Yes-side claims are not winning them any votes
Merran Smith of Clean Energy Canada (the spawn of the tendrilous and pervasive eco-activist group Tides Canada and Simon Fraser University) and one of the dozens of Metro Vancouver leaders pushing for a Yes vote in the TransLink sales-tax plebiscite, met with our editorial board earlier this month to discuss her group’s concerns about the economic consequences of a No vote.
At one point during the meeting, Smith, an otherwise delightful and intelligent person, launched into the ridiculous talking point that all the Yes men (and women) have been parroting about the vote. She claimed, as many politicians and business leader continue to do, that the plebiscite isn’t a vote on TransLink. The public-relations hack who suggested repeating that mantra to all the six-figure elitists in municipal politics, the universities, the unions and the business community in the Yes campaign should be fired.
Guess what, everyone? In a democracy, the voters — not politicians — have the final say on what the issues are and the polls show that voters are screaming loud and clear that they are already overtaxed by TransLink and that they don’t trust the organization with any more of their cash.
By a two-to-one margin, for the past week, voters have almost certainly been marking big fat Xs in the “No” circle of their mail-in ballots and shipping them back to Elections B.C., many further infuriated that the Yes side continues to spend millions of public dollars on ad campaigns promoting what is surely a lost cause.
For the Yes proponents to continue to push the “it’s not a referendum on TransLink” line demonstrates equal measures of hubris and stupidity. What a slap in the face to taxpayers. And who among the Yes proponents even believes it?
If it’s not about TransLink, why did Vancouver mayor and chief Yes man Gregor Robertson scramble to bring in octogenarian billionaire Jimmy Pattison to oversee the money — at least “initially,” as the mayor admitted later? Given Pattison’s age, I suppose “initially” is a given.
And Transportation Minister Todd Stone didn’t help the Yes crowd when he announced recently that he has no plan to reform TransLink or its governance, despite the public’s furious reaction to the proposed regional sales tax and the organization in general. Todd Stone? More like Todd Stone-Deaf.
Another remarkably inept comment you hear repeatedly from the Yes side is the denunciation of Novote-advocate Jordan Bateman of the Canadian Taxpayers Federation and his complaints about TransLink’s spending. Some commentators have nearly implied that Bateman and his “secretive” federation should have no right to speak.
It’s sour grapes, but it also shows that Yes folks aren’t listening to — or in tune with — the public. Bateman’s campaign would get nowhere if thousands of Metro Vancouverites didn’t feel as he does about TransLink. There’s that inconvenient dang democracy again, getting in the way of the technocrats and their mega-plans for the serfs.
Another talking point from the Yes side that — like the “it ain’t about TransLink” line — is doing their campaign more harm than good is the claim that there is “no Plan B.” That’s absurd. In politics, as in life, there is always a Plan B, C or even a D or E.
The mayors’ insistence that there can only be a Plan A shows such a remarkably low level of imagination and problem-solving that they really ought to step aside so smarter folks can take over their jobs.
And who among them thought it was a bright idea to threaten voters with the “no Plan B” claim? Did they really think that extortion would inspire people to back their plan?
While most people want more transit and roads, they want it provided more efficiently with the growing, existing tax streams and they want big changes to how TransLink is run. Politicians and other leaders who ignore the public’s will on those points do so at their own peril.