Many people have emailed me about the vote on Mixed Martial Arts motion at Vancouver City Council. After two weeks of marathon meetings on everything from budget to re-zonings, I don't think I could explain it much better than the notes I jotted down during the meeting today which I've typed and included below. If you're really interested, video of all speakers, questions and speeches available here.
-- Rough text of speech (check against delivery) --
Chairperson, I struggled a great deal with this issue over the days since we got the report, although not because of a lack of rigour in the report. And I thank staff for doing such a thourough job with it. But because it's not every day we're asked to regulate something that's technically illegal under the Criminal Code.While I appreciate the City Manager's comments in that regard - that statutes often lag behind public opinion and sentiment, and we've talked about some other examples of that today - it does not solve the question of liability.
There are two possible solutions:
1) the city assumes the liability, which neither the report nor anyone on council seems to be contemplating
or
2) the promoter assumes the liaibility, as the report suggests
In which case, we'd have very, very few events in the next two years -- the "pilot" period proposed in the report -- as very few promoters seem able to indemnify the city in the many millions of dollars which is the level we'd require. We might get 1 events, maybe 2.
At the same time, the evidence from the speakers today is that the perception that it is legal, created by a positive vote today that is really only a very narrow opening of the door, would create a proliferation, or at least spur growth in amateur events.
And as we've heard it's the amateur events we're most worried about and it's the amateur events we don't have the authority to regulate.
Therefore it's very hard for me to see the logic in taking the course of action proposed in the report. There are very few benefits, still no new information on the provincial or federal legislative framework, and it carries potentially large negatives in further increasing unregulated amateur events.
I would vote against it, based on these concerns alone.
However, I also don't want to hide the fact that there is a second issue for me and that is the issue of the inherent violence in mixed martial arts marketing.
As a former school trustee, I spent too much time dealing with the fall out of kids living in a world that seems determined to de-sensitize them to violence by sanctioning it among adults, but then punishes them for participating in violence themselves.
There is clearly athletic ability involved in mixed martial arts, and I don't want to diminish that, but it is violence that is being marketed in the professional events, not athletic ability.
As a city councillor, I can't stop all exposure of kids to adult-endorsed violence but i do have this one vote today and I will cast it against the recommendation with the hope, the sincere hope, that the sport can continue to evolve to the point where the marketing can depend on athletic ability and not violence.
