Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
I am deeply sorry over the anger, grief and deprivation that have been felt
by my friends, neighbours and those who care for the environmental fabric of
our city (Anon. 1990).
SHPOA, City Council and the Planning Department had worked closely
over the years in the planning of Shaughnessy and a choreographed out-
come to the public hearing would have been passage of the more restrictive
of the motions concerning new development. But this consummation of an
ongoing political understanding was derailed by an unexpected interven-
tion. While new immigrants had played almost no part in the ongoing debate
up to the announcement of the public hearing, in the second half of 1992
residents with Chinese family names submitted a quarter of the letters to
Council. Moreover, they mobilized and formed their own organization, the
South Shaughnessy Property Owners' Rights Committee. At the public
hearing they worked as a co-ordinated block, seated together and waving
small flags in unison when one of their number presented a brief. It was an
act of no little risk-taking and courage by newcomers to test out the unfa-
miliar contours of free speech in a head-on clash with a 60-year old elite
organization. But they out-worked the SHPOA and its supporters, and
when Council tallied up the briefs after six boisterous nights of democratic
exchange, they learned that residents with Chinese family names had pre-
sented almost half of the briefs. With allies in the real estate sector who
campaigned against controls, and a few Anglo-Canadian allies worried
about land values, it turned out that 63 percent of speakers had presented
briefs opposing Council's motions. The plan rehearsed by SHPOA and the
City ahead of the public hearing could not proceed.
The ideology of this unexpected political intervention owed its formation
unmistakably to socialization around the meaning of property in Hong
Kong, and expectations concerning democratic practice in Canada. The
name of the new group, the South Shaughnessy Property Owners' Rights
Committee, clarified immediately its genesis and its platform. In letters and
briefs, arguments moved around the themes of property rights, land values,
individual freedom and democracy. The new homeowner who cut down the
sequoias on his Kerrisdale property could not understand why his neigh-
bours were up in arms: 'That's my private property. Why do you bother me?
First, I don't want publicity. I have my own private rights. It's none of their
business' (Godley 1990). In complete opposition to SHPOA's position,
democracy was presented as the absence of government action, the removal
of limits, and empowerment of individual property rights. A woman speak-
ing through an interpreter made the case efficiently at the public hearing:
I live in Shaughnessy and we built a house very much to my liking. The
new zoning would not allow enough space for me… I strongly oppose this
