa.

Whoa! If this place makes you so miserable, maybe you should seek happiness somewhere else.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Dado

Several months back I was called by a pollster concerning politics at all three levels in Ottawa. For the municipal poll Hume wasn't even listed as a choice by the pollster - I had to "write him in" as one of my choices (I literally had to ask "can I add someone else to the list?" - I wasn't even offered an "other"). Most of the others being discussed at the time, like O'Brien, Cullen, Watson (who was still being coy at the time), Deans and even Doucet were offered up, but not Hume, which suggests his potential as a candidate hadn't even filtered into the midst of this pollster.

I think it's all too easy for those of us who follow these things closely to attach a higher weight to some candidates based on our knowledge of their performance/suitability/etc. than would the population at large who doesn't follow things nearly as closely. Name recognition seems to count for a lot in municipal politics and Watson has a lot more of that than Hume, who seems to be more about getting stuff done quietly than making lots of noise. Last time around O'Brien had to buy name recognition using his personal fortune and his connections in the business community; Hume has no such resource at his disposal.

I'm not sure which three you're counting in the "centre": Watson, Hume & O'Brien or Cullen, Watson & Hume... because to me only Watson & Hume are centrist; Cullen is former NDP and O'Brien is a [wannabe] Tory.

Do you really think O'Brien has a realistic shot at this? Cullen is the nominal leftist candidate but he's liked by very few people anywhere on the spectrum, and I'm sure the average left-wing voter would do whatever they can to avoid O'Brien returning, which means voting for Watson. On the right, thinking conservatives don't like people like O'Brien - his idiocy dragged a bunch of senior provincial and federal Tories into a courtroom, after all - so he's not going to find much support or help there. O'Brien is really limited to the Lowell Green constituency. Hume would probably have captured slightly more of O'Brien's support base than can Watson, but Watson is just going to clean up the huge "centrist" vote that votes on name recognition and safe blandness.

And Hume, btw, has done transit no favours by intervening heavily in the Hospital Link corridor study to ensure that the Browning Ave routing option was removed from further study, thereby effectively condemning the entire study as a pointless endeavour (it will propose a stub into the Hospital corridor from the SE Transitway while the route from the east will head through big box and office block sprawl just south of the VIA station, which is already served by rapid transit). Of all the councillors, none has intervened more heavily in transit matters this term than Hume, and certainly none more successfully. Cullen and Hume sure make the interesting contrast in terms of transit through their wards: Cullen would like to see 25 houses knocked down in his ward for a transitway alignment that's worse than the one we've already planned for, while Hume is unwilling to even let a transitway go past the houses on Browning Ave in a wide, easily mitigated hydro corridor connecting the hospitals with Orleans where many of the hospital workers live.

Interesting analysis, Dado, and in many ways I can see your points. I can also unfortunately see how the scenario you've described plays out to a comma. I guess it will all depend on how each campaign is run and how each will "message" itself.

With Cullen we get the transit plan, but reset on Lansdowne.
With O'Brien we get the transit plan and Lansdowne.
With Watson, we're not sure.

Reset buttons cost money, we ought to know.

Is it possible to run on a city-building platform? Very difficult. City-building implies spending taxpayers' money. So candidates who want to be taken seriously have to play to the lowest common denominator, which gave us "zero means zero" and a reset button last time. Did we save any money?

Is municipal politics condemned to letting big city-building decisions be taken by technical studies and a process of elimination and ultimate jeopardy? Look at Lansdowne: we got here because we dithered until it was time to tear down part of it, lest it fall to pieces. Look at transit: we got here at the price of a maxed-out system that will continue to be strained until we get the LRT built. Years and years of studies which only mean that politicians get behind big projects when doing nothing becomes clearly harmful.

Somewhere, there is a big deficit in ambition, imagination and proactivity.

So let us weep about that, and when we're done weeping, let us vote intelligently and in full knowledge of what we want to see happen.

[gjhall]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Even with four years of jellyfish Watson, if he hits the re-set button, there'll be enough NIMBYism and negativity generated that someone else will come along, pledging to hit the same bloody button, and get elected.

Fact it: this pathetic Crapville hates transit, and couldn't build its way from one end of a wet paper bag to the other. Then we have to deal with inteprovincial issues and the bloody NCC. This town is an ungovernable piece of garbage that should just be bulldozed.

Move the capital to some place that works, like Sault Ste. Marie or Churchill.

Down with Ottawa.

We're more into constructive criticism.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Mille Sabords

Whoa! If this place makes you so miserable, maybe you should seek happiness somewhere else.

Working on it. The "reset button" would be a big factor in a final decision to move my business somewhere else.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by gjhall

We're more into constructive criticism.

I've tried being constructive, and am moving on to pleading, cajoling, and ridicule. Nothing else has worked.

[Dado]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Even with four years of jellyfish Watson, if he hits the re-set button, there'll be enough NIMBYism and negativity generated that someone else will come along, pledging to hit the same bloody button, and get elected.

Fact it: this pathetic Crapville hates transit, and couldn't build its way from one end of a wet paper bag to the other. Then we have to deal with inteprovincial issues and the bloody NCC. This town is an ungovernable piece of garbage that should just be bulldozed.

Move the capital to some place that works, like Sault Ste. Marie or Churchill.

Down with Ottawa.

And I thought I was bad...


But your post does raise something I have thought about on and off: was Ottawa the right choice for the capital?

On reflection, I don't think it was. Ottawa is too overshadowed by Toronto & Montreal because it's located too close to them (especially Montreal) compared to the size of the country as a whole. For example, and this might sound a bit daft, but sometimes when you watch the TV weather on a national broadcast Ottawa is dropped off the map while Montreal, Toronto and Sudbury are shown. On transportation matters, Ottawa takes second fiddle: freight rail has been all but abandoned here and our airport doesn't exactly have a lot of international flights - because it's too easy to go to Montreal. Locating the capital in Ottawa was selected as a compromise between Upper & Lower Canada and not because it was a good spot for one.

So where would I have put it? Well it would have had to be reasonably accessible in the 1850s when the capital was picked. With hindsight one would also want it somewhere more central to the future (i.e. current) Canada, since it was foreseeable at the time that Canada would eventually span all of British North America. The physical site itself would also want to be somewhat dramatic.

So... North Bay. Except it wouldn't be called 'North Bay' since that name came about as an accident during the building of the CPR. It would have had some other name more befitting a capital. North Bay may not seem all that accessible, but in fact it was by way of the Ottawa and Mattawa Rivers from the east and the French River and Lake Nippissing from the west, water still being the main form of transport in the 1850s. A capital at North Bay would have brought about the early construction of the Georgian Bay and Ottawa River Canal project to link Georgian Bay with the Ottawa River, a project that would likely have gone through without WWI intervening. North Bay would also be the hub of the entire future Canadian railway system, with trains from Toronto & Montreal coming together for the trip westwards. That combined with major port facilities related to being at the high point in the canal system (North Bay is located pretty much on the divide between the Great Lakes and Ottawa River watersheds) and being the future gateway to the mineral extraction industries to the north would have made the capital an important commercial as well as political centre, something that Ottawa isn't. Later, the capital would need an international airport with decent connections to the rest of the world.

As a site, North Bay is overlooked by dramatic hills immediately north of the city while being sandwiched between Lake Nippissing and Trout Lake (which I'm sure would have a different name - like Lake Albert or something). These hills would be a good place to have a lookout from which citizens and visitors would be able to gaze down on their capital. Being on shield and hemmed in geographically, the site would have promoted fairly dense construction, eventually using granite as a construction and paving material; Helsinki perhaps could have been inspiration. Some of the channels and rivulets in and around the city could have become canalized for an Amsterdam-like feeling in places. The location also has a number of hillocks suitable for grand buildings of state.

Politically, this location was, at the time, outside the usual boundaries of Upper & Lower Canada. It would have been possible to create a special province or the like for the capital rather than have it subject to provincial rule from afar. Since it was all Crown Land, planning for the capital would have been much simplified as well.

But the biggest benefits I think would be on the national outlook, and, subsequently, on the outlook of the citizenry of the capital. Ottawa as a location has just reinforced the petty Toronto-vs-Montreal, English-vs-French battles that characterized much of early Canadian history, whereas a location as remote as North Bay would have opened politicians' minds to the potential of the country lying to the west. The petty battles would have seemed just that - small and petty after a trip of several days by water or early railway. The location of the capital would not have been a compromise that was "won" by Ottawa, an existing city; rather the building of the capital in the wilderness would have been an exercise itself in nation building. It would have been the staging point for the building of the transcontinental railway, which likely would have come about much earlier. The capital would have been seen as a place of importance by both its inhabitants and the population as a whole, whereas right now it seems as if Ottawans and their municipal politicians often don't even realize they live in the capital.


... and now back to talking about our current mayoral candidates

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Working on it. The "reset button" would be a big factor in a final decision to move my business somewhere else.

Here's hoping you "reset" yourself quickly, then.

[lrt's friend]

The one good thing with four more years of O'Brien would be that the rapid transit plan goes ahead, as opposed to a groundhog-day-esque 'reset'.

I don't know about that. We may continue to move forward for the time being but there is a great risk that when it goes to tender, the price tag may go up considerably and then where are we? We might as well hit the reset button since we may have reached a dead end.

Re-election of O'Brien or election of Cullen does not necessarily mean that we will get the LRT shovel in the ground in the next 4 years. This will not be the first time that a major project gets shelved.

[RTWAP]

I'll have to start drinking heavily if my only choices for an LRT-friendly mayor are Cullen and O'Brien.

I wonder if Hume is just laying low. Running a campaign that competes with Watson may not be feasible, but what if he enters the campaign at the last minute with a more grassroots approach. Don't try to run an expensive professional looking campaign. Just run from the heart and hope to win.

The thing for Hume is, if it's head to head between him and Watson then I think he's got a chance. But if he enters early then O'Brien probably comes in too, and Hume almost certainly loses.

He should file his papers for mayor 5 minutes before the deadline and have a go.

[c_speed3108]

Originally Posted by RTWAP

I'll have to start drinking heavily if my only choices for an LRT-friendly mayor are Cullen and O'Brien.

I wonder if Hume is just laying low. Running a campaign that competes with Watson may not be feasible, but what if he enters the campaign at the last minute with a more grassroots approach. Don't try to run an expensive professional looking campaign. Just run from the heart and hope to win.

The thing for Hume is, if it's head to head between him and Watson then I think he's got a chance. But if he enters early then O'Brien probably comes in too, and Hume almost certainly loses.

He should file his papers for mayor 5 minutes before the deadline and have a go.

This is the thing. It makes no sense for Hume and O'Brien to both run. It is not in either of there interests. It need to be one or the other for either to have a chance. They should meet up behind a Tim Hortons and sort this out

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by lrt's friend

I don't know about that. We may continue to move forward for the time being but there is a great risk that when it goes to tender, the price tag may go up considerably and then where are we? We might as well hit the reset button since we may have reached a dead end.

Re-election of O'Brien or election of Cullen does not necessarily mean that we will get the LRT shovel in the ground in the next 4 years. This will not be the first time that a major project gets shelved.

Nor the last. The "reset" button thing is going to repeat for another two or three cycles until Ottawa finally throws in the towel and abandons any pretence of being a real city once and for all.

Useless Watson gets elected in 2010, hits the reset button.

John Baird will hit the reset button again.

Ontario PCs will get elected in 2011, and they'll hit the reset button.

The federal government will change, and they'll hit the reset button.

Watson gets turfed or quits in 2014, and the next council hits the reset button.

It's reset buttons, all the way down. What a town.

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Uhuniau

Nor the last. The "reset" button thing is going to repeat for another two or three cycles until Ottawa finally throws in the towel and abandons any pretence of being a real city once and for all.

Useless Watson gets elected in 2010, hits the reset button.

John Baird will hit the reset button again.

Ontario PCs will get elected in 2011, and they'll hit the reset button.

The federal government will change, and they'll hit the reset button.

Watson gets turfed or quits in 2014, and the next council hits the reset button.

It's reset buttons, all the way down. What a town.

I thought you were moving?
Aaaanyway...

The bigger picture here is, there cannot be any reset button and the electorate has to say that. There can't be anymore reset buttons. What's the alternative? We always go back to that, too. The Transitway is maxed out. We NEED more capacity. LRT in a subway is the final destination, no matter how many reset buttons you hit.

Aside from the comedic aspects of the above post, the other key question has to be: who does it profit to hit the reset button? There are only a few cities in Canada where a project of this scope can be undertaken. Such a project represents a major investment, big contracts, lots of jobs (therefore intense lobbying), years of billable hours in other words. Do you think for a minute that the various industry interests who are likely to bid on such a contract would find it remotely funny that it keeps getting cancelled? Do you think for a minute that the last LRT plan was cancelled because "it was too costly"? Give your head a shake. It was cancelled, if anything, because it didn't go "all the way"... in other words, because "it wasn't costly enough" !!!

If you want a career as a stand-up comedian and you want a good set on Ottawa and its reset buttons, then I'll go see you at Yuk Yuk's and I'll laugh my belly off. You have lots of material to work with. But don't kid yourself. This is getting done. No resets.

Resets helps no one. It doesn't help the industry (probably a prime backroom mover and shaker) AND it doesn't help the electorate, who is getting increasingly frustrated with Ottawa's transportation problems. This just happens to be a confluence of interests that will make this a natural. The usual suspects will huff and puff about the money. There will be the usual oh-so-Ottawa self-effacing modesty about whether we "deserve" a subway and whether the voters of PEI would agree. I don't give a fuck about the voters of PEI and what they think of my city's subway, unless we also ask them what they think of every other major transit plan the feds throw money into from coast to coast.

[Dado]

Personally, I think the talk of "reset" buttons is bit overheated.

The only issue is really the tunnel downtown. That would likely be the only thing to be "reset" and given the timeline of tunnel construction we could have an operational at-grade system long before a tunnel gets built anyway. We could even do a planning and EA study on a surface option all the while that engineering design work goes ahead for the tunnel, because it's not like it's going to be done quickly. That allows a decision to be taken on either course of action once the designs are complete for both without slowing anything down.

And what if this "reset" led to an earlier completion of the Tunney's Pasture-Baseline portion of the system using the savings from the tunnel?

[Mille Sabords]

Originally Posted by Dado

Personally, I think the talk of "reset" buttons is bit overheated.

I agree with you there.

Originally Posted by Dado

The only issue is really the tunnel downtown. That would likely be the only thing to be "reset" and given the timeline of tunnel construction we could have an operational at-grade system long before a tunnel gets built anyway. We could even do a planning and EA study on a surface option all the while that engineering design work goes ahead for the tunnel, because it's not like it's going to be done quickly. That allows a decision to be taken on either course of action once the designs are complete for both without slowing anything down.

And what if this "reset" led to an earlier completion of the Tunney's Pasture-Baseline portion of the system using the savings from the tunnel?

And I disagree with you there. The tunnel downtown is not controversial, other than for the few in this "municipal bubble" who think they know better or insist on being relevant by being contrarian. Sooner or later, there will be a tunnel. Making a controversy out of such a basic thing is intellectual masturbation and technical dishonesty.

Most people, regular people, WANT the tunnel. They think it can't come a minute too soon. Just get it built!

The timeline of the tunnel construction is 6-7 years. We can spend over half that amount of time jerking ourselves off on sterile surface vs underground debates, or we can just get on with it.

[Uhuniau]

Originally Posted by Mille Sabords

I thought you were moving?

Working on it...

The bigger picture here is, there cannot be any reset button and the electorate has to say that.

The electorate, the morons, will say the exact opposite. Repeatedly. Exhibit A: LARRY O'BRIEN GOT ELECTED.

There can't be anymore reset buttons. What's the alternative? We always go back to that, too. The Transitway is maxed out. We NEED more capacity. LRT in a subway is the final destination, no matter how many reset buttons you hit.

I know that. You know that. That's two of us. There are a lot of (a) stupid people in this town, and (b) people who can't give a rat's ass about transit in the first place, and they voter in larger proportions than in any of the other 10 largest cities in Canada.

Such a project represents a major investment, big contracts, lots of jobs (therefore intense lobbying), years of billable hours in other words. Do you think for a minute that the various industry interests who are likely to bid on such a contract would find it remotely funny that it keeps getting cancelled?

Sadly, in Ottawa the planning, consulting, lobbying and NIMBYing industries are, each, much larger economically than the actual building stuff industry. The people who prolong the problem have more influence than anyone who might turn a buck implementing the solution.

Do you think for a minute that the last LRT plan was cancelled because "it was too costly"?

From the perspective of the home-owning and car-driving voters who are the bedrock of the electorate outside about three wards, that is EXACTLY what happened.

But don't kid yourself. This is getting done. No resets.

Then you don't understand the personal politics of this city, especially the childish feud between provincial Liberals and Tories which has infected the elected politics one level up (federal) and one level down (municipal).

Resets helps no one.

I know that. You know that.

It doesn't help the industry (probably a prime backroom mover and shaker)

Transit is not a major industry in Ottawa, unlike Montreal, Toronto, or Vancouver. Hell, even the ATU membership, who — at least the share who actually live in Ottawa — are anti-LRT, so they can't be counted on to vote and politic as a bloc.

AND it doesn't help the electorate, who is getting increasingly frustrated with Ottawa's transportation problems.

For "transportation problems" read "car problems": the electorate who actually vote are overwhelmingly home-owning drivers, not renters or non-drivers, who need to start showing up at the municipal ballot box.

This just happens to be a confluence of interests that will make this a natural.

I don't see any confluence of interests. In fact, I see a divergence; Ontario gave Ottawa the shaft in its piddly $600-million-and-don't-ask-for-any-more pledge; the feds are still not on board; the NCC is being obstrucionist, as usual in all matters transit.

unless we also ask them what they think of every other major transit plan the feds throw money into from coast to coast.

Indeed, and the good burghers of Ottawa, with their federal and provincial taxpayer hats on, have already given tens of millions in funding for the Canada Line in Vancouver, the Montreal Metro, major transit projects in Toronto and the GTA, and then get shafted even by our own locally-elected federal and provincial members.

And then we re-elect them.

If they don't care about transit in their own city, and if there are no consequences for their ineptitude — Watson, Meilleur, Baird, Poilièvre, all got re-elected — why should MPPs or MPs from elsewhere in the province or country?