Raj Hundal's disappearing act was unbecoming of a park board chair

by Charlie Smith on August 29th, 2009 at 8:17 PM

Last week, Vision Vancouver park commissioner Constance Barnes was back in the news for all the wrong reasons. CKNW Radio reporter Janet Brown revealed that Barnes had borrowed $3,000 from the city to pay for an alcohol-rehabilitation program. Nobody told the NPA's Ian Robertson of the existence of the loan.

Barnes acknowledged on June 10 that she has been charged with impaired driving after crashing her vehicle into a house in South Vancouver.

In response to the latest media flap, Vision Vancouver rushed into the breach with a spokesperson, Ian Baillie. He explained that Barnes was only making use of a program that was available to all city employees. Baillie added that the loan would be repaid.

I haven't heard any explanation why Vision Vancouver park chair Raj Hundal didn't make himself available to answer questions. In the past, he has often spoken on behalf of the board about Barnes's status. (Hundal is welcome to fill out the comment form beneath this article to provide an explanation for why he couldn't be reached last week.)

Earlier this month, Hundal told the Straight that Barnes could return to work in September. In July, Hundal told the Straight that Barnes is getting paid while on leave.

In neither instance did Hundal reveal that Barnes had borrowed money from the city interest-free to help pay for her rehabilitation.

Hundal, who was elected to the park board for the first time in 2008, could have a bright political future. He's thoughtful, knowledgeable, and has a lot of grassroots support. But he risks derailing his nascent political career if he doesn't demonstrate more transparency in the future.

He should have told reporters about the $3,000 loan at the outset. And he should have made himself available to speak to the media after word of the loan leaked out. The last time I checked, Ian Baillie wasn't chair of the park board.

Hundal already faces an uphill battle in the next election because his Vision colleagues have refused to take action against the racist at-large system for electing municipal politicians.

The Straight has repeatedly demonstrated how Vancouver's municipal-electoral system discriminates against candidates with South Asian names, but that doesn't appear to matter to Vision or NPA politicians. In light of this reality, perhaps Hundal's future in civic politics is already doomed--and whether or not he speaks about the loan is of no consequence to his municipal career. If so, it's a sad comment on the state of Vancouver politics and on the politicians who sit on Vancouver city council.

Comments

4 Comments

David Wong

Aug 30, 2009 at 6:20pm

Charlie,

You know that I agree with most of what you write... but I still can't digest your championing the thought of "racist" at-large system. I was one of the first to identify this thought, but then having see the opportunists jump onto the "crying the racism wolf" bandwagon... it's a bit too much.

I'm in favour of a ward system, but if any future candidates start using the race card to shop for votes, I'll be there to publicly make them justify their lack of self-esteem.

And they better have a strong stomach, because I don't mince my words for those who crave public office.

Charlie's Angel

Aug 30, 2009 at 9:03pm

David Wong... you are our city's best breath of fresh air. There are so many of us who enjoy your candidness, your honesty and intelligence!
Thank you

Dave S

Sep 1, 2009 at 9:19pm

Charlie it is really simple the loan is not a Park Board decision. They had nothing to do with the granting of the loan and have not ability to control the terms of the said loan-- it's simple really but that gets in the way of moral indignation.

Charlie Smith

Sep 4, 2009 at 6:25pm

To me, the issue is really simple. Should Raj Hundal have told the public about the interest-free loan to Constance Barnes? Frances Bula and Allen Garr say this should be kept confidential. I say that Barnes is an elected official who already told people that she was drinking, that she crashed her car into a house, and that she was seeking rehabilitation. By then, there really wasn't any confidentiality to protect because Barnes had already told everyone about her problem. Vision sent a spokesperson out to deflect the flack. It's not that complicated.