Sunday, August 19, 2007

The Garbage Strike Conspiracy, Part Deux


Update: Sunday Night, Aug 19/07: In the comments, Ian King took exception to my using the term 'push' for the polling that was done by Ipsos-Reid. In terms of the actual poll itself, I have to agree that he is correct, and I thank him for bringing this to my attention. However, what I was really trying to say (badly) is that the City is 'pushing' only what they choose to have the public know about 'the Poll' while hiding the rest from view. Thus, I have editted the text to make this point of view/opinion more clear in the updated version.

So, apparently, Sam Sullivan et al. decided to do a little polling while they weren't negotiating.....

Christina Montgomery, The Vancouver Province
Published Sunday Aug 19, 2007

The City of Vancouver spent $9,000 to poll 300 people about what they think of issues surrounding the ongoing civic strike -- including whether an offer the city had already made to workers was "fair."

Spokesman Jerry Dobrovolny, who had refused earlier to say what the Ipsos Reid poll cost, told The Province Friday: "I wasn't releasing that number [yesterday], but now that it's generated such a buzz, we are releasing the amount."

Sure glad Mr. Dobrovolny cleared that up.

Because while $30 bucks a pop for a call from a telemarketer/pollperson is bad enough, how outraged would we, the people of Vancouver, be if the cost had actually been $400 a pop?

Laura Drake, The Globe and Mail
Published Aug 18, 2007

The city spokesman also took the union to task for publishing on its website that the cost of the poll was $120,000.

"It is inflammatory and really damaging to the process when they say on their website that the City of Vancouver poll costs $120,000 with an exclamation point after it," Mr. Dobrovolny said.


I'll tell you what is inflammatory - the suggestion by Mr. Dobrovolny that a ridiculous poll that has the whiff of the push from his side about it was in and of itself not inflammatory.

One woman who took the poll, but did not want to be named, said one question directly asked who you supported, the union or the city.

Mr. Dobrovolny, who would not confirm whether that question was asked, said the entire poll will be released eventually, but could not say when.

Why won't Mr. Dobrovolny's paymasters and/or spinmeisters let him tell us what the other questions are and what answer's they received? Is it because they are currently negotiating (as has been suggested now and has been suggested before, when they have not been) or is it because they want to push a message at us that wouldn't be supported by the other questions and answers?



I don't give a hoot in heckfire what the thing actually cost.

Because, clearly, even $1.49 on a Woodwards' Tuesday morning in 1971 would have been way, way too much.

Especially when the currently available evidence suggests that it was likely designed to be little more than a public relations sop* for Mr. Sullivan's folly b/w alleged continuing assistance from the Wilcox Group.

Monte Paulsen, The Tyee
Published Aug 16, 2007

Yvonne Yuen of the Wilcox Group confirmed that the communications consultants were working for the (Greater Vancouver Labour Relations) bureau during the early days of the strike. She referred additional questions to owner Mat Wilcox, who did not return The Tyee's call.

CUPE submitted a Freedom of Information Request (FOI) seeking additional information on Wilcox involvement in this strike, and received 48 pages of correspondence between Wilcox and the bureau in June 2007. CUPE claims that correspondence includes evidence that Vancouver's General Manager of Human Resources Mike Zora was involved in discussions involving the bureau's mandate for this strike.


*Unless and until the entire poll, which we bought and paid for, is released to us in full it is, we would humbly suggest, very difficult for any reasonable person who has been paying attention (with anti-war room spin deflector shield fully activated, of course) to come to any other conclusion.
More on the actual questions from Mr. Tieleman.


No comments: