Ladner vs. Robertson Debate: Round One

And the race is on!

Last night in front of a full & at times rowdy room in the bowels of the Vancouver Public Library, the NPA's Peter Ladner and Vision Vancouver's Gregor Robertson squared off in their first head to head debate of this civic election campaign.   

The event was hosted by Langara college and included well honed journalists: the CBC's Stephen Quinn, civics guru Frances Bula and the Courrier's Mark Hasiuk as the principle question-askers as it were.

Things of note included the energy of the room which was decidedly biased in favour of Robertson, perhaps three to one in terms of vocal support.  Also, Peter Ladner's confidence.   Despite the room's tone, he spoke with a strong voice and did not shy away from addressing issues or his opponent head on.   

Another factor, which may prove to be  the biggest challenge for Councillor Ladner, was the evident antipathy towards Mayor Sam Sullivan, his record, and the NPA. It was clear from the crowd's rumbles that despite Peter Ladner's role in challenging and then displacing Sullivan in a leadership contest, he's non-the-less closely associated with the current mayor and unpopular policies.  The palpable disdain for Sullivan was a recurring theme throughout the night, a mood that Mr. Ladner, wisely tuned into as his references to the Mayor were neutral at best.

Here's a quick listing of the debate's most memorable moments:

Biggest distraction: Apart from the dead mike/moderator screw-up false start that killed 10 minutes, Peter Ladner's decision to read his opening and closing remarks from a bright red notebook was an odd and distracting move.

Most popular position:  Ending homelessness - championed by both leaders.

Crowd favourite:  Gregor's retort on his perceived lack of experience: If experience was a good qualification for leadership then Mayor Sam Sullivan would have had an amazing term.  

Best moment of conviction:  Robertson's claim that he entered civic politics to tackle the homeless problem because "it's not getting any better".

Best display of honesty: Ladner admitting that the Civil City Project implementation isn't working very well.

Most politically dangerous statement:  Ladner claiming that temporary help for the homeless (like converting the Storeum building site into a shelter) is not, and should not be a priority, as it draws resources from long range solutions.

Best attack dog moment:  Ladner pointing out that he's never seen Roberston sit through a full session of a City council meeting, city committee meeting or translink meeting.

Best zinger: After Roberston made a stink about the 'unjust' passing of the RAV transit line and the lack of NPA leadership, Peter Ladner pointed out that it was actually the COPE/Vision dominated council that signed off on it.  After a few gasps and a hush, Roberstson, retorted that Ladner was on the Translink approval board at the time.  Vision partisans then exhaled.

Best vision statement:  Robertson's closing statement that he seeks to "rally the people of Vancouver to take responsibility for their city"  JFKesque and effective.

IN SUM:

Ladner seemed to have the edge in performance and presence while Robertson effectively communicated a message of hope and progressive change.  I'd call it a draw.

The next debate will be the  Vancouver Courier-sponsored debate at Science World on October 8th.