NO to Clarke. YES to MacSween. Here Are 20 Reasons Why

I'm a transparency candidate for CBRM council. Wouldn't it be a bit contradictory to base my platform on open information and no spin, and be unwilling to declare which mayoral platform I support?

I'm interested in earning your vote based on your understanding of what I am about. I am not interested in stealing your vote by hiding which platform I am most aligned with. If you have a candidate who will not tell you who they support and why, that is an error flag. It's similar to lying by omission.

I'm voting for Rankin MacSween.

I have absolutely no issues with sharing my reasons why. If you're unsure or undecided, maybe this information will help you choose. 

Come October 15th, regardless of who is elected as mayor, they should both have the same expectations. If I am elected to council for District 7, I'll be casting my votes yay or nay based on my assessment of each situation, not blind support or opposition.

NOTE: This is a long topic. If you decide to jump ahead, here is what I will discuss in this article:

The Cons of Cecil Clarke

Reason #1 - "If not the port, then what?"
Reason #2 - High Costs in the Billions, Uncertain Returns
Reason #3 - Unqualified Leadership
Reason #4 - Transparency Blackout
Reason #5 - Taking Unethical Liberties with Financial Claims
Reason #6 - Breaking the Rules is the New Rule
Reason #7 - A Failure to Deliver (Aka "Put the Puck in the Net")
Reason #8 - Relationships So Deep, They're Out of Reach?
Reason #9 - Claiming Wins Courtesy of the Federal Liberals
Reason #10 - The Last Minute Poverty Champion
Reason #11 - An Empty Promise to Resign
Reason #12 - Special Interests Get the Best Liquidation Deals
Reason #13 - Turning the CBRM Into a Bank
Reason #14 - An Anti-Equalization Guy Protecting Halifax
Reason #15 - $125 Million Cape Breton Growth Fund That Shrunk

The Pros of Rankin MacSween

Pro #1 - A History of Community Economic Development
Pro #2 - New Dawn Investment Fund
Pro #3 - Everything Local, By Our Own Bootstraps
Pro #4 - Focused Problem Solving
Pro #5 - He Is Not, and Has Zero Desire to Be a Career Politician


It just so happens that I prefer that our next mayor be Rankin MacSween. I believe that he has the right philosophy and focus. Career politicians like Clarke, who admits he is "married" to it, have an achilles heel right out of the gate. Their primary motivation is about their own career development in the political realm.

I want a focus on the community, not someone who dreams of becoming the leader of the Conservative Party of Nova Scotia - or any other party for that matter!

Cecil Clarke is a likeable enough guy. He's mostly polite in the public eye, and he looks how you might expect a mayor to look if you were a casting agent for a TV series. He's skilled at public relations and knows how to make everything sound very positive, even if a bit challenging to decipher at times. However, saying the right things and doing the right things have very different outcomes.

I learned a long time ago to trust what people do, not what they say they are going to do. This is particularly true in politics. And, it's particularly true in this municipal election.

In 2012, my perspective was different too. The choice wasn't as clear cut. Most people didn't follow Clarke's time as an MLA as closely as we do now with him as the current CBRM mayor. In the cooling off period where our very popular mayor, John Morgan, decided not to run again, residents of the CBRM were trying to fill that void. And Cecil Clarke convinced the majority that he was going to be the one to do so. He wasn't.

I'm going to share the list of reasons that have helped guide my decision.

I will start by describing why I cannot vote for Cecil Clarke. If you want to understand my decision making process, this is how it came about. I think there are far too many alarm bells and definite deal breakers for me to even have considered voting for Clarke this year. And that is why my online vote for Rankin MacSween has already been submitted. It's locked in now and I'm confident I made the right choice.

When you ask for the public’s trust and accept an important and well-paying job to serve your citizens, then you must be held to a higher standard.

If you frequently don't adhere to this standard, then it's our civic duty to draw attention to such shortcomings. It's not for the sake of criticism itself. It is for the sake of problem identification and the solutions that are possible afterwards.

My concerns are focused on Mr. Clarke's actions in public office that are of public record. I am evaluating him as an elected official, not as an individual. That is a part of what is involved with being a leader. There will be both praise and criticism, support and opposition. It's a healthy and a necessary part of our democracy.

We've been electing people based on who is the most likeable or familiar. We need to be electing people based on who is the most qualified person for the job. The fan mentality is suitable for Hockey Night in Canada, not political elections.


The Cons of Cecil Clarke

Reason #1 - "If not the port, then what?"

The entire economic focus of the CBRM for the past 4 years has been the port. That is exactly what they mean when they say you "put all of your eggs in one basket". There has been little or nothing about entrepreneurship or anything else that can uplift this community. I'm willing to bet that if you ask politicians, government officials, and business leaders outside of Cape Breton about what they think WE want, they are all going to say that we want "the port" and nothing else. This is a very dangerous message that negatively impacts our ability to get the resources we need to solve our challenges and define our future. Clarke's tunnel vision has defied the tremendous efforts and successes of our innovation and entrepreneurship community.

Reason #2 - High Costs in the Billions, Uncertain Returns

The port focus has already cost us tens of millions of dollars with little to show for it except a divided community. It may take years before we will know if it will be beneficial or not. And, even if it does work out, reasonable estimates suggest that it will not create enough jobs to turn our economy around. So we're discussing a project with estimated costs upwards of $1.6 Billion to achieve - with a suggestion of limited and uncertain job impact.

So we are betting everything on one super-expensive initiative, that is super-risky, and which we have no control over.

Even if it works out, it won't be enough. Not to mention that it competes directly with another port on Cape Breton Island. It's hard to determine if this is madness, bad management, and/or purposely misleading to the public?

Strangely enough, a project of this magnitude and complexity is all entrusted to the mayor and the four councillors with no business experience (that he personally appointed to the port board).

Reason #3 - Unqualified Leadership

From my vantage point, the port strategy has been mismanaged by Mayor, Council, and everyone they've pulled into the fray. It's difficult to believe that a solid plan and execution path could somehow be presented so poorly. I believe it's more likely that the apparent missteps are accurate symptoms of the project's true status.

To be clear, the port "concept" may happen at some point. I don't know. Certainly, a lot of people believe it will - just as many do not.

What I do know is that there has been a lot of what we might call questionable business going on that is completely unacceptable when representing the citizens of a community. The CBRM isn't a private corporation, just in case any of us needed that little reminder.

When I see the type of "deals" related to the port that have been disclosed to the public, and how those relationships have been explained by our Mayor and Council and their associates, it seems quite possible and perhaps likely that the port leadership is either incompetent or purposely misleading the public for some reason - political or otherwise. Maybe it's a bit of both.

Either way, it has the potential to be bad news for all of us - particularly as taxpayers. It has already divided this community and, for myself and many others, it's resulted in a complete loss of trust and confidence in our local government.

I say these things openly, but not lightly. I have no intention of conveying a conspiratorial tone. These ideas are based on reasonable interpretations of the info that is out there. I don’t form my opinions based on just a few missteps along the way. I like to give people the benefit of the doubt until I see multiple caution flags. But I’ve noticed what appears to be a consistent distortion of the information these past few years - and ongoing through this election campaign.

For about a year now, I've been digging more deeply into the details, tracking news stories, and contributing here at goCapeBreton. If you browse the headlines of the local papers, you will have a very different sense of the status of everything. Local leadership in the CBRM loves to use the mantra of "don't be negative" to discourage people from doing much more than cheerleading. I consider that just a defence mechanism for political job security. Regardless of the fear of being labelled "negative" that some may have, it's far too difficult to read something like this Community Report on the port and not come away with some valid questions and significant concerns.

Then we saw expensive colour brochures fall out of the Cape Breton Post the last week of September, smack dab in the middle of the election. It offered no new information of note. I think of it as similar to the municipal elections version of an involuntarily, taxpayer-funded super PAC. Otherwise known as an election brochure on behalf of Cecil Clarke's campaign, paid for by his friends at the port.

Reason #4 - Transparency Blackout

Mayor Clarke's election platform in 2012 included transparency as a key focus. What he's done was the complete opposite.

One of the first acts Clarke did when he was elected was to hire two people that he hand-picked. These jobs did not follow proper code-of-conduct hiring guidelines we should expect from government. Otherwise qualified individuals (maybe you) had no chance of getting hired for one - nor your qualified friends or children. The positions offer large yearly salaries ($75k and $82k each) and Clarke, unabashedly and unapologetically, described them as political appointments - as if it was a-ok. Leaders get fired for making such appointments, as you can see here.

That totals over $628,000 of taxpayer money over 4 years. He wasn't done there. Some time later, he hand-picked a CEO for the Port of Sydney Development Corporation at a yearly salary of $200,000 ($100,000 kicked in each year by CBRM taxpayers).

So, now we are at $1,028,000 of our taxpayer money for jobs for his personal associates during Clarke's single term as mayor.

Yes, the people who were given these jobs are decent people. However, there are lots of decent people with the qualifications to do the job whose only limitation appears to be their lacking of a direct connection to Cecil Clarke or the Progressive Conservative Party. You won't be surprised when I suggest there are lots of community organizations that work with our at-risk citizens that would have benefited tremendously from a small piece of that $1,028,000 in handpicked hires for Clarke.

Hiding the Neil McNeil report from council until leaked, burying CBRM business dealings in non-disclosures, or providing no proof of the Harbor Port Development Partners spending the claimed $1.2+ Million on pro bono port marketing is all a strike against Clarke's proposal of offering transparency in 2012.

The lack of transparency keeps getting worse. Despite one of the jobs being for a full-time communications person, that role seems to have been used primarily for the privilege of Clarke and not the CBRM in general.

Clarke may not see the irony in his suggestion that another communications person needs to be hired because the CBRM is getting so many freedom of information requests. When an organization receives so many such requests, it is usually because they are doing a poor job of communicating with the public about public affairs that should be disclosed automatically. Breaking records for secret meetings (aka in-camera), and racking up non-disclosure agreements with corporations is definitely a good way to flood the CBRM with FOIPOP requests.

If he was a mayor who promoted transparency, then he wouldn't be a mayor with an unmanageable influx of freedom on information requests that apparently requires new staffing to handle. Somehow he thought this was going to emphasize his committment to transparency and not the complete opposite - even with a communications advisor at his disposal?

Reason #5 - Taking Unethical Liberties with Financial Claims

Cecil Clarke has been touting his fiscal management with CBRM finances, and strategic accounting that allows the port corp to show supposed surpluses. The typical resident of the CBRM has to take him at his word. Most people don't dedicate their evening after work or school to fact check the Cape Breton Post or Mayor Clarke's campaign page.

But I do. How can you trust someone that has to overstate or misrepresent their achievements? Mayor Clarke has been publishing an infographic everywhere that claims he's reduced interest payments from $18 Million per year down to $11.5 Million per year "now...".

There are a couple of issues with these claims. I personally verified it with the CBRM's Chief Financial Officer, Marie Walsh.


Firstly, it's not interest he's talking about. Anyone with a credit card with high interest rates will have terror struck into their hearts when they see that word. So his infographic creates a more villainous enemy for him to slay. It's actually just our total loan payments, including both principal and interest for the year. The interest, while still significant, is actually around around $2.5 Million per year.

Maybe they just made a mistake? Not so fast. I've informed them of the error, but they insisted it was accurate and then published it in the Cape Breton Post afterwards.

Now before I tell you the next problem, I want you to keep in mind that the mayor hired a communications professional as his personal assistant for $75,000 per year.

The infographic suggests the payments (as they call "interest") are "Now..." $11.5 Million. Since it's the year 2016, you might reasonably believe that is what we are paying this year?

No, it's the projected payments for 2017/2018. If they had used the payments we made this year, the difference between where we started and where we are not would not have seemed quite as impressive, even though they would have been more accurate, more honest, and more ethical.

I think communications professionals know exactly what "now..." means.

Reason #6 - Breaking the Rules is the New Rule

Clarke and his present council seem to be getting more comfortable with breaking the rules. This was evidenced by the Sustainability Fund mismanagement. Despite it having quite specific criteria for eligibility, that was ignored the council went along with it.

CFO, Marie Walsh, who apparently seems to be committed to truthfulness, and adherence to rules in several instances that I've noted, twice indicated during the council meeting of sustainability awards that were ineligible under the program.

The mayor suggested that could be looked at in the next term. Then the council voted in favor of the items likely quite ineligible to access funds from the Sustainability program. How many community groups were excluded because they followed the rules of the program, or council awarded funds to programs or groups that should be ineligibleif the rules were followed?

Reason #7 - A Failure to Deliver (Aka "Put the Puck in the Net")

If you jump back to Clarke's 2012 campaign platform, what of note do you think he delivered on in four years? His showcase offer to voters in 2012 was the establishment of a "charter" with the Province of Nova Scotia. At the debate he expressed how critical it was for the CBRM.

After his election, we heard very little of his vague "charter" again. Of course, it did pop up again in his campaign promises for 2016.

Many people won't be too upset that he didn't fulfill the charter because it was never very well explained in the first place. It was delivered with a tone of "trust me, this is important".

As Clarke made clear in the 2016 debate that he wants to remove the tax cap, the fact that that charter might be the gateway to him getting the controls to our CBRM tax policy could be a bit alarming. Remember that he's a mayor that wants to manage a $1.6 Billion port project with port board members consisting of five men who have never run a business and don't have any port experience.

The seniors of the CBRM - who could be short on food, meds, or heating fuel if the cap is broken - certainly aren't interested in someone incapable of understanding the impact of adverse changes that will likely result from messing with the cap haphazardly.

So maybe it's best that he didn't put the puck in the net when it comes to the charter.

Some have suggested it is unfair to say that he has not accomplished anything during his four years. A member of the Clarke campaign team recently wrote a letter to the editor in the Cape Breton Post. The achievement she felt was his best was the establishment of the youth council.

It's a good program for students. However, it's not exactly on par with Clarke's biggest promises. Port development doesn't count when you give away land for next to nothing (Archibald's Wharf) or have to act like a commercial bank and buy land for another corporation (McKeil deal).

If you were put on the spot to name his single most important accomplishment, what would it be? Think about it.

Reason #8 - Relationships So Deep, They're Out of Reach?


Another big platform position in 2012 for Clarke was his connections and deep relationships. That was probably quite compelling at that time. He was a former Progressive Conservative MLA with Harper as the Prime Minister. Could anyone predict that a Justin Trudeau would be Prime Minister with a big Liberal takeover two years later?


I don't think the closing of Enterprise Cape Breton Corporation was a part of the offer he was suggestion he would deliver from his Federal friends.

The voters believed him, but he didn't deliver. If he had any connections, they're irrelevant now. Rumours of him putting on a red jacket are still too early despite what Manning MacDonald might hope we believe.

Reason #9 - Claiming Wins Courtesy of the Federal Liberals

Marketing people are aware that some people really do believe if you're in a photograph that you must be responsible for something. That's why photo taking strategies are so common at every level of government, and among every different political party on the planet.

However, claiming this 14,400 days of work nonsense as a grand achievement is a little misleading. Firstly, would it be too hard to actually describe the economic impact in terms of estimated new jobs? 14,400 sounds like a decent win at a local Chase the Ace. But it would be more clear if phrased: "We will create x new jobs for one year" and fill in that x with something not designed to overstate an achievement.

Regardless, that bucket of infrastructure money is a part of the Federal government's strategy. It was a major part of the Liberal Party's election platform. And they are delivering it to municipalities all across the country (i.e. Canada, not the Chinese Republic of Novazone). We were getting that even if one of the painted ear-tipped cats were elected as mayor.

It's a good thing. It just is a little suspect of a very late pre-election booster that Clarke is extremely reliant upon to make a case for his reelection - which is certainly in major jeopardy.

So before we break out a green, black and mustard coloured superhero costume, we need to keep this in perspective. The main responsibility of a municipal government is local infrastructure and services. It arrived via the Federal Liberals, but was absent during the reign of Clarke's Conservative Party associates.

Reason #10 - The Last Minute Poverty Champion

Clarke ignored important things in the municipality until they become politically important. Our excessive child poverty was not on his agenda until the community pushed it there. He didn't even attend the national poverty summit: "Cities Reducing Poverty: When Mayors Lead".

Why not?

Poverty at these huge numbers doesn’t appear overnight. In fact, Mayor and Council decided that flowers were more important. Transit has been an issue for many years, but ignored until the months before the election when Mayor and Council decided to make transit free for the summer. They counted the passengers and suggested that when the bus is free, more people will use it.

Reason #11 - An Empty Promise to Resign

Nearly half-way into his first term (2014), Clarke promised to resign if he did not achieve his goals for CBRM. Many thought this was a puzzling statement to make. Perhaps he was doing some political posturing, where, on the one hand, he was giving himself an out in case he wanted to run for a Federal seat in the upcoming 2015 election.

Many people thought he would bail on the job as mayor if he had a chance at being a Member of Parliament. This was such an issue that he had to make a public statement about it during his election run.

On the other hand, since his “goals” were not exactly defined, it meant he could decide for himself whether he achieved them or not. If he wanted to stay on as mayor he could just say whatever he wanted. And, that’s what happened.

On June 3, 2015 at a fee-based luncheon that was livestreamed, Clarke announced his many achievements and that he would continue to “keep his stick on the ice” as Mayor of CBRM. He even got a standing ovation, as I was struck with the feeling of "bad sushi" while watching the livestream.

Why did I have such an adverse reaction?

Other than not paying attention to the expiry date (pun intended), his claimed achieved goals were a couple of highly-questionable business deals (read about them below) and then a list of things that could, possibly, maybe happen in the future (like NSCC Marconi moving downtown), and a promise to do some studies, feasibility studies, and pre-feasibility studies about some other stuff. It was some of the best/worst political rhetoric that I had ever heard north of the US border.

I immediately re-watched "Men Who Stare at Goats" to try to understand rational. (Disclaimer: yes, bad, obscure joke here).


Reason #12 - Special Interests Get the Best Liquidation Deals

During this election season, it's become abundantly clear that people know the story of Archibald's Wharf in every district. And how it was handled matters to them. They know it sets a precedent for anything, greenspace or otherwise, that exists in their communities. It can be taken whether you protest it in the hundreds or not. And it can be liquidated regardless of its worth - in terms of both cost and value to the community.

In a region of double digit unemployment, jobs is a magic word that can instantly suspend disbelief for those struggling to get by or who want to actually reside in their home with their family every night of the year.

Apparently it was enough to push a deal through council despite a community standing together just asking to slow it down and consider alternatives. And, yes, it was pushed through by council members who were strung along for months and then given the agreement late the night before they had to vote on it. 9 of 12 of them felt that it was good judgement to vote for something they hadn't fully read or understood.


So that was the end of the prime downtown greenspace real estate next to the "Gateway to Newfoundland" with over 300,000 people passing each year. Built for millions, it was liquidated for the cost of a nice cottage style home in Ashby.

Reason #13 - Turning the CBRM Into a Bank

Clarke started out by liquidating prime real estate for a fraction of its value. Then he moved on to economic development that involved creating $1.2 Million in debt for the CBRM in order to buy land for a corporation.

So it's not lost on many people that it looked quite a bit like the CBRM had suddenly started acting like a commercial bank.

It's also alleged that they didn't bother to appraise the land before handing over the $1.2 Million (MacSween campaign). So the CBRM taxpayers took on debt and all financial/environment risk for a corporate handout. The magic word "jobs" once again arose to dampen the public response.

It's didn't dampen the CBRM internal response. When Senior Economic Development Officer, John Whalley, raised concerns of a conflict of interest deal to the new CAO, he was taken off the port file. This ultimately lead to a lawsuit against the CBRM for "constructive dismissal", and in the coming months we'll (hopefully) start to learn some of the details on how this shady-structured deal actually occurred.

Reason #14 - An Anti-Equalization Guy Protecting Halifax

If you agree that Clarke's bias towards special corporate interests while our mayor is concerning, you should be aware of what he was up to as one of our provincial MLAs.

Equalization payments is a topic that is hotly contested. It was Mayor John Morgan's big battle that ended in us failing in our legal bid to get a better deal. Estimates range anywhere from $15 Million to $50 Million a year that some assert the province should be sending our way. If they were right, even at the lowest end of that range, our economic position in the CBRM could be very different. It would lead to stuff like easing the tax burden on homeowners (i.e. the highest in the province), taking care of our roads and infrastructure, and delivering quality services to residents!


"What precipitated this action in the first place, I think times have changed and we're in a different era right now and it's one of optimism and one that speaks to growth" - MLA Cecil Clarke, after CBRM equalization lawsuit is dismissed.

He felt it was more of just a "differing of opinion". On the career trajectory of a career politician, was he siding with the province choosing party over his community in Cape Breton?

Reason #15 - $125 Million Cape Breton Growth Fund That Shrunk


If you notice we're dipping back before Clarke's time as mayor, it's important. Remember that past behavior is the best predictor of future behavior. I believe a tall, community man named Rankin something-or-other is often heard sharing this tidbit of wisdom.

When Cecil Clarke was a provincial MLA, he was made the point man for the Province of NS on the $125 Million Cape Breton Growth Fund. It was set up by the federal and provincial governments to help the people of Cape Breton to transition from the loss of our coal and steel industry.

Mismanagement of the fund neutered its ability to make a real impact for the people of Cape Breton and the economy it needed to spark. Clarke didn't do anything to help.

Let's switch gears now. We have a solid argument for why Cecil Clarke shouldn't be re-elected. In fact, it is probably enough information to have those among us who voted for him for mayor in 2012 to pause to wonder what they were thinking!


The Pros of Rankin MacSween

Pro #1 - A History of Community Economic Development

Some people may confuse not having a history as a career politician as being disadvantageous. We had it with Cecil Clarke and it resulted in nothing of real significance.

Rankin spent his life focused on community economic development in Cape Breton. As the leader of New Dawn Enterprises, he and his team build low-income housing units, create and manage many businesses, educate countless people, rejuvenate empty properties, play a role in healthcare, run programs like Meals On Wheels, and much more. They even invest in Cape Breton's most successful and growing innovative startup, Protocase, with 150 employees and customers that comprise the most elite, technologically advanced companies on the planet (or off the planet, for those involved in space exploration).

Cecil Clarke does not even measure on the scale of economic development where Rankin dominates. Rankin did it from an organization he runs, not one with bountiful intra-government funding access. They have to build programs based on concepts such as sustainability and business models.

Pro #2 - New Dawn Investment Fund

Small businesses are the economic drivers of our future. Rankin worked with a number of people to create the New Dawn Investment Fund. Through it, they have raised millions of dollars from local investors, and reinvested the funds into companies owned and operating by local people. These include our most successful technology firms.

These are the investments in true drivers of job creation and the future of our economic development.

With a fund containing just a fraction of the funding compared to, let's say for example, the $37 Million dredge, it's actually creating sustainable jobs with the formation of a new industry for Cape Breton.

Pro #3 - Everything Local, By Our Own Bootstraps

Rankin knows that we have a municipal role to lobby for assistance from other levels of governments. However, he gives everyone the reality check we need. For those that remain here after the death of our industries, we have to be resilient. We have to pull ourselves up by our own bootstraps and reset our mind with the realization that "noone is coming to save us".

Towards this end, his initiatives are all aligned with support local people, local businesses, and local entrepreneurs.  He does not preoccupy his time promising that we're going to get by, just by hanging in long enough for outside help that will suddenly reverse our declining fortunes.

Pro #4 - Focused Problem Solving

Rankin's platform is focused on solving key problems. He knows what the levers are to improving communities and building a business ecosystem with the potential for growth. He knows you don't bring people here or create businesses by offering to tax them out of existence.

He did not bait his campaign with an exhaustive Christmas wish list of promises for every district. He focused on the needs of the community. He is not asking voters to suspend their disbelief and believe every desire of the CBRM shall be fulfilled. And he refuses to make excuses for why we, as a municipality, cannot confront our most important issues in our community. He knows that local leadership sets the focus and guides the attention of the provincial and federal government.

If setting our focus resulted in $37 Million to deepen a harbour, is it not possible that significant funding is available to address real priorities in our community? If we focus on the right problems, we can start achieving the right solutions.

Pro #5 - He Is Not, and Has Zero Desire to Be a Career Politician


Rankin is not a career politician. It's safe to bet that he will never pursue an office higher than that of mayor of the CBRM, the community he loves. His life doesn't revolve around politics, political parties, global travel, or posturing for the next stepping stone in a political career.

Every indication is that Rankin MacSween is running for mayor because he is answering the call of our community for an alternative leader who will refocus on our community. He recognizes that we need him. He's right. We do need him.

There is little reason to doubt that he will put the community ahead of any other interests. To do otherwise, would be to completely change the consistent focus he's demonstrated for his entire life.


At the mayoral debate this past September 29th, an audience member somewhat angrily challenged Rankin MacSween as to why he opposed the sale of Archibald's Wharf, given that New Dawn has a welding school to train members of our community for good paying jobs in the trades. They asserted that maybe the Archibald's Wharf sale would result in jobs for these welders.

Rankin was honest in his response. He stated that he did not oppose the company. He opposed the process by which the the property was sold out from under the community by mayor and council. He questioned why another suitable location could not be explored given that:

"We are an island surrounded by water, for God's sake" - Rankin MacSween, in response to the suggestion that Archibald's Wharf was the only location to develop in our harbour

The person asking was right. It would have been in MacSween’s and New Dawn’s best interests if Rankin were to simply say what a wonderful deal this was and join the others in pushing the deal through without due process.

But, he didn’t say that. He, instead, spoke up for the good of the community, even when it was against his own personal business interests. This is what real leadership is about: putting the needs of the greater community above your own.

I'm satisfied that you can see the clear difference in these two mayoral candidates.

Once again, we now have a basis for further discussion. You have what you need to understand the pathway to my decision to support Rankin MacSween for mayor. We have an opportunity for four years of progress with a transition to a new mayor. I believe Rankin is right suggesting that we can do better. In fact, I believe that we can do much better with a new approach.

There are no perfect candidates to be had. You may even suspect my judgement may be clouded despite my attempt to make an informed, multi-factor decision.

Perhaps you may have even heard some grumbling about New Dawn, or bought into some of Mayor Clarke's campaigning that suggests (despite how silly a suggestion) that Rankin is "against jobs"?


Nothing changes the fact that in Rankin you have a community man with a proven track record. With Cecil you have a career politician, with a suspect record on Cape Breton business, four years of non-performance for the CBRM, and a promise-based plan that is focused on rescuing departing votes in every district.

To me, the choice for mayor is an easy one. I believe the next four years are critical for Cape Breton Island. This belief was the motivation that lead me to decide to become a candidate myself. I really hope we collectively make the right choice for the good of our community.

If you have a different view on this issue, please post so that we can have a discussion.

Please share to spread awareness.

www.electjoeward.com
Joe Ward for District 7 Council

1-888-330-7579

Do you live in District 7?
The communities of Howie Center, Sydney Forks, Portage, East Bay, Ben Eoin, St. Andrews Channel, Big Pond, Big Pond Center, Middle Cape, Irish Vale, Irish Cove, Enon, Grand Mira North, Grand Mira South, Upper Grand Mira, Gabarus Lake, Gabarus, French Road, Rock Elm, Huntington, Sandfield, Juniper Mountain, Big Ridge, Marion Bridge, Caribou Marsh, Dutch Brook, Mira Road, and that part of the community of Prime Brook south of Highway 125

Authorized by Official Agent

Posted by
Receive news by email and share your news and events for free on goCapeBreton.com
SHOW ME HOW


4,666
https://capebreton.lokol.me/no-to-clarke-yes-to-macsween-here-are-20-reasons-why-1
Gov Election Past Elections CBRM

0

Log In or Sign Up to add a comment.
Depth
seek-warrow-w
  • 1
arrow-eseek-eNo items to display

Facebook Comments

View all the LATEST
and HOTTEST posts
View

Share this comment by copying the direct link.

  • Our Sponsors

Using this website is subject to the Terms of Use that contain binding contractual terms.