It has often been said of the federal Liberals that they campaign from the left and govern from the right.

After yesterday’s meeting of city council’s planning and environment committee (December 18), I wonder if Vision Vancouver is going the other direction.

The issue that has me thinking this way is the Burrard Bridge bike-lane trial. I have to suspect that Vision, a party often seen as right-of-centre-moderate, has turned a sharp left on this one.

Let’s chart the course of this political shape-shift.

During the campaign for last month’s municipal election, both Vision and COPE ran on a promise to revisit the Burrard Bridge issue. (Remember, former COPE councillor Fred Bass had initiated a two-lane bike trial for the bridge in the summer of 2005, but the NPA nixed it right away in December of that year after taking back city hall.)

Rather than pushing to have two lanes reallocated from vehicular traffic to bikes, in-line skaters, and pedestrians, Vision and COPE wanted a one-lane “reversible” trial that would take one traffic lane and give it to cyclists—in the form of a half lane in each direction—while the flow the centre lane would shift direction based on rush-hour traffic.

This was a clear “signal” to hard-core cyclists like Bass and Richard Campbell that Vision and COPE did not want to revisit Bass’s proposal during the campaign. Fear of NPA criticism may have been one factor. But some may have feared that a one-lane trial would be simply too expensive and cumbersome.

Certainly Bass thought it was of concern when he told the Straight before the election: “If this foretells the weak-kneed-ness of Vision and COPE together, then Vancouver has lost something substantial.”

Bass also noted, as did pedestrian activist Bev Ballantyne, that the issue has been studied to death. They also noted ad nauseum that city staff’s position from a safety perspective favours a two-lane reallocation or (an expensive) widening of the sidewalks, but not the one-lane option.

The election came and went, and Vision and COPE saw all but one council candidate on their slates elected. Lo and behold, Vision councillor and engineer George Chow immediately signalled to the Straight last week that the two-lane trial was back in the game.

Council voted 10-1 in favour of adopting Chow’s motion to ask staff report back by March 3 with a viable trial for next spring.

Council heard from six cycling speakers on the issue: Don Buchanan, Arno Schortinghuis, Bass, John Whistler, Campbell, and Ned Jacobs.

All of them stressed the need to honour the city’s transportation commitments and have a two-lane trial that allowed for safe use of the bridge by pedestrians, cyclists, and transit vehicles ahead of private automobiles. They seemed to get agreement from city engineering-services manager Tom Timm.

At one point yesterday, after hearing from all speakers, Timm even went so far as to suggest that council could reword its motion, “as I am hearing a strong leaning toward two lanes”.

Seeing the political crossroads up ahead, Mayor Gregor Robertson missed the left turn and opted for pragmatism.

“I’m all for looking at both options, so we keep our options open,” Robertson muttered to Timm.

Vision was a whisper from going straight back to Bass’s motion and ditching the one-lane option completely. Robertson’s moderating influence may just have been the political correction that stopped a complete and utter move back to Bassland.

Don’t be surprised if the opposition—NPA councillor Suzanne Anton—uses this as its last-ditch lifeline next year and tries to muddy the waters. Mind you, that will be harder to do if Timm and his crew opt for Bass’s original plan.

Maybe Vision moderates want to take that left turn a little more slowly. Now at least they buy some time. By introducing this so early on, they also at least signal to all that they know it has been a controversial issue that has gone unresolved for 20-plus years.