“De-Growth” makes its debut on the Vancouver civic election ballot

    1 of 1 2 of 1

      A local municipal party is raising questions about the concept of “green”.

      De-Growth Vancouver, an offshoot of the Work Less Party, is running three candidates for city council in the Vancouver civic election on November 19.

      Candidate Ian Gregson describes his party as focused on “the maturation of green principles”.

      “Everybody’s green these days, but what does green mean,” Gregson told the Straight by phone.

      The candidate argued that unlike the term green, the concept of De-Growth cannot be diluted.

      “You can’t turn around and say this is a green tarsands,” he said. It’s very hard to kind of wash it out.”

      For those wondering what exactly De-Growth means, Gregson explains part of it is based on the view that “you cannot have continuous growth on a finite planet”.

      “The bottom line on many of the green principles is you can still have an economy as long as the product you buy is green, and we disagree with that completely,” explained Gregson.

      De-Growth city council candidate Chris Shaw, who has been volunteering as a medic at the Occupy Vancouver camp for most of the last month, said he eventually wants to see the city’s growth decreased to zero.

      “Of course that’s not going to happen instantly,” he said. “It’s going to take time to get that across, but I think that that has to be the goal, to begin to put the brakes on the expansion of our ecological footprint.”

      Shaw equates the consequence of continuous growth to being on “an endless treadmill”.

      “The consequence of that is going to be something we’re going to pass on to our kids, and it’s just going to be a lot less pretty world than we have now,” he said. “And if we wait until our grandkids have to have this discussion, it’s going to be vastly less pretty for them.”

      One of the ways Shaw envisions a deceleration in the local economy is around real estate.

      “The Vancouver economy, to my mind, is built on real estate, and I think you can put extreme brakes on that, and not keep building those giant condo towers that really serve a certain block of people and cost millions in change,” he argued.

      The candidate added he would implement “significant rent controls” on rental housing across the city.

      De-Growth’s policies also include a focus on increased supports for arts and culture, and on expanding the local food supply.

      Gregson concedes that the party’s focus on decelerating growth may not be mainstream enough to get De-Growth a seat on council.

      “We recognize that we’re not going to get elected - that’s fine,” said Gregson. “What we’re here to do is say to people - hey, there are other viewpoints on this.”

      “We’re basically here to influence, and in the same way the existence of the Green party in Canada or in North America has influenced everybody else to be green,” he added. “For such a small political movement, it sure has a lot of big influence.”

      “No other party is talking about this,” added Shaw. “If we don’t raise it, who’s going to talk about it? Nobody, because it’s unpopular. It sounds weird.”

      “No one wants to think that you can’t have all the goodies in the candy shop – but you know what, you can’t have all the goodies in the candy shop. Someone’s got to say it, and that’s us.”

      Shaw and Gregson are joined by a third De-Growth candidate for Vancouver city council, Chris Masson. The party is also running a candidate in the Sunshine Coast Regional District’s election.

      Comments

      21 Comments

      Lawson1945

      Nov 15, 2011 at 6:45pm

      Sorry Im only interested in a BC Conservative Civil Party

      GZLFB

      Nov 15, 2011 at 7:45pm

      Masson and Gregson are alright. Shaw is a prize panderer.

      GZLFB

      Nov 15, 2011 at 7:51pm

      Oh it's not a debut, more a rebranding of the Work Less Party. Better name.

      2nd Nation

      Nov 16, 2011 at 6:55am

      Do I read the message of this party correctly? Id est, "now that I am here I wanrt this place to be less crowded so I can enjoy my existence without a lot of <other> people cluttering up my urban environment".

      scathie

      Nov 16, 2011 at 8:11am

      How small should Vancouver shrink? This is an interesting theory. We're at something like 900.000 now. Should the population be 800,000? 700,000? Should we be encouraging people to leave Vancouver and move to the surrounding suburbs?

      walker

      Nov 16, 2011 at 11:14am

      Intriguing that people assume de-growth is about population. I assumed it was about economic growth, which is an unhealthy construct for a society to pursue. Sustainable economic and environmental policies geared to Vancouver makes sense to me - regardless of how many people live inside the city limits.

      john smith

      Nov 16, 2011 at 12:06pm

      For those jeering at the goals of this party, I guess that they are also in favour of unrestricted immigration as in "why bother to protect our lifestyle in Canada when there are billions wanting to move here".
      At what point does growth stop? It's the elephant in the room that mainstream parties won't address.

      Mike Simons

      Nov 16, 2011 at 12:17pm

      Degrowth can be hard to wrap your head around at first. Growth as policy has only existed since WW2, but it's deeply burned into the common psyche.

      Planned degrowth is the response to today's un-economic growth, which does more harm than good -- we measure and prize the wrong things. Degrowth's goal is to increase human well-being, no matter how often knee-jerk detractors claim otherwise.

      Sheeple

      Nov 16, 2011 at 12:55pm

      While I am in general agreement with the basic principles of freedom by dis-engaging from SLAVE WAGE CORPORATE DRONE TYPE WORK/EMPLOYMENT.

      On looking at your platform some of the following points do not seem well thought out perhaps you can articulate for us the Voters in more detail on the points below...

      (1) Special Tax breaks for Artists Spaces, not all of us are Artists but I work for myself as a Consultant in Technology why can't I get the same "break" as self employed Artists? or are Artists more equal than others? (Animal Farm :)

      (2) "illegal Drug use" - do you prose legalization? of all Drugs? or only some? while you may address the root cause for addicts, what about people who want a recreational and/or medicinal "toke"? what about Alcoholics?

      (3) Sex Trade Workers - What about those Men & Women who CHOOSE to work say from home or a private place and want the flexibility and money in this "Profession" should they not have the FREEDOM to Just Do It? :)

      (4) Why subvert established Private Property Rights? with Squatters Rights? Would that not lead to the collapse of Property ownership? Who will protect the the average private Property owner?

      Squatters Rights is a nightmare scenario ala Central & South America where anyone can come by and claim their family in prior generations owned the Land without ANY Proof.

      It ALSO LEADS TO HIGH LEVELS OF CORRUPTION via encouraging the EXPROPRIATION of legit Property from it's current RIGHTFUL OWNERS ala Central America where local Officials collude for a share of the Expropriated Property.

      Is that what you want to happen in Vancouver / Canada?

      (5) I see NOTHING about Population and/or Demographics on your Platform? What are your positions on those?

      Again I am not an Artist but will I share in the SAME RIGHTS as them if you come to Power?

      De-Growth is a Euphemism

      Nov 16, 2011 at 1:00pm

      What is it propelling continuous growth on our planet? Greed, personal glory? No, it is capitalism. Capitalism is based on the requirement for continual, unquenchable growth. It's not that your corporation earns $8 zillion as year, it's that your corporations profits grow, both absolutely, in concrete numbers, but more importantly, relatively, in relation to your competitors, the other players in fighting for a share of your market. It's capitalism's endless drive to competition that will destroy this planet. The drive to greater and greater accumulation had significant, negative impacts when there were about a dozen capitalist countries in the 19th Century, but now with 7 billion people, and with resources (water, air, food, trees) stretched beyond capacity, capitalism is a threat to life on earth period. I don’t know why Shaw refuses to name the system. It’s too late for pussy footing. This system must be stopped or it will surely end this planet.