Thursday, May 27, 2010

Brampton's Mayoral race is going to be a good run...

Rui Branco, the owner of Brittany, one of the dogs seized in Brampton in January has signed on as campaign manager for Bruce Haines. Haines is running against Susan Fennell, who is Brampton's current mayor.

K9 crusader signs on with candidate
The man at the centre of the dog seizure controversy is fighting back in a whole new arena—he is trying to help oust Mayor Susan Fennell.
Rui Branco has been named campaign manager for Bruce Haines, who is running against Fennell in this fall’s municipal election.
For mayoralty candidate Haines, Branco represents the “grassroots citizens’ campaign” he says he is running, which is exactly what he was looking for in a campaign manager, he said.
“He clearly ran into a city that refused to accept the truth, tried to cover it up, and had no interest in justice,” Haines said. “It’s what I’ve been fighting for years... It’s brought two fighters together.”
Branco’s family owns Brittany, one of two dogs wrongly identified by the city as “pitbulls”, seized and held for 14 weeks before finally being released when it was determined by an independent veterinarian that they were not “pitbulls”.
“To date, Susan Fennell has refused to independently investigate this matter and instead participated in a campaign of disseminating inaccurate information to the public all the while wasting tens of thousands of the taxpayers’ dollars to facilitate a cover-up,” Haines charged.
Branco said Haines is “a true community fighter for justice,” and residents would  be well-served by him as mayor.
“Transparency and accountability cannot be just empty words promised by our elected officials,” Branco said. “Bruce will ensure the city behaves in a fashion that restores the public’s faith if he is elected as the new mayor of Brampton.”
Bruce Haines is fortunate to have Rui as his campaign manager. 

Susan Fennell is in for the fight of her life. She best be getting her resume updated...

Fennell certainly isn't about fair and equal treatment under the law in Brampton. Rambo and Brittany were seized and ripped from their loving homes only to be held for 3 months. It cost Rui $20,000 and making a deal with the city agreeing to post a dangerous dog sign on their property even though neither dog were seized for any reason other than the Brampton AC thought they were "pitbulls". There are an awful lot of dog owners in Brampton. Approximately 1/2 of households own a dog.. That is a lot of votes!

Rambo's owner took him to the vet to find he had a broken rib that was not a recent injury. It was estimated by the vet the injury happened sometime while Rambo was being held by the city. 

The city is refusing to launch an investigation. 

Here is an editorial from the Brampton Guardian today.

Time for dog inquiry
The arrogance and lack of accountability shown by the City of Brampton throughout ‘doggiegate’ continued last week as city officials refused to answer questions about Rambo’s broken ribs.
Simply stating there is “no evidence” that the dog’s ribs were broken while he was in the care of the animal shelter just isn’t good enough. It’s an unacceptable response to a very serious allegation.
Because the truth is, it is possible that’s exactly where his ribs were broken. According to an expert, the injury happened at least two to four weeks before he was released by the city, and he was in the city’s shelter for 14 weeks.
There are questions.
Who, we ask, will address these questions? They need answering. Residents need to know that the city’s animal services department is operating fairly and transparently. Right now, there are no indications that is the case.
Apparently, the city has no interest in even trying to find out the answers, maybe because the bureaucrats fear the possibilities. Better to say nothing, and deny, deny, deny.
When questions are raised, and city officials take a “don’t say anything” approach, waiting for the storm to blow over, it does a disservice to the residents of Brampton and the city itself.
This whole episode is an embarrassment for this city, and the way it has been handled is shameful. 
We expect more from our municipal government, and we demand an inquiry be held to shed some light on this very murky, questionable mess.



  1. Ha! Susan will lose because some dogs were impounded? Sorry, but Bruce Haines hasn't gotten a chance to win this race. Heck, Manning has a better chance of winning the mayoral seat.

    Tell Bruce, bye. Just like he lost the Green party seat, its the same again.

  2. Half of all Bramptonians may own dogs, but less than 2% own dogs that might be considered Pitbulls. Of the other 98%, probably 96% couldn't care less about Haines' stand on dogs.

  3. Wow you are quite a wealth of information on what percentage of breeds of dog and stance on dog owning vote in Brampton.
    I actually don't live in Brampton, but I beg to differ on your opinion of how many people care about this draconian ban on a non-breed of dog. No such thing as "pitbull" dumb ass. Do I detect a little animosity toward Haines? He must be creeping up in the polls...

  4. Clem Halibut...concerned citizenOctober 1, 2010 at 12:10 PM

    This is a non issue for me in this election, The dog story recieved far too much ink in the first place. There's no need to drag this tired wretch of a story back into the fold.

    There are far more troubling aspects to Susan Fennell's mayorship than her handling of this dog situation.

    Her record over the last decade is pathetic. She's nothing more than an empty suit. She's incompotent and her record alone should be enough to boot her from her seat.

    I think Haines is wasting his time. This dog issue isn't going to bring any business to Brampton, It's not going to lower taxes, and it's certainly not going to reduce any crime.

    This is nothing but a feeble pathetic attempt at hack populisim. It just reaks of desperation and the voters will surely see through it.

    I'd prefer my candidate to focus on solving some actual problems in this town, rather than muck it up and grandstand over this tired and dead non issue.

    Let's here some real solutions. Some real ideas.

    I'll agree that anything is better than Susan Fennell at this point...Let's focus on what actually matters

  5. For the twits...

    This really isn't about the dogs, although we're fighting because it's about our dogs.

    It's about a government legislating people into second-class citizenship based on the property they own.

    Think about what property you have the government might target...your house, your car...and realize that if you don't boot McGuinty & the Lie-berals out of office (and don't for God's sake vote for Smitherman in Toronto), this provincial government will continue to make hay of your Charter rights. It's not a case of if you will be next, it's WHEN you will be next.

  6. Clem; you are entitled to your opinion and I respect that the dog issue isn't foremost on your issue's list; however it is rather pompous of you to project your opinion to what is or should be other voter's important issues. For Rui Branco, this issue is extremely important to him since he was dragged through the mud (putting it mildly) based on how his dog looks not how it behaved. There are a great many people who are basing their vote based on how the candidate stands on dog legislation and this will most certainly apply in the next provincial election.
    As Social Mange pointed out this is about rights not dogs but what dough heads don't realize is that every dog is a "pitbull" under this vague and draconian law. It is whether you are unlucky enough to be the "target". Mutts cannot be determined by breed mixes. It is simply a guessing game and if you own a mutt, which 3/4 of the pop do, you are at risk! Fair? Well now substitute any other item in the law. Precedence...

  7. The race will prove interesting. Sanderson will be announcing his run for the chair soon...