Where’s the plan

Sandy Latchford refuses to answer this question. The candidate for mayor is complaining once more, this time in a campaign flyer, that the County’s current economic development path is a mistake.

“What we are doing now is not good enough… It is time for the Economic Development Office to take a new direction.”

We’ve heard this argument before—but so far we haven’t heard Latchford’s proposed alternative.

Personally I think it is odd to observe the thousands of folks who thronged to the Crystal Palace and beyond these past few weekends to celebrate the County’s wine, food and arts—and conclude we are on the wrong path—but let’s leave my opinion out of this for the moment.

Instead, please cast your memory back to February of this year, when the new mayoral candidate first began her rant against the economic development office. This was the first we learned the candidate harboured her own theories as to how the County’s economic prosperity ought to be developed. We challenged the candidate at the time to substantiate her attacks with evidence and to provide an alternative strategy. We believe that if you want to be mayor you must do more than tear things down. You must also have a plan to rebuild. In February, Latchford promised on her web site “a more detailed economic development policy in the coming weeks.”

Yet nothing came.

In June we again challenged the candidate to bring forth her plan to develop our economy for public examination and scrutiny. Nearly four months had passed since she had launched her ambush on the economic development office. Still no sight of her alternative economic development strategy.

If she would not answer the questions posed by the Times— then at least she should answer to County residents at the mayoral candidates’ meeting in Picton. But Latchford declined to participate in the June meeting—refusing to answer questions or reveal her platform, she said, until nominations had closed. It was too soon she said.

Now in September, just weeks before the election, and we have yet to learn anything from the candidate on her proposed alternative to the County’s economic development strategy. According to her literature we need to take a new direction— but she still won’t us what this new direction is.

So I asked the candidate a series of follow up questions on Sept. 3

They were:

“You state that [the County’s] long-term goal should be economic viability through collaboration with measurable outcomes. Some questions follow:

1. Are you suggesting our current economic development strategy as it is currently practised doesn’t have regard for long-term economic development?

2. Or that the economic development office doesn’t collaborate with the community businesses and individuals?

3. Where are the specifics of your plan? You wrote in February that the details of your economic development strategy would be forthcoming in the following weeks. Where are these details?

4. Don’t you need to explain your alternate strategy to the electorate? Is it fair to continue to attack the economic development officer and his strategy without this?

5. Finally, I think readers should know your track record in this field. What, in your experience or background, qualifies you to speak with credibility and authority on strategies of economic development?”

I am still awaiting Latchford’s response to my questions. So what does her silence tell us about the candidate? Maybe she doesn’t have to answer to the Times—but who else will hold her accountable for her actions? Even if you agree that changes are needed in our economic development efforts—you deserve to know what the candidate has in mind.

The bottom line is that she promised details of her economic development policy in February. It is now September. We don’t know what she has planned. Or even if she has a plan at all.

We do know the issues she trumpets at council, including ground water protection, accessibility and renewable energy. They are likely part of her agenda. But each of these items comes with a price tag. Where is her platform and plan to pay for it? So far we have heard plenty of fog but scant substance.

In our hunger for change, let’s pause a moment to ensure we know what it is we are voting for. Let’s not simply smash things because it makes us feel better. In the upcoming candidate meetings, let’s ensure that those who seek to be our mayor have a plan, and that they are willing to explain it and defend it.

rick@wellingtontimes.ca