The elephant in the room

I'm home now from the Chamber of Commerce's all-candidates' meeting, where my opening speech enjoyed the loudest and most prolonged applause I've received for any of the speeches or answers I've given in any of the all-candidates' meetings.

No surprise that the speech also generated some strong --even emotional -- responses/rebuttals from two members of the Protect slate later in the evening during the wrap-up session. Here are the notes from my opening speech:

Hi, I'm Terry O'Neill, and I’m seeking re-election to council.
This is our fourth all-candidates’ meeting, and there have been plenty of big issues discussed: services, densification and taxes. But there’s one we haven't talked about. There’s an elephant in the room, and it’s this:
The NDP is trying to take over City Hall.
*It’s no coincidence that every member of the Protect slate, aka Coquitlam Citizens Alliance, is also an NDPer.
*It’s no coincidence that our local NDP MLA and MP have endorsed the slate.
*It’s no coincidence that CUPE, which represents the city’s unionized workforce and is closed aligned with the NDP, has endorsed the slate, too.
We all know what damage the NDP did to the provincial economy when it was in power. Let’s not let it happen in Coquitlam too.
As an independent, I’ll work hard to keep Coquitlam safe and financially sound. That’s my promise, and you can count on it!

The CUPE issue moves front and centre

Hot on the heels of Jon Ferry's column in today's Province, which is about, in part, the financial and organizational support that CUPE gave to Neal Nicholson in last year's by-election, comes this blockbuster, pictured.
The graphic is of an ad that appeared on page 31 of today's Tri-City News (ironically, right below one of CUPE-endorsed Selina Robinson's ads).
For the record, I had nothing to do with the conception, purchase or placement of the ad. I had heard rumours that Coquitlam businessman William Dick, who is identified as the purchaser of the ad, was contemplating such an action, as he has attended several all-candidates meetings and has been vocal about his opposition to the undue influence of CUPE.
I was pleased to see that Mr. Dick, who two months ago donated to my campaign, had explained the controversy so well and, further, that he had gone so far as to endorse a group of independent candidates, including me, for council.
As readers of this blog and my Facebook page know, I have been writing about this subject for several weeks now in the hopes that the public would take notice. With today's publication of Mr. Ferry's column (which I blogged about earlier) and Mr. Dick's ad, it seems my efforts are finally bearing some fruit.

Whose interests are being served?

In this morning's Province, Laura Jones, sr v-p with the CFIB, writes compellingly about overspending by municipal governments in the province. "Operating spending [from 2000-2008] soared by 58 percent, or double what a reasonable benchmark suggests tht it should be.
"Much of this is due to inflated wages and benefits at the municipal level, where compensation is about 35 per cent higher than equivalent private-sector jobs."
On a related subject, Peter A. Epp of Coquitlam writes, in a letter [not yet on line, but a similar one, from last week, is] to the Tri-City News, that, "With no one minding the store, city staff has grown into a bloated, overpaid and self-absorbed bureaucracy...I hope the mandate of the promised provincial municipal auditor general includes a review of all city staff positions."
Both of these items touch on what is undoubtedly the big issue of this campaign: the direct relationship between the property-tax increases we've seen over the past several years, and the high rate of pay increases and overall pay given, primarily, to the city's 1,444 CUPE workers, and also to the exempt staff.
The big question: can we trust new candidates and incumbents who have a direct relationship with CUPE, through major donations and even, as I've written about earlier, through CUPE being an officially registered Campaign Organizer, to put the interests of the taxpayer first?
As I noted in Facebook last night, it was very interesting to hear Neal Nicholson reveal a figure of two percent, when talking about what raise CUPE might earn in the coming year, during the all-candidates discussion we had about the city's finances. Two percent, with maybe some changes to the benefits package, he suggested, as if pulling the figure out of the air. But given his close ties to CUPE, I'm wondering whether this wasn't actually an opening gambit by the union, as a prelude to next year's bargaining.
For the record, I'm in agreement with Mayor Richard Stewart and Councillor Linda Reimer in saying there should be a ZERO percent raise. The current four percent raise is an insult to taxpayers and private-sector workers.