NPA mayoral candidate Kirk LaPointe announced Monday that housing affordability is no longer the top issue in the campaign since news broke of a private financial deal between Vision Vancouver and the union that represents the city’s outside workers.
Though the deal between Mayor Gregor Robertson’s party and CUPE Local 1004 was revealed in a Courier story posted online Oct. 16, LaPointe spent a second consecutive day questioning the mayor on the agreement that resulted in a $34,000 donation from the Local and matching funds from CUPE’s B.C. and national offices for a total of $102,000.
“I actually don’t believe now that the largest issue is housing affordability,” LaPointe said at a mayoral debate broadcast Monday on Shaw television. “I believe that there is evidence of a problem inside our government, evidence of deals that have been made. I really would like to know what other deals have been made because it’s very clear that there’s been one made with the city’s outside workers.”
The Courier story posted online Oct. 16 and authored by contributor Bob Mackin quoted Vision Coun. Geoff Meggs telling members of Local 1004 that Robertson “has again recommitted to not expand contracting out, to make sure that wherever we can bring in new processes, that members of 1004 will be delivering those services.” Meggs was heard on a leaked recording obtained by Mackin of an Oct. 14 meeting held at the Maritime Labour Centre Auditorium.
LaPointe’s comments Monday came shortly after his party issued a press release accompanied by a YouTube link to a debate Sunday at Christ Church Cathedral where Robertson got into an exchange with the NPA leader over the union deal.
At Sunday’s debate, LaPointe pressed Robertson on whether he was proud of what his councillor pledged and whether that commitment “tied the hands” of the city in future negotiations with the union.
Robertson said Meggs was “not my councillor” and that he didn’t send representatives to such meetings. As for whether Meggs’ comments would affect negotiations, the mayor replied “absolutely not.”
At Monday’s debate, LaPointe accused the mayor of standing back from the controversy “as if he wasn’t somehow implicated, when his councillor actually said quite clearly that he was committing on behalf of the mayor to never outsource further any city services.”
Added LaPointe: “I think that’s a breach of fiduciary responsibility. I think it’s intended to buy votes. It certainly resulted in $102,000 in donations from the union and I think the city deserves an answer.”
Robertson told reporters after Monday’s debate that LaPointe’s allegations were “nasty” and “ridiculous.” The mayor said there is a longstanding commitment from Vision Vancouver to fair collective bargaining and to not contract out services at the city.
“That’s our practice and principle for six years now,” he said. “We have maintained a balance of city services — some contracted in, some [contracted] out — and we’re committed to continuing that balance. So there’s no additional change. Councillor Meggs was just stating the obvious and our track record to date and commitment to date to continue with that practice.”
Asked if his comments at Sunday’s debate in which he declared the city’s hands weren’t tied to future negotiations contradicted Meggs’ promise to the union, the mayor said: “What Coun. Meggs said is that we’re effectively continuing the same consistent policy that we don’t favour contracting out. We think city workers deliver good value for services and we’ve gained good efficiencies and saved taxpayer dollars working respectfully with our labour unions — in contrast to the NPA, who were at war with unions and we saw a big garbage strike [in 2007] as a result.”
City hall records show unions and developers have made significant financial contributions to Vision’s campaign since the party ran in its first election in 2005.
The records also show the NPA has received huge sums from developers over the past decade, including $960,000 in donations in the 2011 campaign from Macdonald Development Corporation.
Each party spent more than $2 million in the 2011 race and in excess of $1 million each in the 2008 campaign. Both parties surpassed the $1 million mark in 2005.
There are no limits on donations or what a party can spend on their campaigns. Neither is there a ban on corporate or union donations.
mhowell@vancourier.com
twitter.com/Howellings
