Chris Bryan editorial is a “must read”

Chris Bryan’s editorial about Voice (and the evolving New Westminster political scene) in the October 28th Newsleader is a must read for anyone interested in local political affairs.

As Chris Bryan points out, not only is Voice alive and kicking and “a force to be reckoned with in 2011,” Voice is actively gearing up for the next civic election which is now just a year away.

To paraphrase an obvious and famously apt quote attributed to Mark Twain/Samuel Clemons: Reports of the death of Voice have been greatly exaggerated; and it’s pure wishful thinking on the part of those with an interest in maintaining the status quo here in New Westminster to imagine that Voice is dead.

And, as more and more people are starting to point out, holding elected officials to account, raising important issues and challenging the status quo are essential to the political process and not “negatives” as some would have it.

However, as Chris Bryan very correctly points out, Voice was just a year old at the time of the last civic election, and like any young, vital organization Voice is always learning and evolving and we appreciate any and all feedback.

After all, Voice is based on the premise that the community’s interests are best served when a diversity of views and opinions are brought to bear on issues and a broad public consensus is achieved. And what we’re ultimately striving for are the optimal solutions that flow from open and transparent public processes that have accountability and “value for money” as key guiding principles.

Chris Bryan’s passion for New Westminster is readily apparent, and as always, Voice is open to feedback and critical analysis of our organization and our actions in the community because that which does not kill us makes us stronger.

13 thoughts on “Chris Bryan editorial is a “must read”

  1. Good article.
    The Newsleader seems to be analytical in its treatment of slates and Voice’s emergence onto the political scene. The other paper’s ties to the other slate are readily apparent.

  2. the status quo in New West has got to go. All its given us is high taxes, traffic, dilapidated schools, and did I mention high taxes.

  3. Thanks, saw it for the first time in my paper and just re-read the editorial, same impression on the second read as the first; thoughtful, thought-provoking, and (imagine this!) balanced!

    wow! again.

  4. Chris Bryan hit the nail right on the head. i suspect that the opportunist Osterman bailed on Voice because he knew they wanted no part of him.
    Ostermans voting record is not based on any principles or philosohpy, basically, he throws some grass up in the air,sees which way the wind takes it, then he does some grandstanding for those in the crowd, and then he votes. Then he goes home and removes the picket fence that is stuck up his exhaust pipe.
    No loss to Voice. Osterman barely got voted in last time, lets see how he does without the support of Voice.

  5. Coprons’ comment that “the other paper’s ties to the other slate are readily apparent” is ridiculous. All papers really care about is news, although they are likely to point out if the emperor doesn’t, in fact, have any clothes.
    Of course, if Voice candidates choose not to run ads with one paper and not the other, it will give the impression of a bias, but you’d be the ones to blame.

  6. To anonymous.
    It was not the intent to dis any paper, but to show the difference in approaches.
    I think anybody with a discerning eye will agree that the editorials between the two papers are markedly different, in style and in quality.
    Further, it is not always what you write that makes the difference, most times it is what you don’t write.
    When you have a large advertising contract in place, you don’t bite the hand that feeds. I don’t buy your Pollyannaish view that “all papers really care about is news”.
    Your last paragraph sounds an awful lot like somebody who might be in the industry.
    My comment would be, that if a newspaper dealt with issues fairly, candidates would place ads with them.

  7. Re: the negative label that has been slapped onto Voice New Westminster

    Is anything or anyone all positive or all negative, always correct or always wrong? No.

    Is every individual associated with one group exactly the same? No.

    Are there people of integrity in all political camps? Yes.

    Are all political camps always good? No, not always.

    Is it a mistake to examine and ask questions about local issues? No.

    Is it a mistake to register opposition or complain about unpopular political decisions? No.

    ….. OR,

    … AND THIS IS THE REALLY IMPORTANT QUESTION:

    … is it a mistake to carte-blanche accept and live with the decisions made by elected politicians?
    Yes: because it is close-minded and undemocratic, it is, or would be, a tragic mistake to blindly accept the decisions of any politician or body of elected representatives.

    Thank you to Voice for finally bringing a true democratic model to local New Westminster politics.

  8. News Flash to the nay-sayers who outright dismiss the legitimacy of Voice NewWestminster: as citizens, we are not a mob of cookie-cutter voters!

    That’s right, believe it! New Westminster residents do have thinking brains and we are tired of being spoon-fed the City-Hall spin of the day, including the line that Voice is negative. That line worked for you last time but won’t again. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

    This Mayor and Council have consistently raised taxes; their transportation decisions will make our traffic woes worse; and the Pier Park plans have put city finances into a tail-spin, a peril which will mean more tax hikes!

    And for what? To put an unwanted mega-regional garbage incinerator here to contribute to the air pollution that comes from the thousands of non-resident cars that already travel through our city!?!

    It’s time for serious change before it is too late to salvage the New Westminster we know and cherish. Keep up the good work Voice!

  9. A closed-mind is one that refuses to entertain and weigh differing points of view. To avoid solid, issue-based statements or respectful debate, closed-minded individuals will readily dismiss anyone with a dissenting view-point.

    Evidently, they will also resort to baseless name-calling. Note the undeserved ‘negative’ label levelled against Voice; what is important is to keep in mind that these are individuals and groups (or friends of individuals and groups) with vested special-interests/political-agendas, often with very singular purposes.

    Unlike these closed-minded individuals who oppose scrutiny and discussion, Voice New Westminster welcomes scrutiny and discussion.

    Voice New Westminster:

    *embraces a diversity of view-points
    *models issue-based, respectful debate
    *and unfailingly encourages a meeting of minds

    Stay the course Voice. Meaningful change can be a slow process.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>